On Friday, June 7, 2024, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court in Abuja ordered the final forfeiture of all assets belonging to NOK University, Gwasmyen Water Factory, Gwasmyen Event Center, and Gwasmyen International Hotel in Kaduna State.
The EFCC announced the court’s decision via its official X account on Saturday evening.
Court grants Final Forfeiture of NOK University, Hotel and Factory in Kaduna
— EFCC Nigeria (@officialEFCC) June 8, 2024
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja, on Friday, June 7, 2024 ordered the final forfeiture of every asset of NOK University, Gwasmyen Water Factory, Gwasmyen Event Center… pic.twitter.com/BLySRVXbwa
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) pursued this forfeiture through its counsel, Ekele Iheanacho, citing Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act 2006 and Section 44(2) of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria. Iheanacho presented compelling evidence that Anthony Hassan, a former Director of Finance and Accounts at the Federal Ministry of Health, used illicit proceeds to build NOK University.
The assets forfeited include several major buildings within the university, such as the Senate building, ICT building, Faculty of Medicine building, Science Deanery building, two academic buildings, and a Faculty Hall. Additionally, the forfeited properties extend to Gwasmyen Water Factory, Gwasmyen Event Center, and Gwasmyen International Hotel in Kaduna State.
EFCC’s investigative officer, Adaora Asabe Oragudosi, conducted an in-depth investigation into allegations of criminal conspiracy, theft, abuse of office, and money laundering involving staff at the Federal Ministry of Health. This investigation led to the identification of the properties linked to Hassan.
In her judgment, Justice Abdulmalik underscored the legal principle that individuals living beyond their means owe society an explanation. She stated, “The Apex court has held that any person who lives above his means owes the society some explanations. The burden lies on the accused to justify properties acquired which are disproportionate to his known legitimate earnings. It is in law that forfeitures are hinged on preponderance of evidence.”
She further elaborated, “The respondent has failed woefully in tilting the scale of evidence in his favor. It is a principle of law that oral evidence cannot contradict or supersede documentary evidence because documentary evidence speaks for itself.”
This decisive ruling follows an earlier interim forfeiture granted by the court on June 1, 2022, marking a significant milestone in the EFCC’s ongoing efforts to combat corruption and reclaim unlawfully acquired assets.
