Court dismisses Abacha’s family N500m suit against FG

Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja dismissed a suit filed by the family of the late Head of State, General Sani Abacha, against the Federal Government on Monday. The case challenged the revocation of one of Abacha’s properties located in the Maitama District of Abuja.

While delivering judgment in the suit, Justice Lifu dismissed the suit for being statute-barred among other reasons.

The suit was filed in 2015, nine years ago by the family of the late military ruler where they demanded that the FG return their father’s mansion located at Osara Close in Maitama.

Today’s dismissal of the suit makes it the fourth time the Abacha family would lose legal battles on property.

The family previously lost twice at a High Court of the Federal Capital Territory and once at the Court of Appeal in Abuja on grounds of jurisdiction.

This occasioned the family to approach the Federal High Court to Institute a fresh case.

The family among others, prayed the court to nullify and set aside the revocation of the Certificate of Occupancy of the property of the late General Abacha.

The family contended that the C of O marked FCT/ABUKN 2478 covering Plot 3119 issued on June 25, 1993, was illegally and unlawfully revoked by the defendants in the suit on January 16, 2006, in breach of section 44 of the 1999 Constitution and section 28 of the Land Use Act.

The defendants in the suit are; the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Federal Capital Development Authority, President, Federal Republic of Nigeria and Salamed Ventures Limited as 1st to 4th defendants respectively.

The plaintiffs in their statement of claims argued that the FCT under Nasir El-Rufai had “between 2004 and 2005 instructed them to submit the Certificate of Occupancy in their possession for re-certification”.

The family claimed the 2nd plaintiff, Mohammed Abacha promptly complied with the directive by delivering the Certificate of Occupancy to the FCDA and an acknowledgement copy issued to him.

While waiting for a new Certificate of Occupancy to be issued to them, the plaintiffs asserted that “Mohammed Abacha received a letter on February 3, 2006, notifying them that the Certificate of Occupancy had been revoked without any reason stated in the letter and the adequate compensation not paid.”

On this note, the family asked the court to declare as unconstitutional, unlawful, illegal, null and void, the revocation of the property.

They also sought an order setting aside the revocation and holding that their Certificate of Occupancy is valid and subsisting.

The plaintiffs asked for an order of injunction prohibiting the defendants from taking any further steps on the disputed property and to also compel the defendants to pay them N500M as damages.

The defendants in their separate counter affidavits and preliminary objections asked for outright dismissal of the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/463/2016.

They prayed the court to grant them an N500M compensation against the FG.

Justice Lifu in his judgment, held that the plaintiffs have no locus standi (legal power) to institute the suit.

The suit was filed by Mohammed Abacha, the eldest surviving son of the former Military ruler and his widow, Hajia Maryam Abacha on behalf of the Executioners of the Estate of the late Military General.

Justice Lifu agreed with the 4th defendant that the cause of action arose on February 3, 2006, when the Certificate of Occupancy was revoked while the case was filed in May 2015, years after the revocation and far more than three months it ought to have been filed.

Besides, the Judge held that the plaintiffs lacked locus standi to file the case upon their failure to present as exhibits, their letters of administration to the Estate as required by law and as proof of their claim as the Administrators.

The 4th defendant, Salamed Ventures Limited represented by James Ogwu Onoja (SAN), had argued that the suit, at the time it was instituted had become statute-barred having not been filed within three months of the cause of action allowed by law and thus, robbed the court of jurisdiction.

He contended that “the suit was caught by the provisions of the Public Officers Protection Act and had become a mere academic exercise and asked the Judge to dismiss it for being frivolous and lacking in merit”.

He further argued that Salamed Ventures Limited became owners of the disputed property upon its purchase from the federal government at N595M and issuance of Certificate of Occupancy number 181dw-3adcz-721r-15a8-10 of May 25, 2011.

Justice Lifu agreed with Salamed Ventures that the Abacha property was lawfully revoked upon breaches in the covenants in the Right of Occupancy by erecting structures without first obtaining building plans.

He dismissed the suit and awarded a cost of N500,000 as the cost of litigation against the plaintiffs to be paid to Salamed Ventures.