Judges’ Mansions That Threaten Judicial Autonomy

By Davidson Iriekpen

The recent completion of 40 housing units for judges in Abuja has reignited debate over the separation of powers, with many questioning whether the executive branch’s funding of such lavish accommodations for members of the judiciary is consistent with the principle of judicial independence.

The media was abuzz recently with news of the inauguration of official mansions for judges of the Court of Appeal, the Federal High Court, and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court in Abuja by the Minister of the FCT, Mr. Nyesom Wike, with many analysts questioning the appropriateness of the projects.

While the initiative aims to boost judicial welfare, security, and independence by removing judges from vulnerable rental areas, critics have argued that it could create perceptions of undue influence on the judiciary and compromise its perceived neutrality by tying judges to political benefactors.

The provision of standard official residences is globally acceptable for top judicial officers. However, the specific implementation—characterised by political fanfare and massive executive involvement—remains a subject of intense public concern.

Officials of the Federal Capital Development Authority (FCDA) said the project comprises 20 duplexes for judges of the FCT High Court, 10 for judges of the Federal High Court, and another 10 for justices of the Court of Appeal. Each residence is a seven-bedroom duplex equipped with luxury features, including private swimming pools, home theatres, staff quarters, and advanced security systems.

Proponents, including President Bola Tinubu and the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, have maintained that befitting housing and secure environments would give judges peace of mind to interpret the law fairly. Specifically, Justice Kekere-Ekun praised the initiative as a milestone in supporting the judiciary’s welfare, emphasising that the homes would provide judges with the peace and security needed to perform their duties effectively.

Also, supporters of the initiative and other government officials insist the criticism is misplaced. They argue that providing adequate accommodation for judges is a standard government responsibility and aligns with the constitutional role of the FCT administration in supporting all three arms of government. According to them, several judges reportedly lived in rented apartments and guest houses, a situation authorities say posed security risks and could undermine judicial independence.

Even the FCT minister, Wike, has dismissed criticism that the residences are excessive, insisting that providing secure and dignified living conditions for judges is essential to strengthening the rule of law and protecting the integrity of the judicial system. He denied claims that the construction of homes for judges in Abuja is intended to influence the judiciary politically, adding that the housing project is not his personal initiative but rather part of a welfare package introduced by President Tinubu in 2024 to ensure the judiciary’s independence.

However, the scale and luxury of the houses have triggered intense reactions from a cross-section of Nigerians, with many comparing them to the deplorable conditions in which teachers and medical doctors live in the same Abuja. This, they stressed, comes amid persistent economic pressure across the country, with rising food prices and widespread hardship affecting millions of households. They also pointed out that high-profile, politicised fanfare around the housing projects creates the perception that the bench is beholden to political power and, as such, erodes public confidence in the judiciary.

A human rights lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN), condemned the houses for judges, arguing that it is wrong for the executive to give gifts to the members of the judiciary, especially judges. He said this is why the judiciary’s autonomy has been constitutionalised, adding that judges have no business going to the executive to buy them cars and houses.

“Because you are a minister of the federal government, like a state governor, your budget is limited to the affairs of the FCT. So, you cannot, as the head of the FCT, be dishing out gifts of cars and houses to judges in the Federal High Court, the Appeal Court, and the Supreme Court. Number two, you have cases before these courts, on the theory of equality before the court, you cannot be seen to be giving cars or houses to the judges who are going to determine your cases.”

A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, who spoke to THISDAY on condition of anonymity, argued that, as an independent arm of government, the judiciary should be properly funded, like the other two arms of government, to provide vehicles and houses for judges. “The judiciary is supposed to be on the first line charge, like other arms of government, to be able to address all that the judges and other officials need. Giving them cars and houses by the executive arm of the government will definitely compromise them and erode judicial integrity,” he said.

Recently, the President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Afam Osigwe (SAN), faulted state governors and the executive branch for publicly gifting houses and cars to judges. He argued that this practice compromises judicial independence. Osigwe maintained that the judiciary’s operational needs—including courtrooms and staff quarters—should be fully funded through an independent budget, not at the political mercy of governors. He warned that publicly presenting vehicles or homes makes judges beholden to political figures, and erodes public trust in the judiciary’s ability to remain impartial, especially when providers have cases pending in court.

The NBA president emphasised that the judiciary must be financially autonomous, insisting that judges’ official needs, including transportation and housing, should be adequately covered by proper, independent budgetary allocations rather than executive handouts. “It is concerning to us that the governors would do things for the judiciary as if they were doing them a favour. Often, it’s annoying to see some governors talk about how ‘Oh, I give cars to my judges,’ or even invite the judges to a public presentation of vehicles or other materials to members of the judiciary. The judiciary should be an independent part of government and should not be demeaned or reduced to a point where members of the judiciary should be given handouts as if a favour was being done to them,” Osigwe stressed.

Another human rights activist, Samson Adaku, in a series of social media posts accused the government of prioritising the welfare of judges while ordinary Nigerians struggle to survive. He argued that similar housing support is not provided for other critical professionals, such as doctors and teachers, raising questions about the government’s broader spending priorities.

On his part, the Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA) has described it as an act of “egregious corruption” and a violation of judicial independence. In a statement, its Director, Emmanuel Onwobiko, stressed that as an independent arm of government, the judiciary should not be financially indebted to the executive, which controls public resources. The group also said the move could compromise the impartiality of the courts, especially in cases involving the government.

Source: TheNigeriaLawyer

The post Judges’ Mansions That Threaten Judicial Autonomy appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, has defended the construction of houses for judges and justices in Abuja, insisting that the projects would not compromise the independence of the judiciary.

Wike made the remarks on Friday after inspecting ongoing judicial infrastructure projects, including judges’ residences, the Court of Appeal Abuja Division, and proposed housing projects for judges of the National Industrial Court and the Code of Conduct Tribunal.

The minister was reacting to concerns reportedly raised by the Nigerian Bar Association over executive involvement in providing infrastructure for the judiciary.

Dismissing the criticisms, Wike argued that government provision of facilities for judicial officers was not new and should not be interpreted as interference with the judiciary.

“The mere fact that the executive constructs buildings does not mean it will interfere with the judiciary,” he said.

“We have built public houses for the National Assembly and for the judiciary before. The Supreme Court was built by the government. So there is nothing new in this.”

Wike also accused the leadership of the Nigerian Bar Association of inconsistency, alleging that the association often seeks financial support from state governments for its conferences and activities while criticising government interventions in the judiciary.

“All they are interested in is when state governments will sponsor NBA activities. If governments fund their conferences, does that mean they are no longer independent?” he queried.

The minister maintained that the FCT Administration would continue implementing projects aimed at improving the welfare and working conditions of judges and justices across the country.

“This is a voluntary act by government to make judicial officers comfortable and focused on their work. It is not done to erode judicial independence,” he added.

Wike explained that the judicial projects form part of activities lined up to commemorate President Bola Tinubu’s third anniversary in office.

He expressed satisfaction with the progress made on the judges’ quarters project, describing the development as well executed and almost ready for inauguration.

“We’ve seen the judges’ quarters beautiful. I’m very elated that the job was done well. The houses are well furnished and almost 99 per cent ready,” he stated.

The minister further disclosed that preparations had commenced for the groundbreaking ceremony of residential projects for judges of the Industrial Court and the Code of Conduct Tribunal.

However, Wike expressed dissatisfaction with some aspects of the finishing work at the Court of Appeal Abuja Division project despite its advanced stage of completion.

“Almost 90 per cent complete, but I must say it’s not the quality I expected. I have told the contractor that several errors must be corrected before inauguration,” he said.

He assured that the administration would continue monitoring contractors to ensure projects are delivered according to approved specifications and timelines.

“All the promises that have been made, we are going to fulfil them. That is why we are going around to inspect and ensure contractors are ready,” the minister added.

The post Wike Defends Judges’ Housing Projects, Rejects Fears Over Judicial Independence appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

The sitting in has adjourned the alleged terrorism financing and illegal possession of firearms case involving former Attorney-General of the Federation, , and his son, , until April 15 and 16.

The case came up on Tuesday before Justice , with both defendants present in court.

During the proceedings, the prosecution counsel, (SAN), informed the court that he had only recently been assigned to take over the prosecution of the case.

According to him, the instruction was received on Monday, leaving little time to properly consult with witnesses.

“I got the instruction to take over the prosecution of the case on Monday and so I need time to interface with the witnesses,” he told the court while requesting a new date for the hearing.

Defence raises no objection

Counsel to the defendants, (SAN), did not oppose the request for adjournment.

Following the submissions from both sides, Justice Abdulmalik granted the application and adjourned the matter to April 15 and 16 for trial.

DSS filed terrorism charges

The had earlier arraigned Malami and his son on a five-count charge bordering on terrorism financing and unlawful possession of firearms.

According to court documents marked FHC/ABJ/CR/63/2026, Malami was accused of allegedly refusing to prosecute suspected terrorism financiers whose case files were reportedly forwarded to him during his tenure as Attorney-General and Minister of Justice.

The charges were filed under provisions of the .

Allegations of illegal firearms possession

In additional counts, both defendants were accused of unlawfully keeping a Sturm Magnum firearm, along with live and expended cartridges, at their residence in , , without lawful authorisation.

The alleged offences are said to violate relevant provisions of the .

The case was initially investigated by the , which later transferred it to the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation ahead of the commencement of trial proceedings.

The post Court Adjourns Terrorism Financing Case Against Malami, Son to April 15 appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

A High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) sitting in Maitama, Abuja, on Friday granted bail in the sum of N10 million each to Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mike Ozekhome, and his co-defendant, Ponfa Useni, following their arraignment on a 12-count criminal charge bordering on alleged forgery.

The charges were filed by the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation, accusing the defendants of forging documents, including an international passport and an irrevocable power of attorney, allegedly used to lay claim to a London property said to have been unlawfully procured by the late Jeremiah Useni.

Both defendants pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Bail Conditions

In a brief ruling, Justice Chizoba Oji admitted the defendants to bail in the sum of N10 million each with one surety each. The sureties, the court ruled, must own property within the Federal Capital Territory.

The judge further ordered the defendants to deposit their international passports with the court as part of the bail conditions.

Justice Oji noted that since the proceedings were conducted on a Friday, the defendants would be allowed to return home if unable to perfect their bail conditions immediately. However, she directed them to report back to court on Monday to complete the process.

She warned that failure to perfect the bail conditions by the stipulated date would result in their remand in a correctional facility.

Prosecution and Defence Positions

The prosecution was led by Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Rotimi Oyedepo, who did not oppose the bail applications moved on behalf of the defendants.

Ozekhome’s bail application was presented by Tayo Oyetibo (SAN), while Ponfa Useni was represented by F.R. Onoja (SAN). Both defence counsels urged the court to grant their clients bail on liberal terms, arguing that the defendants were reputable individuals who would not interfere with the course of justice.

The absence of opposition from the prosecution streamlined the bail proceedings, allowing the court to issue its ruling shortly after arguments were heard.

Allegations in the Charge

According to the charge sheet, the defendants are accused of forging key legal documents purportedly used in asserting ownership claims over a property located in London.

The prosecution alleges that the documents — including an international passport and an irrevocable power of attorney — were falsified to facilitate the claim over the said property.

The property in dispute was reportedly linked to the late Jeremiah Useni, although further details of the alleged unlawful procurement were not fully disclosed during Friday’s proceedings.

Legal analysts note that forgery-related offences, particularly those involving international assets and official documents, carry serious criminal implications under Nigerian law if proven.

Legal Implications

The case adds to ongoing high-profile legal proceedings involving senior members of the Nigerian legal community. As a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Ozekhome holds one of the highest legal ranks in the country, a designation reserved for distinguished legal practitioners.

The court’s decision to grant bail reflects established judicial principles that an accused person is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Bail is typically granted unless there is a compelling reason to deny it, such as risk of flight or interference with witnesses.

By ordering the surrender of international passports and requiring property-owning sureties within the FCT, the court imposed conditions aimed at ensuring the defendants’ availability for trial.

Next Steps

The matter is expected to proceed with further hearings after the defendants perfect their bail conditions. The court is likely to set a trial date during subsequent proceedings.

Legal observers say the case could hinge on documentary evidence and expert testimony regarding the authenticity of the disputed documents.

As of the time of filing this report, additional details of the prosecution’s evidence and witness list had not been made public.

The court’s directive requiring the defendants to report back on Monday underscores the urgency attached to compliance with bail conditions.

Further developments are expected as the trial unfolds.

The post Court Grants Ozekhome N10m Bail Over Alleged Forgery appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

A High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) has issued interim orders restraining the Federal Capital Territory Administration (FCTA) and the Minister of the FCT, Nyesom Wike, from interfering with a disputed parcel of land in Maitama District, Abuja, claimed by Nanet Hotels Limited.

The order followed a suit filed by Nanet Hotels and marked FCT/HC/CV/5274/2025, which is currently pending before the FCT High Court.

In a public notice dated January 20, 2026, Nanet Hotels warned investors, developers, and relevant government agencies to desist from any dealings on the property identified as Park No. 2008, Cadastral Zone A06, Maitama District, measuring approximately 1.96 hectares.

The notice, issued through the company’s solicitors and signed by Chikaosolu Ojukwu, SAN, and Segun Fiki, stated that the court had already granted interim injunctive reliefs restraining the defendants from interfering with the claimant’s possession and occupation of the land.

According to the solicitors, the interim injunction was granted on December 22, 2025, pending the hearing and determination of a motion on notice.

They stressed that, while the matter remains before the court, no person, institution, or authority has the legal right to allocate, sell, transfer, or otherwise transact on the disputed land or any property connected to it.

The lawyers further cautioned members of the public against entering into any transaction relating to the land, warning that such actions could expose investors to lengthy and expensive legal disputes with serious financial implications.

Court documents show that the presiding judge, Justice Bello Kawu, also restrained the defendants from enforcing or acting on a purported revocation notice contained in a letter dated July 7, 2025, which was reportedly received on September 24, 2025.

The court barred the FCTA, the FCT Minister, and other defendants from ejecting, harassing, intimidating, sealing, demolishing, relocating, or otherwise disturbing Nanet Hotels’ possession of the property.

In addition, the court directed the Inspector-General of Police and the Nigeria Police Force to refrain from enforcing the alleged revocation or aiding any form of eviction or disturbance pending the determination of the motion on notice.

Justice Kawu further ordered all parties to maintain the status quo as at the date the suit was instituted.

Nanet Hotels maintained that it remains lawfully entitled to the land under a Deed of Sub-Lease dated July 9, 2007, which grants it possession of the property until 2037, unless lawfully terminated in accordance with the agreement and applicable laws.

The company said it is prepared to pursue the case to the Supreme Court, if necessary, as part of efforts to curb land grabbing and the unlawful conversion of designated parks and green areas in the Federal Capital Territory.

The post High Court Bars FCTA, Wike From Interfering With Nanet Hotels’ Maitama Land appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

Rumours are intensifying that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is considering appointing Justice Abdullahi Mohammed Liman, a recently retired judge from Nasarawa State as the next Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). If this turns out to be true, the implications for the credibility of the 2027 general election could be significant.

Although Liman is not widely known to the public, he has been at the center of several high-profile and controversial judicial decisions. Among them is his ruling that halted Kano State Governor Abba Yusuf’s move to reinstate Sanusi Lamido Sanusi as Emir of Kano, an act that inflamed political tensions and triggered legal battles over jurisdiction. Liman also halted the suspension and attempted arrest of APC National Chairman Abdullahi Ganduje over the widely publicized “dollar stuffing” scandal.

His judicial record has prompted both praise and criticism. In Edo State, Peters Omoragbon, a former governorship candidate, accused Liman of delaying a ruling in a case involving INEC. In 2016, his residence in Port Harcourt was among those raided by the Department of State Services (DSS), who claimed to have recovered $2 million in cash. Liman denied the allegations, dismissing them as baseless and saying he would have resigned if such claims were true.

Despite his legal background, what has triggered alarm is not just Liman’s record, but the political context surrounding his possible appointment.

During a recent interview on Arise TV, political figure Buba Galadima warned of “rumours all over the place” suggesting that a retired judge “known for notoriety” may be appointed as INEC Chairman. Though Galadima did not name Liman directly, the description fits. He went further, warning that such a move could “create chaos” and potentially endanger the conduct of future elections.

While Galadima’s language may be exaggerated, it reflects a broader concern: that Nigeria cannot afford an INEC chairman whose independence and impartiality are in question especially not in the run-up to a high-stakes election like that of 2027.

The regional implications are also worth noting. Supporters of the administration have recently circulated a list of past INEC chairmen to argue that the South-South has historically dominated the role, while the North-Central has never produced one. Justice Liman, from Nasarawa State in the North-Central, would address that imbalance. But critics argue that President Tinubu, whose appointments have consistently leaned toward the Southwest, is unlikely to make such a departure from his current pattern.

Moreover, there is concern that Liman’s perceived closeness to influential figures such as Ganduje and former Rivers State Governor Nyesom Wike could further politicise INEC. Appointing someone with such affiliations would set a dangerous precedent—one that risks undermining the commission’s credibility before campaigns even begin.

One curious detail is Liman’s early retirement from the Court of Appeal, even after the judicial retirement age was raised to 70. This has fuelled speculation that he may have stepped down to make himself eligible for a high-level political appointment.

It is important to recall that no president; civilian or military, has ever appointed an INEC chairman from his own ethnic or regional base. That unwritten rule has helped preserve some measure of balance and public trust in the electoral process. Breaking with that tradition now would only deepen existing divisions and fuel suspicions of electoral manipulation.

If Tinubu is seriously considering Justice Liman, he must weigh short-term political advantage against long-term institutional damage. INEC’s legitimacy hinges not only on its constitutional authority but also on public confidence in its leadership. An electoral umpire perceived as partisan would do lasting harm to Nigeria’s democratic process.

As 2027 approaches, Nigeria needs an INEC chairman who is above reproach someone whose appointment will reassure, not inflame. The office demands neutrality, integrity, and an unimpeachable sense of fairness. Anything less will cast a shadow over the next general election and over the president’s own legacy.

By Farooq A. Kperogi
Source : The Nigeria Lawyer

The post The Risk of Politicizing INEC: Why Justice Liman’s Rumored Appointment Raises Concerns appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

The EFCC made this known through an ex parte motion filed before the Federal High Court in Abuja. The motion, marked FHC/ABJ/177/2024, is part of a non-conviction-based asset forfeiture process.

According to the EFCC, Nwabuoku voluntarily refunded the funds and surrendered the property. The Commission believes the assets were obtained from unlawful activities.

In the motion, EFCC lawyer E. Iheanacho, SAN, asked the court to issue an interim forfeiture order. The order would transfer ownership of the funds and property to the Federal Government of Nigeria.

Several company bank accounts linked to the case were listed. These include:

• Temeeo Synergy Concept Limited – ₦12.5 million

• Turge Global Investment Limited – ₦4.1 million

• Laptev Bridge Limited – ₦682,904

• Arafura Transnational Afro Ltd – ₦51.2 million

• EFCC Recovery Account – ₦220 million (refunded by Nwabuoku)

The EFCC also asked the court to publish the interim order in a national newspaper. This allows any interested parties 14 days to come forward and show cause. If no valid claim is made, the final forfeiture order may be granted.

According to EFCC investigator Chinelo Okpara, the funds in question were linked to the Ministry of Defence. They were originally allocated for internal security operations by the Nigerian Armed Forces.

The investigation revealed that funds were funneled through four companies. The money was then transferred into an account belonging to M Davi Company Enterprises. This account was allegedly used for the personal benefit of Nwabuoku.

Between November 2019 and September 2020, ₦355 million was deposited into that account by various individuals, including one Joseph Gideon. Investigators say Nwabuoku admitted in a written statement that the money belonged to him.

Out of the total funds, ₦64 million was used to purchase a five-bedroom duplex at No. 20 City Gate Estate, Kukwaba, Abuja. Another ₦160 million was reportedly invested in securities and other financial instruments.

Nwabuoku later returned ₦220 million to the EFCC Recovery Account. He also handed over the property and its keys to the Commission.

The EFCC cited Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Related Offences Act, 2006. This law allows the court to issue interim forfeiture orders without a criminal conviction if assets are linked to illegal activities.

Although the case was scheduled for mention on July 15, the court did not sit. A new date has been fixed for October 22, 2025.

Meanwhile, a separate case is ongoing. The EFCC is prosecuting Nwabuoku on a nine-count charge of money laundering involving ₦868 million. He has pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Nwabuoku was appointed Acting Accountant-General of the Federation by former President Muhammadu Buhari in May 2022. His appointment came after the suspension of Ahmed Idris, who was also under investigation.

The investigation and recovery efforts continue.

The post Nwabuoku returned ₦220 million and a five-bedroom duplex to EFCC. appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

Speaking during the opening of the NUJ Workstation in Owerri on Monday, Nwakaeti, in a paper titled “Judiciary and the Role of the Media in Deepening Nigerian Democracy,” described the current state of the judiciary as a departure from its constitutional role as the last hope of the common man.

“Judicial independence is fast becoming a theoretical concept in Nigeria. Courts have increasingly strayed from established legal precedents, and the separation of powers, once a hallmark of democratic governance, is now largely symbolic,” he stated.

Nwakaeti pointed to several systemic issues undermining judicial effectiveness, including the backlog of cases, delays in the judicial process, and flawed appointment procedures. He argued that judicial appointments have become politicised and sometimes based on favoritism rather than merit, turning what should be a sacred duty into a matter of influence and inheritance.

“In many cases, appointments to the bench are now seen as spousal gifts or tools for influence peddling. This undermines public confidence in the judiciary and compromises its credibility,” he said.

Calling for urgent reform, the legal expert urged the judiciary to reclaim its independence as enshrined in Section 6 of the 1999 Constitution. He noted that no arm of government holds the constitutional power to diminish the judiciary’s authority, adding that an empowered and functional judicial system is key to checking executive overreach and upholding democratic norms.

He also called on the media to remain vigilant and continue reporting on developments within the justice system. “A fearless press is essential in holding those in power accountable and ensuring that the judiciary fulfills its responsibility to protect civil liberties and uphold the rule of law,” Nwakaeti concluded.

The post Corruption, Political Interference Undermine Nigeria’s Judiciary — Ex-NBA Chair appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

Justice Obiora Egwuatu gave the ruling on Friday. He also barred other parties in the suit from taking any actions that could interfere with the ongoing legal process.

The judge warned all involved not to take steps that could pre-empt the court’s decision. The case was then adjourned to June 26, 2025, for the next hearing.

The case was filed by Ghanaian investors. They include JonahCapital Ltd, Houses for Africa Ltd, and three individuals: Samuel Esson Jonah, Kojo Ansah Mensah, and Victor Quainoo. Their lawyer, Abu Arome, filed the suit on their behalf.

They asked the court to stop the police, EFCC, and other parties from arresting or intimidating them during the investigation. The investors claimed that their rights were being violated.

The conflict started with multiple petitions regarding ownership of River Park Estate. In response, the IGP created a Special Investigation Panel (SIP) to examine the complaints.

After weeks of investigation, the panel submitted its report to the police leadership. The report was supposed to be reviewed by the legal department to check for any criminal elements.

Despite this, the investors said they received no reply after sending follow-up letters dated March 20 and April 16. Instead, a new investigation allegedly began under DCP Akin Fakorede, head of the IGP Monitoring Unit.

The investors stated that even while the matter was still in court, they were being summoned and harassed. Fakorede allegedly continued to investigate the case, ignoring the findings of the earlier panel.

They also accused the EFCC of arresting and detaining Kojo Ansah Mensah, the CEO of JonahCapital and Houses for Africa Nigeria. He was reportedly held for several days without clear cause.

Due to the situation, the investors petitioned the Police Service Commission, led by Hashimu Argungu. They also wrote to the Attorney-General of the Federation, Lateef Fagbemi, SAN. Both were asked to intervene in what the investors called abuse of power.

The plaintiffs are asking the court for a perpetual injunction. This would stop the police and EFCC from arresting, inviting, harassing, or detaining them.

They argue that the investigation is based on agreements signed years ago on June 1, 2012, and July 13, 2012 which have already been addressed.

They also want the SIP investigation report to be released. The panel was led by DCP Usman Ahmed Imam from the Force Criminal Investigation Department.

In addition, the investors are demanding ₦200 million in damages for alleged violations of their rights.

The matter will be heard again on June 26, 2025, at the Federal High Court in Abuja.

The post Court Bars Police, EFCC from Intervening in River Park Estate Dispute appeared first on Housing TV Africa.