Court compels Aisha Achimugu to report to EFCC for investigation

Justice I.E. Ekwo of the Federal High Court, Abuja, has mandated businesswoman Aisha Achimugu to appear before the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for questioning on Tuesday at noon, in connection with an ongoing investigation.

In his ruling on Monday, Justice Ekwo further directed the EFCC to bring Achimugu back to court on Wednesday to provide an update following her appearance at their office.

This order arose from an application by Achimugu’s legal representative, Kehinde Ogunwumiju, SAN, who sought a court order to safeguard his client from potential detention or harassment by the EFCC, given her willingness to cooperate with the commission’s investigation by honoring their invitation.

Ripples Nigeria reports that Justice Ekwo had previously, on April 11th, instructed the EFCC and five other security agencies to submit their defense in a lawsuit initiated by Achimugu aimed at preventing her anticipated arrest and detention. These other agencies named in Achimugu’s fundamental rights enforcement suit include the Nigeria Police Force, the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), the State Security Service (SSS), the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC), and the Nigerian Immigration Service (NIS).

The judge had issued this earlier directive after Ogunwumiju informed the court that despite being served with an order to explain why Achimugu’s requests should not be granted, none of the respondents had appeared in court as instructed.

Achimugu, identified as an industrialist, had filed an ex-parte motion, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/626/2025, naming the NPF, ICPC, and SSS as the first to third respondents. Through her lawyer, she also included the EFCC, NSCDC, and NIS as the fourth to sixth respondents, respectively, in the motion dated and filed on April 3rd.

In her application, Achimugu sought an interim injunction to restrain the respondents from threatening or harassing her with arrest, detention, invasion of her properties, or impeding her fundamental rights to freedom of movement, liberty, privacy, and property, among other concerns.

Presenting ten grounds for her application, Achimugu highlighted that the EFCC had declared her wanted on March 28th. She argued that this declaration was unwarranted, unjustifiable, lacking probable cause, and deliberately intended to discredit, humiliate, and subject her to public scorn, causing irreparable damage to her reputation, personal dignity, and professional standing.

During the previous hearing on April 11th, Justice Ekwo had given the respondents a final opportunity to appear and justify why Achimugu’s sought reliefs should not be granted, adjourning the case until Monday for a hearing.

Read also: INEC chairman urges swift electoral reforms to fortify democracy

When the matter was brought before the court on Monday, the ICPC, SSS, EFCC, and NIS had legal representation.

Ogunwumiju informed the court that the hearing was scheduled for the respondents to show cause. He noted that the respondents had served their counter-affidavits and applications for extension of time late on Friday. He also stated that they had not yet received any processes from the police, NSCDC, and NIS (the first, fifth, and sixth respondents).

Ogunwumiju indicated that Achimugu was scheduled to return to Nigeria on Tuesday and would report to the EFCC’s office by 12 noon. He expressed his expectation that the respondents would have filed their responses in a timely manner for all matters to be addressed that day.

However, Ogunwumiju did not object to the motions for an extension of time to file their processes, as moved by the counsel for the ICPC, G.O. Ndieze, and the counsel for the EFCC, Ekele Iheanacho, SAN, and the court granted these extensions.

Ogunwumiju then drew the court’s attention to certain “uncontroverted facts.” He pointed out that in the affidavit supporting their originating processes, Achimugu had explicitly stated her intention to return and attend her interview with the EFCC on April 29th, specifically referencing paragraph 61 where she indicated her “willingness to cooperate with the investigation.”

The lawyer further noted that in the EFCC’s affidavit to show cause, the commission itself acknowledged in Paragraphs 9 and 10 that his client had previously been granted administrative bail. Based on this, Ogunwumiju urged the court to order his client to return on Tuesday, report to the EFCC, and continue under the same bail conditions. “We will be asking for an order to restrain the respondents from further harassing her. I refer the court to Paragraph 52 of the counter affidavit by the 4th respondent (EFCC). This indicates that she enjoys bail. We want the court to give an order to protect her. We urge the court to consider that she is coming with her son, who has a special need,” he pleaded.

Iheanacho, representing the EFCC, opposed Ogunwumiju’s application. He argued that Achimugu’s application was speculative as her rights had not been violated. The lawyer further contended that Achimugu had violated the conditions of her administrative bail. “We have invited the applicant and she refused to come. We wrote to her to come and she refused to come,” he asserted.

Justice Ekwo, however, directed Iheanacho to confine his arguments to the ex-parte motion where they were to show cause. “We are not talking about the substantive matter now, what they are looking at is for you to show cause why the application she has prayed. The learned count for the applicant has pointed you to your own averment in your counter affidavit, which I consider to be your affidavit to show cause. I do not see any controversy if the applicant says I am coming to you on a date and then says, you have granted her bail, so you should not arrest her. Unless you are denying this averment,” the judge stated.

Responding, Iheanacho maintained that Achimugu’s application lacked merit because her rights had not been infringed upon.

“The present situation is that the applicant is coming to you. If the applicant comes to you, she has surrendered,” the judge observed.

“If the applicant comes, we will take it up from there. The application before this court is of no moment,” Iheanacho responded.

Ogunwumiju then requested an adjournment until Wednesday to allow for the withdrawal of the suit if his client was permitted to continue on bail.

After hearing the arguments from both legal teams, Justice Ekwo issued his order: “The 4th respondent requires the applicant to appear before them to assist in the course of investigation, which is the constitutional obligation of the 4th respondent. And I also see the applicant showing a willingness to appear in the course. Therefore, I find no controversy considering the averment of the applicant and none should be created. Therefore, I am minded to make the following orders. The applicant shall appear before the 4th respondent on 29th April, 2025, as couched by the applicant in paragraph 61 of the affidavit in support of the motion ex-parte and Exhibit 3E. I further make an order that the 4th respondent, upon the appearance of the applicant, shall return with the applicant to this court on 30th April, 2025 for report of the appearance of the applicant. This is the order of this court.”

In its affidavit to show cause, the EFCC detailed its investigation into Achimugu’s financial activities. The commission stated that on February 12, 2024, during an interview with Achimugu and her lawyer, Darlington Ozurumba, Achimugu provided a statement explaining substantial funds that had passed through her corporate bank accounts.

According to the EFCC, Achimugu admitted that a sum of ₦8,710,000,000.00 was paid by her partners as an investment fund for the purchase and payment of a signature bonus for an oil bloc acquisition on November 8, 2022.

Further investigation, the commission alleged, revealed that Achimugu, through her company, Ocean Gate Engineering Oil and Gas Limited, acquired two oil blocs, Shallow Water – PPL 3007 and Deep Offshore – PPL 302-DO, for a total of $25,300,000, primarily through cash payments made to Bureau De Change (BDC) operators, who then made payments to the Federal Government via corporate accounts.

The EFCC alleged that “the ultimate sources of the said sum of $25,300,000 used in the acquisition of the oil blocs were not linked to her lawful earnings or income or any business partner” and that “the acquisition of the Oil Blocks was marred by corrupt practices, as bribes were paid to the officials of the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission in the process.” The commission also noted that “none of the Oil Blocks assigned/allocated to Ocean Gate Engineering Oil and Gas Limited by the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Commission has commenced exploration/production from inception to date.”

The anti-graft agency further stated that following a court decision in a previous suit filed by Achimugu (Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/451/2024) that was dismissed, the commission continued its investigation, sending letters to various government agencies, including the FIRS and CBN. This further investigation allegedly revealed that Achimugu operates a total of 136 bank accounts across ten different banks, both in her personal and corporate names.

Join the conversation

Opinions

Support Ripples Nigeria, hold up solutions journalism

Balanced, fearless journalism driven by data comes at huge financial costs.

As a media platform, we hold leadership accountable and will not trade the right to press freedom and free speech for a piece of cake.

If you like what we do, and are ready to uphold solutions journalism, kindly donate to the Ripples Nigeria cause.

Your support would help to ensure that citizens and institutions continue to have free access to credible and reliable information for societal development.

Donate Now