BVN: Adegboruwa flays FG, court over ‘manifestly illegal’ account forfeiture order

Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, a lawyer, has described the order granting forfeiture of funds in accounts without Bank Verification Number (BVN) to the Federal Government as “manifestly illegal”.

The order was granted by Nnamdi Dimgba, a judge of the Federal High Court, Abuja following an application by Abubakar Malami, Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice.

In a statement issued Sunday, Adegboruwa cited section 36(1) of the 1999 constitution and Article 7 of the African Charter as provisions breached by the order, arguing that it was not proper to determine the rights of parties in their absence.

He added that the BVN was merely a policy decision that was not “backed by law”.

Read also: Nigerian government to seize bank accounts without BVN

His statement read, “I am very well concerned about how we deploy interim orders for permanent purposes, such as to forfeit valuable assets, without any or fair hearing from the person(s) concerned.

“I think it is improper to obtain interim orders to freeze bank accounts of estates that are in dispute between the beneficiaries, of estates of deceased persons that are still being contested, of profits of companies that are still subject to litigation or other disputes, just to mention a few examples of the arbitrariness of these orders.

“There is nothing in section 3 of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2011, that makes BVN a condition precedent for operating a bank account in Nigeria. Nothing at all. What the law requires is verifiable identity of the customer, such as name, address, photographs, identity cards, etc. BVN is policy decision of the Central Bank of Nigeria and a court of law should not base its orders on executive policies that are not backed by law.

“I get truly worried with the way we adopt ex-parte applications to determine very serious and weighty issues of law.

“The other point is the bindingness of an ex-parte order upon the whole world and upon all millions of bank customers in Nigeria, who are not directly parties to the suit. How proper is it, for a court to seek to determine the rights of parties in their absence, in view of the clear provisions of section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution and Article 7 of the African Charter.

“Why this desperation, if one may ask? I support that money suspected to be proceeds of crime should be traced, isolated and forfeited if the owner cannot successfully account for it. But to proceed to seek to forfeit all monies in all banks meant for all customers in Nigeria, on the ground of absence of BVN is manifestly illegal.

“I therefore humbly urge the honourable attorney-general of the federation to review this case with a view to tempering the tenor of these rather outlandish orders.

“The quest to scoop revenue for government should not be at the detriment of the constitutional and fundamental rights of the citizens. Which is why I have been praying that these orders are not real, but rather one of the usual social media gimmicks”.

RipplesNigeria… without borders, without fears

Click here to join the Ripples Nigeria WhatsApp group for latest updates.

Join the conversation

Opinions

Support Ripples Nigeria, hold up solutions journalism

Balanced, fearless journalism driven by data comes at huge financial costs.

As a media platform, we hold leadership accountable and will not trade the right to press freedom and free speech for a piece of cake.

If you like what we do, and are ready to uphold solutions journalism, kindly donate to the Ripples Nigeria cause.

Your support would help to ensure that citizens and institutions continue to have free access to credible and reliable information for societal development.

Donate Now