A high-stakes land dispute in Abuja has escalated, with lawyer Alexander Oketa petitioning the Executive Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) over alleged misconduct by its officials. The dispute centers on a prime property at Plot 680-689, Cadastral Zone Bo6, Mabushi, Abuja, and has pitted Jona Brothers Construction Limited against Chief Michael Adeojo, owner of Elizade Motors, for over six years.
Oketa’s petition accuses EFCC operatives of unlawfully seizing and sealing off the property, disregarding multiple court rulings that affirmed Jona Brothers Construction Limited and its partner, Uche Vincent, as the rightful owners. Here’s what you need to know about this unfolding legal drama.
The Allegations
In a strongly worded letter, Oketa alleged that EFCC officials, led by Mr. Olayinka Macaulay of the Property & Fraud Unit, stormed the property on March 6, 2025, and took drastic actions without legal justification. These actions included:
Halting ongoing construction work.
Padlocking the property’s gate.
Chasing away workers and marking the property with “EFCC KEEP OFF.”
Threatening to arrest the property owners and workers if they returned.
Oketa claimed these actions were carried out under the guise of enforcing an interim forfeiture order obtained by the EFCC from Justice Nwite of the Federal High Court. However, he argued that the EFCC had no authority to enforce such orders, as court orders are typically executed by the Sheriff of the Federal High Court, not the EFCC.
Court Rulings Ignored?
The lawyer emphasized that the property’s ownership had already been adjudicated in favor of Jona Brothers Construction Limited by Justice Ibrahim Mohammed of the FCT High Court. This ruling, Oketa argued, takes precedence over the interim forfeiture order obtained by the EFCC.
“The judgement of Ibrahim Mohammed is the latest and takes precedence over and above the interim order secretly obtained by the Commission,” the petition stated.
Oketa also challenged the EFCC to provide evidence that the interim order was served on his clients, noting that the Federal High Court Registry had distanced itself from the enforcement.
Economic and Legal Implications
The petition highlighted the severe economic impact of the EFCC’s actions, including:
Exposure of building materials and equipment worth billions of naira to theft and damage.
Disruption of construction activities, leading to financial losses.
Oketa accused the EFCC of acting in favor of Chief Michael Adeojo, whom the courts had repeatedly ruled against in the land dispute.
A Call for Accountability
Oketa called on the EFCC Chairman to rein in the officers involved and respect the rule of law. He warned that failure to act within 48 hours would result in legal escalations, including petitions to:
The National Judicial Council (NJC).
The National Security Adviser.
The National Assembly.
The Attorney-General of the Federation.
The National Human Rights Commission.
Why This Matters
This case raises critical questions about the rule of law and the role of anti-graft agencies in Nigeria. If the allegations are proven true, they could undermine public trust in the EFCC and set a dangerous precedent for the enforcement of court orders.
As the 48-hour ultimatum ticks down, all eyes are on the EFCC’s response and whether it will take steps to address the alleged overreach by its officials.