Femi Ashekun/
One of Nigeria’s largest financial institutions, United Bank for Africa Plc, has been drawn into a high-profile alleged foreign exchange fraud and money laundering case involving N4.29 billion, after its planned arraignment before a Lagos court was stalled by the absence of the defendants.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had scheduled the arraignment of UBA, two of its officials and two companies before Justice Rahman Oshodi of the Lagos State Special Offences Court sitting in Ikeja on Wednesday.
However, proceedings could not go ahead after the defendants failed to appear in court.
The anti-graft agency is prosecuting UBA alongside Muyiwa Akinyemi, Amangbo Eziashi Stephen, Geeos Global Service Limited and Fedat Global Limited on a four-count charge bordering on alleged foreign exchange infractions, concealment of proceeds of unlawful activities, retention of criminal proceeds and money laundering involving N4.29 billion.
The case places a major spotlight on UBA, one of Africa’s leading banking groups with operations in more than 20 countries and millions of customers across the continent.
According to the EFCC, the defendants allegedly conspired to sell foreign exchange above rates stipulated by the Central Bank of Nigeria between September 2022 and March 2023.
In one of the charges, the Commission alleged that the defendants “conspired to sell Forex above the rates stipulated by the Central Bank of Nigeria”.
The EFCC further accused the defendants of concealing N4,290,112,796.72 in a UBA account, alleging that the funds were derived directly from unlawful activities.
The charge states that the defendants allegedly concealed the funds in UBA Account Number NGN09991931102, an act the Commission says contravenes provisions of Nigeria’s anti-money laundering laws.
When the matter came up on Wednesday, EFCC counsel T.J. Banjo informed the court that all defendants had been duly served with the charge and other court processes and that affidavits of service had already been filed.
Banjo expressed frustration over the absence of the defendants, describing it as part of a pattern allegedly aimed at frustrating the prosecution.
“The matter is for report of service and arraignment of the defendants. They have all been served, and affidavits of service have been filed before this Honourable Court,” he told the court.
The prosecutor further revealed that the Commission had made efforts to arrest two of the defendants after they allegedly jumped the administrative bail earlier granted to them by the EFCC.
Banjo said he was particularly surprised that the defendants failed to appear despite having been served with the court processes.
In a dramatic exchange, counsel to UBA and two of the defendants, Adewale Kamourudeen, challenged the prosecution’s position, insisting that his clients had not been served with either the information or hearing notices relating to the proceedings.
“The first, second and third defendants have not been served with the information or the hearing notice for today’s proceedings or the previous adjourned date. We got wind of it through newspaper reports. That is why we are here,” he argued.
Kamourudeen also requested an opportunity to examine the court records and determine the basis upon which the prosecution claimed service had been effected.
The disagreement over service quickly became the central issue in court.
Responding, Banjo maintained that service had been properly executed through UBA’s Compliance Officer, Chima Okugbo.
According to the prosecutor, Okugbo received the court documents on behalf of the bank and also accepted service for Akinyemi and Stephen.
“Chima Okugbo has consistently represented the bank during investigations and accepted service on behalf of the bank and the two officials,” Banjo told the court.
Justice Oshodi subsequently asked the defence counsel whether he would accept service on behalf of his clients, but Kamourudeen declined, stating that he had no instructions to do so.
Following the submissions, the court adjourned the matter until June 16, 2026, for a report on service, arraignment and further proceedings.
The allegations represent a potentially significant legal challenge for UBA given the increasing regulatory focus on compliance, anti-money laundering controls and foreign exchange transactions within Nigeria’s banking sector.
The outcome of the case could attract considerable attention from regulators, investors and stakeholders in the financial industry, particularly because the allegations involve one of the country’s systemically important banks and concern transactions valued at more than N4 billion.
For now, however, the substantive charges remain untested, as the court is yet to take the plea of the defendants.
The next hearing is expected to determine whether the defendants will finally be arraigned and whether the long-running dispute over service of court processes will be resolved.
0Related posts:
Interrogating Two Years of Nigeria’s Foreign Policy Under President Tinubu
Court Strikes Out Access Bank’s Case against Japaul …Lessons for Financial Institutions
UBA Surpasses N1tn Market Capitalisation Mark Amidst Impressive Financials, Recognitions
Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia in Tears as Corruption Trial Begins
Alleged N3bn fraud: Court Dismisses EFCC’s Counter-affidavit, Grants Ali Bello, 3 others N500m Bail
How Ajudua Defrauded German Industrialist of N250M