FCDA in bother over demolition of Patience Jonathan’s property



    Patience Jonathan
    Patience Jonathan: Court to research demolition of her property

    By Wandoo Sombo

    The Federal High Court, Abuja, has ordered an investigation into the allegations property belonging to former First Lady, Mrs Patience Jonathan, was demolished in Abuja.

    Justice Nnamdi Dimgba gave the directive on Monday following submissions by Jonathan’s counsel, Mr Mike Ozekhome, that the property was demolished by an company of the Federal Government.

    The constructing belonging to Aruera Reachout Foundation/Women for Change and Development Initiative is an uncompleted construction, mentioned to be positioned on Shehu Yar’Adua Way alongside Mabushi-Kado Life Camp Expressway, Abuja.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had filed an ex parte movement asking the court docket for short-term forfeiture of the property, however Ozekhome filed an objection.

    Ozekhome and counsel to the EFCC, Mr Benjamin Manji, have been in court docket for listening to of the functions when Ozekhome raised the difficulty of the alleged demolition.

    He informed the court docket that he had video recordings and footage of the demolition.

    He insisted that the state of the property must be ascertained earlier than the swimsuit might proceed.

    Ozekhome defined that the train would afford him the chance to file a correct affidavit and exhibit video recording, footage and newspaper publications of demolition of the property.

    But Manji informed the court docket that he was not conscious that the property was demolished.

    “I’m listening to for the primary time that the property, the topic of the swimsuit, has been demolished.

    “If that’s true, it’s actually not by us. Our mandate is obvious; it doesn’t embrace demolition.

    “We need to confirm if the property is still in existence before we can proceed with our application for temporary forfeiture,” he mentioned.

    In his ruling, Justice Dimgba mentioned that the standing of the property should first be ascertained because the court docket couldn’t act in useless.

    “I will adjourn for the claim that the property has been demolished to be ascertained to enable the court to know what proper steps to take.”

    The decide adjourned the matter till Feb. 26 for a report on the state of the constructing and attainable listening to of the functions for forfeiture and the objection to it.