Tinubu dismisses US court order of $460,000 forfeiture as unenforceable in Nigeria

 Former Lagos State Governor and the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) Presidential candidate in the 2023 general election, Bola Tinubu, has dismissed the enforceability of a United States District Court order that allegedly ordered the forfeiture of $460,000 in some US bank accounts linked to him in 1993.

Tinubu argued that the court order lacked the necessary jurisdiction to be enforced, as it was never registered in any Nigerian court. He made this assertion in response to a petition filed by the Labour Party presidential candidate, Peter Obi, who challenged Tinubu's victory in the February 25 presidential election.

Tinubu, represented by Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, argued that the decision of the US District Court could not be enforced because it was not registered or domesticated in any court in Nigeria. The judgment delivered on October 4, 1993, was not rendered by a court or tribunal created pursuant to Section 6 of the 1999 Constitution, he added.

Tinubu also claimed that the decision was not made in respect of any cause of action or offense created by an Act of the National Assembly, any subsidiary legislation or instrument under the provisions of law in Nigeria, or any written law in Nigeria.

Furthermore, Tinubu argued that he was not a party or defendant in the said case, no. 93C-4483. He said the petitioners did not disclose a reasonable cause of action cognizable under Sections 131, 134, and 137 of the 1999 Constitution and Section 134 of the Electoral Act of 2022.

Tinubu pointed out that the case of the petitioners as pleaded has not disclosed any disqualifying factor as prescribed by Section 137, in that he was not under a death sentence imposed by any competent court of law or tribunal in Nigeria or any jurisdiction at all. He also said that he was not currently under a sentence of imprisonment or fine for any offense involving dishonesty or fraud imposed by any competent court of law or tribunal in Nigeria.

Tinubu argued that the fact that their case was not presented within a period of less than 10 years before the date of the election, as stipulated by the Constitution, adversely affected their case.

The respondents further argued that the case was not a case of criminal forfeiture cognizant under 18 USC 982, which deals with criminal forfeiture, but rather a civil case for civil forfeiture under 18 USC 981, which the US instituted as a civil plaintiff against identified properties (not persons) as defendants.

Tinubu also argued that the final orders of Judge John Nordberg were made pursuant to a settlement agreement (in the mold of a consent judgment) under the court's civil jurisdiction in 18 USC 981.

The APC also joined the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) in calling for the dismissal of the petition filed by the People's Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate, Atiku Abubakar, challenging the declaration of Tinubu as the winner of the February 25 presidential election.

The APC, in a preliminary objection to the petition, claimed that the tribunal had no jurisdiction to adjudicate on the petition on the grounds that it lacked necessary facts or particulars as required by law.

Tinubu's representatives told journalists in the United States that the claim in some quarters that the 2023 general election was the "worst" in Nigeria's political history was unfounded.

In summary, Tinubu dismissed the US Court order of $460,000 forfeiture against him, stating that it was not enforceable in Nigeria as it was never registered in any Nigerian court.