Court Orders Final Forfeiture Of Kaduna-based NOK Varsity, Other Assets …C0NTINUE READING HERE >>>
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the final forfeiture of NOK University and all assets belonging to the private tertiary institution.
The assets include Gwasmyen Water Factory, Gwasmyen Event Center, and Gwasmyen International Hotel, all in Kaduna State.
The legal feat achieved by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on Friday, June 7, 2024, was disclosed in the 2024 second-quarter edition of the anti-graft agency’s e-magazine, EFCC ALERT!
According to the EFCC’s counsel, Ekele Iheanacho, the order was filed pursuant to Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act 2006 and Section 44(2) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).
Iheanacho presented compelling evidence before the court that Anthony Hassan, a former Director of Finance and Accounts (DFA) in the Federal Ministry of Health, used proceeds from unlawful activities to build NOK University.
Besides the three associated assets, the University buildings forfeited include the Senate building, ICT building, Faculty of Medicine building, Science Deanery building, two Academic buildings, a Faculty Hall, and other structures.
The EFCC’s investigation stemmed from verified intelligence on criminal conspiracy, stealing, abuse of office, and money laundering involving staff of the Federal Ministry of Health. The properties were traced to Hassan through the investigation.
In her judgment, Justice Abdulmalik emphasised, “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.”
Justice Abdulmalik further noted, “The respondent has failed woefully in tilting the scale of evidence in his favour. It is a principle of law that oral evidence cannot contradict or supersede documentary evidence because documentary evidence speaks for itself.”
This ruling followed an earlier interim forfeiture order on the assets granted on June 1, 2022.
>