Adide told the court that the EFCC received a petition alleging criminal breach of trust and obtaining money by false pretence, claims that justified the Commission’s intervention.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has drawn a firm line between criminal investigation and private disputes, telling a Lagos High Court that it is not a debt recovery agency and was never asked to recover money on behalf of a Nigerian-American engineer in a contentious luxury property deal.
An EFCC operative, Emmanuel Adide, made this clear on Tuesday while testifying before a Lagos State High Court sitting at Tafawa Balewa Square in a suit involving property developer Olukayode Olusanya, his firm Oak Homes Limited, and Anthony Ugbebor, over ownership and alleged trespass on two luxury flats in Victoria Island.
Testifying under cross-examination, Adide stressed that the Commission’s involvement in the dispute arose strictly from allegations of fraud, not from any request to recover funds.
“There was no written or verbal request from Mr Ugbebor asking the EFCC to recover the money,” the witness said, emphasising that “the EFCC is not a debt recovery agency.”
The case, marked LD/4471LM/2023, centres on N152 million allegedly paid by Ugbebor as part payment for two second-floor luxury apartments located at No. 14A Musa Yar’Adua Street, Victoria Island, Lagos.
Petition Alleged Fraud, Not a Civil Transaction
Adide told the court that the EFCC received a petition alleging criminal breach of trust and obtaining money by false pretence, claims that justified the Commission’s intervention.
He explained that once such allegations are made, the EFCC’s standard procedure is to investigate and, where criminal conduct is established, recover funds linked to the offence.
However, the investigation later revealed that the dispute was civil in nature, prompting the Commission to disengage.
“Once it became clear that the matter was civil, the claimant was contacted and asked to retrieve the bank draft earlier submitted to the EFCC,” Adide said.
No Directive to Sell Property for Refund
The EFCC operative also addressed claims surrounding the refund process, clarifying that although discussions took place within the Commission, they were internal and not binding directives.
According to him, there was no agreement or understanding that the disputed flats would be sold to facilitate repayment.
“At the time, it was unclear whether disposal of the flats would be required. Forcing the sale of property in such circumstances would amount to improper practice,” he said.
Detention, Bail, and Refund Timeline
Adide confirmed that Olusanya, the Managing Director of Oak Homes Limited, was detained when he first reported to the EFCC office in Abuja but noted that the refund arrangement was reached after he had been granted bail.
“He was already on bail when he made the refund,” the witness said.
He also confirmed that Olusanya never denied that a transaction took place between him and Ugbebor.
“He did not deny it, my lord,” Adide told the court.
The witness said the refund was paid in instalments, adding that although he could not recall the exact number of tranches, Olusanya submitted three bank drafts totalling N102 million to the EFCC.
Earlier in the proceedings, counsel for Ugbebor, I.B. Mamood, informed the court that the defence had decided not to call additional witnesses and formally closed its case.
Following this development, the EFCC, listed as the second defendant, opened its defence through its counsel, M.A. Shehu, who called Adide as a witness and adopted his sworn statement.
The Commission tendered several documents, including the petition, extra-judicial statements, and official correspondence. Justice George admitted the documents as Exhibits 2DW1, 2DW2, and 2DW3, alongside Adide’s witness statement dated January 17, 2024.
Court Adjourns for Final Addresses
During cross-examination by lead counsel for the first defendant, Nasiru Salau, Adide again confirmed that Ugbebor never made a written request asking the EFCC to recover the disputed funds.
After the testimony, Justice George adjourned the case until March 23, 2026, for the adoption of final written addresses.
At an earlier hearing, Ugbebor told the court that he paid N152 million, representing 80 per cent of the N190 million purchase price, for the two luxury flats, was his “life savings” amounting to $400,000.
He alleged that the developer later denied having any record of the transaction and claimed that when he sent a representative to inspect the flats on October 11, 2022, Oak Homes Limited insisted there was no evidence of his purchase.
Under cross-examination, Ugbebor admitted that he petitioned the EFCC in Abuja after suspecting fraud.