Ladipo Sanusi/
Consequently, Justice Oguntoyinbo, while delivering judgment, dismissed Shagaya’s suit against the EFCC, for lacking in merit. It was also described as an abuse of court processes.
Not satisfied with Justice Hassan’s decision, Shagaya, through her lawyer filed a motion seeking to unfreeze the account claiming that the EFCC’s action violates her rights to own property. She said that she was never afforded any opportunity to defend herself before the order was secured.
While delivering judgement on the matter today, Justice Oguntoyinbo faulted Shagaya’s claims that she was not availed the opportunity to defend herself before the order was secured.
According to the judge, the order was made through an ex-parte motion and as such there was no way the court would have listen to her own side of the story.
“The interim order was made based on an ex-parte application filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). An ex-parte application has no respondent and the court is not expected to hear from the other party. Even when the other party is around, it can only be seen and not heard. Therefore, the failure of Justice Hassan to hear the applicant cannot invalidate the order.
“The granting of the interim order of attachment is not unconstitutional and does not constitute an infringement on the applicant’s rights to own property,” the judge held.
Justice Oguntoyinbo further noted that the failure of the applicant to controvert an averment contained in the the counter-affidavit of the EFCC regarding her refusal to honour invitation was fatal to her case.
The judge added that the claim by the applicant that the order was made in perpetuity did not hold water, because there was no evidence that the EFCC had either concluded its investigation of the matter nor file any charge against the applicant.
Justice Oguntoyinbo said: “It is erroneous to claim that the interim order has metamorphosed into a permanent one or in perpetuity because it was to last until the conclusion of investigation by the respondent (EFCC). There was no evidence to show that the respondent has stopped investigating the property or has concluded investigation.”
In conclusion, Justice Oguntoyinbo held that Shagaya’s application lacked merit and as such is consequently dismissed.