Rita Odafe
The Supreme Court has rejected a lawsuit initiated by the 36 state governments along with the Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF) that questioned the federal government’s management of recovered stolen funds.
In a ruling delivered on Friday, the seven-member Supreme Court panel unanimously concluded that the lawsuit was improperly brought before the highest court.
Justice Chidiebere Uwa authored the lead judgment, which was delivered by Justice Mohammed Idris, stating that the plaintiffs did not correctly invoke the court’s jurisdiction.
The court clarified that the issue at hand, indicated as SC/CV/395/2021, fell within the Federal High Court’s jurisdiction.
The plaintiffs alleged that from 2015 to 2021, the federal government secured various forms of forfeiture, recovery, and repatriation of “stolen assets” totaling NI,836,906,543,658.73, which included around 167 properties, 450 vehicles, 300 trucks, cargoes, and 20,000,000 barrels of crude oil valued at over N450 million, asserting that these funds were not deposited as mandated by the constitution.
They contended that instead of allocating the funds to the Federation Account, the federal government improperly transferred them to the Consolidated Revenue Accounts (CRA) and other accounts not sanctioned by the Nigerian Constitution.
The states argued that the CRA is designated for the federal government’s share from the Federation Account, as well as other federal revenues and assets of individual state governments.
Additionally, they noted that other federal revenues earmarked for the CRA consist of income from federal licenses, land revenues, administrative charges, government property rents, returns from federal investments, and tax revenues from the Armed Forces, among others.
The plaintiffs asserted that the creation of the Asset Recovery Account and the Interim Forfeiture Recovery Account, intended for the funding of recovered assets, is contrary to constitutional mandates.
They emphasized that since 2015, numerous recoveries of illegitimately acquired properties have occurred through agencies like the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), the Nigerian Police Force, and the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation.
Citing sections 162(1), 162(10), and 80 of the Constitution, as well as section 2 of the Finance (Control and Management) Act of 1958, the plaintiffs argued that recovered funds qualify as revenue that should go to the Federation Account, not the Federal Government’s Consolidated Revenue Account.
They further argued that it is “unconstitutional to divert or allocate revenue meant for the Federation Account into the Federal Government’s Consolidated Revenue Account or any other account, or to use the revenue for any alternate purpose.”
The plaintiffs sought the court’s declaration that under the provisions of Section 162(1) and Section 162(10) of the Constitution, all forms of income or proceeds from confiscated and recovered assets are deemed revenue for the federal republic of Nigeria, which should be deposited in the Federation Account for the benefit of federal, state, and local governments.
They requested that the court order the remittance of N1.8 trillion (in cash) and N450 billion (in non-cash assets) in recovered funds into the Federation Account since 2015.
The plaintiffs also asked the court to mandate the defendants to provide a comprehensive account of the recovered assets not deposited into the Federation Account by the President, as well as relevant officials and government agencies.
Lastly, they urged the Supreme Court to instruct the federal government, through the Revenue Mobilisation and Fiscal Commission (RMFAC), to develop guidelines for the distribution of recovered assets among the various governmental units.
