A federal high court in Abuja has granted final forfeiture of a London property linked to the late Jeremiah Useni, the late former minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), to the federal government.
While ruling on Tuesday, Binta Nyako, the presiding judge, held that the suit brought by the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) was meritorious.
In the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2333/2025, the CCB, through its counsel Sufyan Ahmad, told the court that the property sought to be forfeited, located at No. 79, Randall Avenue, Neasden, London NW2 7SX, is reasonably suspected to have been acquired with proceeds of unlawful activities.
On November 28, Nyako granted the interim forfeiture order and directed the CCB to publish it in a national newspaper within 14 days, inviting “any person or body” with an interest in the property to come forward and establish lawful ownership.
The prosecuting counsel told the court that the order had been complied with.
According to him, no person or authority – whether corporate or otherwise – indicated interest and/or filed any process contesting why the property should not be forfeited to the federal government.
The lawyer prayed the court to grant their relief.
In an affidavit supporting the motion for final forfeiture, Raji Rasaq, a CCB investigator, said a United Kingdom (UK) tribunal had already ruled in suit REF/2023/0155 that the late Useni was the true owner of the property, having acquired it through a fictitious name.
Rasaq said the property was purchased while the deceased was in public office, with circumstances suggesting it was funded with proceeds of unlawful activity.
He added that the CCB obtained remuneration data for political, public and judicial office holders from the Revenue Mobilisation, Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) to assess Useni’s net worth while in service.
According to him, a net worth analysis by the CCB’s financial investigation and forensic accounting unit (FIFAU), based on the RMAFC salary structure, showed that Useni’s declared income was insufficient to fund the acquisition of the property.
“That there is a substantial unexplained funds gap indicating that funds used for the acquisition must have come from other, undisclosed or undeclared sources,” he quoted the affidavits.
“That this gap constitutes a strong circumstantial indicator of potential fraud/unreported income or illicit accumulation of wealth.
“That, accordingly, the means of acquisition of the London property constitute proceeds of unlawful activity.”
The disputed property is located at 79 Randall Avenue, London NW2 7SX.
Named in the property dispute are Mike Ozekhome, a senior advocate of Nigeria (SAN) and the late Useni, a retired lieutenant-general.
The matter was filed at the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Land Registration, UK, under case number REF/2023/0155, with Tali Shani as the applicant and Ozekhome as the respondent.
The property had been claimed by one “Ms Tali Shani” on one hand and Ozekhome on the other.
Ozekhome said he received the house as a gift from “Mr Tali Shani” in 2021, while lawyers for “Ms Shani” insisted she was the rightful owner.
A witness known as “Mr Tali Shani” had testified in favour of Ozekhome, claiming that he had “powers of attorney” over the property and had transferred the property to Ozekhome.
Mr Tali Shani asserted ownership of the property from 1993 and claimed he later appointed Useni as his property manager, describing the late former FCT minister as an “elder friend and business partner”.
On the other hand, several documents, including an obituary announcement, NIN card, ECOWAS passport, phone number, etc., were tendered by witnesses of Ms Tali Shani to claim ownership of the property.
However, the tribunal found all the documents tendered for Ms Tali Shani to be fake.
The tribunal subsequently dismissed all claims, ruling that neither “Mr” nor “Ms” Tali Shani existed.
Useni, who died in January 2025, gave video testimony in June 2024, confirming that he — not anyone called Tali Shani — bought the property in 1993.
“I owned it… I bought the property… before I gave it to someone to run… I paid the deposit… then bit by bit… I bought it… it is my property,” he told the court.
