The Court of Appeal in Abuja has upheld the final forfeiture of ₦1.582 billion linked to former Managing Director of the Nigeria Incentive-Based Risk Sharing System for Agricultural Lending (NIRSAL), Aliyu Abdulhameed, and a private consultant, Steven Ogidan
A panel of justices led by Justice Okon Abang delivered the ruling on Friday, dismissing the appeals filed by both Abdulhameed and Ogidan. The appellate court affirmed the earlier decision of the Federal High Court delivered on January 22, 2024, by Justice Inyang Ekwo, which ordered the permanent forfeiture of the funds to the Federal Government.
According to a statement from EFCC spokesperson Dele Oyewale, the funds were allegedly proceeds of bribery, criminal breach of trust, and money laundering arising from the Project Monitoring, Reporting and Remediation Offices (PMROs) scheme under NIRSAL. Ogidan served as the National Coordinating Consultant for the PMROs, while Abdulhameed was the Managing Director of NIRSAL during the period of the alleged misconduct.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had obtained an interim forfeiture order in February 2024, under Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1686/2023, after investigations revealed that Ogidan allegedly collected bribes from field consultants he was tasked with supervising, resulting in the project’s abandonment.
EFCC’s investigation concluded that the funds were linked to illicit activities and that Ogidan had voluntarily returned the money during the investigation. “Ogidan acquired the sum through bribery from consultants he was supposed to supervise, leading to the complete abandonment of the project,” Oyewale noted.
Ogidan, however, challenged the forfeiture, claiming the ₦1.582 billion represented legitimate earnings of his firm, Successory Nigeria Ltd, which was contracted by NIRSAL between 2017 and 2022 to manage over 600 field officers nationwide. He submitted that the money was contractual remuneration and not proceeds of crime.
In his affidavit to show cause, Ogidan further alleged he was coerced into returning the funds while in EFCC custody, stating he was pressured by the then EFCC Chairman, Abdulrasheed Bawa, and officials such as Mahmud Tukur. He claimed to have taken loans from friends and financial institutions to repay the sum, attaching a loan agreement with Dignity Finance & Investment Ltd to support his claim.
He also accused the EFCC of targeting him for political and ethnic reasons, citing his alleged support for Abdulhameed’s political ambitions and his preference for hiring Christians and Southerners—claims the EFCC denied.
Responding to these allegations, EFCC investigator Mubarak Isa swore a counter-affidavit, affirming that all statements made by Ogidan and other suspects were voluntary and in the presence of legal counsel. He further clarified that no coercion was involved and that the forfeiture process was initiated after Ogidan’s legal team submitted a letter requesting case compounding under Section 14 (2) of the EFCC Act.
In court, EFCC counsel Faruk Abdullah argued that the funds were directly traceable to corrupt practices and that there was no credible justification to prevent the forfeiture. “No reasonable cause has been shown why the funds should not be finally forfeited to the Federal Government of Nigeria,” he stated in the commission’s April 16 application.
Following the trial court’s ruling, Ogidan and Abdulhameed filed separate appeals challenging the use of Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud Act in granting the forfeiture. However, on June 20, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeals, with Justice Abang emphasizing that the High Court acted within legal bounds—especially as the appellant had voluntarily sought an out-of-court settlement and returned the funds to the government.
