Federal High Court: Aliyu Abubakar Malabu Oil OPL 245 Acquittal

• A Federal High Court in Abuja acquitted businessman Aliyu Abubakar, Malabu Oil and Gas Limited, and six others in a $1 billion money laundering case related to OPL 245.
• Justice Inyang Ekwo ruled that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) failed to prove the 43-count allegations beyond reasonable doubt.
• The court faulted the EFCC for filing charges despite a 2018 letter from then-AGF Abubakar Malami advising against prosecution due to insufficient evidence.
• The judgment emphasized that investigations must be fully concluded before charges are filed, a principle the EFCC reportedly disregarded in this case.
• Justice Ekwo affirmed that no prosecuting agency is legally superior to the Attorney-General of the Federation, whose advice must be respected.

This judgment reinforces the critical importance of thorough investigation prior to filing charges and the binding authority of the Attorney-General of the Federation's advice on prosecution.

A Federal High Court in Abuja recently discharged and acquitted businessman Aliyu Abubakar, along with Malabu Oil and Gas Limited and six other co-defendants, in a high-profile $1 billion money laundering case. The charges were intricately linked to the controversial Oil Prospecting Licence 245 (OPL 245). Justice Inyang Ekwo, presiding over the case, delivered the judgment on Thursday, effectively clearing all eight defendants of the allegations brought against them by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

The prosecution had pursued a 43-count charge, designated FHC/ABJ/CR/268/2016, which was initially filed in December 2016. This extensive indictment alleged fraudulent dealings concerning OPL 245 and various money laundering offenses. Among the accused were A-Group Construction Company Limited, Rocky Top Resources Limited, Mega Tech Engineering Limited, Novel Properties and Development Company Limited, Imperial Union Limited, and Carlin International Nigeria Limited, in addition to Abubakar and Malabu Oil. The EFCC had claimed that approximately $1 billion and N673 million were involved in these illicit financial activities. Specifically, two counts alleged that Malabu Oil and Gas Limited, along with individuals Seidougha Munamuna, Amaran Joseph, and Dauzia Loya Etete (who remain at large), took control of $401.54 million and $400 million. These substantial sums were reportedly transferred by the Federal Government into the company’s accounts held at First Bank of Nigeria and Keystone Bank, respectively, and were deemed proceeds of unlawful activities under the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011.

Justice Ekwo's judgment critically highlighted the prosecution's failure to substantiate its claims, stating that the EFCC did not prove the allegations against the eight defendants beyond a reasonable doubt. A significant point of contention for the court was the EFCC's decision to proceed with the prosecution despite explicit advice from the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF). In 2018, the then-AGF, Abubakar Malami, had issued a letter recommending against the prosecution, citing insufficient evidence to support the charges.

Furthermore, the court found that the pre-charge investigation conducted by the EFCC was incomplete at the time the defendants were charged. Justice Ekwo underscored the fundamental legal principle that an investigation must be fully concluded before any charges are filed. He remarked that an Investigating Police Officer (IPO) must genuinely demonstrate a conducted investigation, rather than merely assuming facts or guessing their existence. The judge emphasized that the situation clearly indicated a departure from this established legal position, where the investigation had not been finalized prior to the prosecution.

The ruling carries substantial implications for prosecuting agencies across Nigeria, particularly regarding their adherence to legal protocols and the authority of the Attorney-General. Justice Ekwo firmly asserted that no prosecuting agency holds a legal position superior to that of the AGF, who serves as the nation's chief law officer. He stressed that agencies should not undertake actions that suggest defiance of the AGF's advice or directives, nor should they expect courts to endorse such conduct.

This judgment reinforces the critical importance of thorough investigation prior to filing charges and the binding authority of the Attorney-General of the Federation's advice on prosecution. The court's stance makes it clear that it will not condone situations where government prosecuting agencies operate at cross purposes, thereby undermining the coherence and integrity of the justice system. The Aliyu Abubakar Malabu Oil OPL 245 acquittal serves as a potent reminder of the judiciary's role in upholding due process and ensuring that prosecutions are based on robust evidence and completed investigations, rather than premature or unsupported allegations.

This ruling reinforces the critical importance of thorough investigation prior to filing charges and the binding authority of the Attorney-General of the Federation's advice on prosecution. Lawyers should advise clients on the implications of premature prosecution and the need for prosecuting agencies to conclude investigations before charging, while compliance officers should note the standards for evidence and investigation upheld by the court.

Source: Original reporting via The PUNCH