The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission has opposed an attempt by former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Diezani Alison-Madueke, to rely on her acquittal of bribery charges by the Southwark Crown Court in London as fresh evidence in her long-running suit challenging the forfeiture and disposal of assets linked to her in Nigeria.
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/2026-IDRI-Masterclass.png")
The anti-graft agency told the Federal High Court in Abuja that the proceedings in the United Kingdom and Alison-Madueke’s acquittal were unrelated to the specific questions before the Nigerian court and should not be allowed to expand the scope of the case.
Justice Inyang Ekwo has fixed November 11, 2026, for hearing of the pending applications after both sides appeared before the court on Tuesday.
The dispute stems from a suit instituted by Alison-Madueke against the EFCC in 2023 challenging, among other things, public notices and processes relating to the auction and disposal of properties and personal effects she claims affected her proprietary interests.
She subsequently amended the suit in February 2025.
The former minister’s latest application followed her acquittal by the Southwark Crown Court on June 17, 2026, where a jury returned not-guilty verdicts on five counts of accepting bribes and one count of conspiracy to commit bribery.
British prosecutors had alleged that Alison-Madueke received expensive benefits from oil and gas industry figures seeking favourable treatment and lucrative contracts during her tenure as Nigeria’s petroleum minister between 2010 and 2015.
She denied the allegations throughout the trial, maintaining that she did not accept bribes and did not directly control the award of government contracts.
Following her acquittal, Alison-Madueke approached the Nigerian court seeking permission to place the UK judgment before it as a subsequent development which, according to her lawyers, had become relevant to her challenge against the forfeiture and disposal of assets.
At an earlier proceeding on July 1, her lawyer, Godwin Iyinbor, sought leave to file a further or supplementary affidavit bringing the UK judgment to the court’s attention.
Mofesomo Oyetibo, SAN, who represented the EFCC at the time, did not oppose the application, following which Justice Ekwo granted leave for the additional process to be filed.
The EFCC has now filed a counter-affidavit contesting the relevance of the material contained in the supplementary affidavit.
In the counter-affidavit sworn to by Oyakhilome Ekienabor, a litigation officer in the law firm representing the Commission, the EFCC described several of Alison-Madueke’s fresh averments as misleading, immaterial and irrelevant to the substantive questions before the court.
“The proceedings before the Southwark Crown Court, London, United Kingdom, and the purported acquittal of the applicant therein, are in respect of a proceeding that is not being prosecuted before any Nigerian court and have nothing to do with the substantive suit before this honourable court,” the EFCC stated.
The Commission maintained that the London criminal trial was distinct from the forfeiture proceedings and orders upon which the Nigerian assets were dealt with.
It also argued that there was nothing in the relevant public sale notice indicating that the properties listed belonged to Alison-Madueke.
According to the EFCC, the particular forfeiture order relied upon by the former minister related exclusively to jewellery and did not extend to every category of property or asset she now seeks to bring within the case.
“The applicant’s further/supplementary affidavit introduces irrelevant facts into this suit, thereby diverting attention from the core issues before this honourable court,” the Commission argued.
The EFCC consequently urged the court to reject the attempt to rely on the UK acquittal in determining the Nigerian suit.
At Tuesday’s proceedings, Queen-Ubokutom Uwe, who appeared for Alison-Madueke, informed the court that her team had just been served with the EFCC’s further counter-affidavit.
She also drew the court’s attention to an application seeking to regularise processes filed on behalf of the former minister.
Paul Mgbeoma, appearing for the EFCC, expressed concern about what he described as the frequency of additional filings by Alison-Madueke, remarking that the matter was being conducted almost like an election petition.
He nevertheless informed the court that the Commission was ready to proceed.
Justice Ekwo thereafter adjourned the matter until November 11 for hearing of the motions.
Alison-Madueke’s position is that her acquittal in London constitutes a material subsequent development that should be brought before the court, particularly because a central part of her Nigerian case concerns what she describes as deprivation of property without conviction, fair hearing or strict compliance with the statutory framework governing forfeiture and disposal of assets.
Her legal team, led by Mike Ozekhome, SAN, argued in its filing that the acquittal could not have been presented when the earlier processes were filed because the London judgment had not yet been delivered.
“After the filing of the applicant’s processes and while this suit was still pending before this honourable court, a subsequent and material event occurred, to wit: the applicant was acquitted by the Southwark Crown Court, London, United Kingdom, on 17 June 2026, of criminal allegations of bribery brought against her,” her lawyers stated.
They argued that the development was relevant to questions concerning the absence of a conviction, fair hearing, due process and what they described as the irreversible deprivation of proprietary rights.
The former minister’s lawyers stressed, however, that they were not asking the Federal High Court to sit on appeal over the UK judgment or treat the foreign acquittal as automatically determining the Nigerian proceedings.
Rather, they said they wanted the judgment admitted as a subsequent material fact which could assist the court in reaching a just determination of the dispute.
The EFCC disagrees, maintaining that the London criminal prosecution and the Nigerian forfeiture proceedings involve separate legal questions and that the foreign acquittal does not determine the validity of forfeiture orders already made by Nigerian courts.
The Commission had also earlier informed the court that the assets at the centre of Alison-Madueke’s challenge had already been disposed of through auctions conducted pursuant to court orders.
Alison-Madueke served as Minister of Petroleum Resources from 2010 to 2015 under the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan. She left Nigeria in 2015 and has since faced investigations, criminal proceedings and asset-forfeiture actions connected with allegations arising from her tenure.
The Federal High Court will on November 11 hear arguments on the competing applications, including the former minister’s attempt to rely on her London acquittal and the EFCC’s objection that the judgment is irrelevant to the issues before the Nigerian court.
[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
Available now for NGN 40,000 at ASC Publications, 10, Boyle Street, Onikan, Lagos. Beside High Court, TBS. Email publications@ayindesanni.com or WhatsApp +2347056667384. Purchase Link: https://paystack.com/buy/evidence-act-complete-annotation
______________________________________________________________________ “Enhance Legal Practice With Authoritative Reports” — Alexander Payne Offers Comprehensive Law Reports, Spanning Over A Century Of Nigerian Jurisprudence
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
