The Supreme Court has affirmed the June 26, 2025 judgment of the Court of Appeal, Abuja upholding the final forfeiture to the Federal Government, the N1.5 billion retrieved from a former consultant to the Nigeria Incentive-Based Risk Sharing System for Agricultural Lending (NIRSAL), Dr. Stephen Olusegun Ogidan.
In a judgment yesterday, a five-member panel of the apex court, led by Justice Mohammed Garba, held unanimously that the Court of Appeal was right to have affirmed January 22, 2025 final forfeiture order made by a Federal High Court in Abuja.
In the lead judgment prepared by Justice Habib Abiru but read by Justice Abubakar Umar, the court came down hard on Ogidan for his “audacity and temerity” to go before the Federal High Court to challenge the final forfeiture order having voluntarily refunded the money to prevent being prosecuted.
Justice Abiru noted that from the records before the court, Ogidan admitted that he got the funds from illegal sources and agreed to refund the money to the Economic and Financial Crimea Commission (EFCC) in a plea bargain arrangement to avoid being prosecuted.
The judge said the court was amazed at the audacity and temerity displayed by Ogidan in deciding to approach the Federal High Court to challenge the civil forfeiture proceedings.
He expressed displeasure that Ogidan was encouraged by two Senior Advocates of Nigeria who offered him their services within the circumstances of the case.
Justice Abiru suggested a periodic review of the rank of SAN to determine contribution of those wearing the rank to the legal profession and decide whether they deserve to continue to wear it.
He awarded a cost of N5 million against Ogidan, to be paid to the EFCC.
Ogidan was engaged by NIRSAL as its National Coordinating Consultant. He was subsequently investigated for criminal breach of trust, bribery and money laundering.
The EFCC, in its court documents, claimed that it revealed a reasonable suspicion that Ogidan acquired the N1.5b through illegitimate activities, specifically bribery from consultants he was supposed to monitor and supervise.
The anti-graft agency said Ogidan later agreed to refund the money to avoid being prosecuted, an agreement he kept by voluntarily making the funds to the EFCC.
Upon Ogidan’s refund of the money, the EFCC initiated the civil forfeiture proceeding in which the Federal High Court issued an order of interim forfeiture on February 5, 2024.
But, in a surprise move, Ogidan engaged lawyers to challenge the order of forfeiture of the money to the FG, an act that was condemned by the Supreme Court in its judgment yesterday.
