Supreme Court Upholds Forfeiture of Seven Properties, $2.045 Million Linked to Emefiele

The Supreme Court has upheld the permanent forfeiture of seven properties, $2.045 million in cash and share certificates associated with former Central Bank of Nigeria Governor Godwin Emefiele.

A five-member panel led by Justice Ibrahim Mohammed Saulawa delivered the unanimous judgment on Friday, July 17, 2026, restoring an earlier decision of the Federal High Court in Lagos.

The ruling overturned a Court of Appeal judgment that had previously reversed the forfeiture order secured by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission.

The dispute began after Justice D.I. Dipeolu of the Federal High Court granted the EFCC’s application on November 1, 2024.

The court concluded that the assets were reasonably suspected to have been acquired with funds derived from unlawful activities.

Emefiele subsequently challenged the decision at the Court of Appeal and initially succeeded. The EFCC then approached the Supreme Court, asking it to set aside the appellate judgment and restore the original forfeiture order.

With the Supreme Court’s decision, the assets are now to be transferred permanently to the Federal Government.

Most of the affected real estate is located in high-value areas of Lagos. The properties include a fully detached duplex at 17B Hakeem Odumosu Street, Lekki Phase 1, and an undeveloped parcel measuring approximately 1,919.59 square metres on Oyinkan Abayomi Drive in Ikoyi.

Also forfeited are a bungalow at 65A Oyinkan Abayomi Drive, a four-bedroom duplex at 12A Probyn Road and eight apartments constructed on about 2,457.60 square metres at 8A Adekunle Lawal Road, all in Ikoyi.

The order further covers a duplex situated on approximately 2,217.87 square metres at 2A Bank Road, Ikoyi, and an industrial complex being developed on 22 plots in Agbor, Delta State.

In addition to the real estate, the court upheld the forfeiture of $2,045,000 and share certificates belonging to Queensdorf Global Fund Limited.

The EFCC commenced the proceedings through an application directed against the assets themselves. This form of case, known as an action in rem, allows a court to determine whether specific property should be forfeited without making the proceeding dependent on the owner’s criminal conviction.

The commission relied on Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act 2006 and Section 44 of the Nigerian Constitution. An affidavit submitted by EFCC investigating officer David Jayeoba supported the application.

The agency maintained that its investigation provided reasonable grounds to suspect that the money used to acquire the assets did not come from legitimate sources.

Rotimi Oyedepo, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria and director of public prosecution at the EFCC, represented the commission in obtaining the original order.

The Supreme Court’s judgment settles the contest over the forfeiture by reversing the intermediate appellate decision. There is no higher domestic court to which the asset-forfeiture dispute can be taken.

The ruling should not be described as a criminal conviction of Emefiele. Non-conviction-based forfeiture proceedings focus on the source and status of the assets rather than determining an individual’s guilt for a criminal offence.

The legal threshold is therefore different from the requirement prosecutors must satisfy in a criminal trial. In this case, the Supreme Court determined that the Federal High Court’s decision to forfeit the assets should stand.

The judgment represents another significant asset-recovery victory for the EFCC and reinforces the commission’s ability to pursue property suspected to represent proceeds of unlawful conduct through civil forfeiture proceedings.