Court Orders Dikko to Refund N57m to FG Within Seven Days

Alex Enumah in Abuja

Justice Nnamdi Dimgba of the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court, yesterday, ordered a former Chief of Air Staff, Air Marshal, Mohammed Dikko, to return the sum of N57million to the federal government within seven days or risk the forfeiture of his property in Abuja.

The said sum was used for the renovation of a property linked to Dikko.
According to the court, the sum of N57 million was transferred into a Stanbic IBTC Account No. 9202077424, belonging to Capital Law Office, and used for the renovation/improvement of Dikko’s property situated at No. 1853 Deng Xiao Ping Street, off Mahathir Mohammed Street, Asokoro Extension Abuja.

Delivering judgment, Dimgba held that, “The Defendant shall file a Report of Compliance with the above order with the Registry of this Court and serve a copy of same on the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission within 10 working days from today.

“In the event of failure by the Defendant to comply with the above orders of the Court, the Defendant’s property known as House No. 1853 Deng Xiao Ping Street, off Mahathir Mohammed Street, Asokoro Extension, Abuja, shall stand permanently forfeited to the Federal Government of Nigeria as a tainted asset,” Dimgba held.
Dikko, who piloted the affairs of the Nigerian Air, NAF, between September 2010 and October 2012, was arraigned before the court on January 25, 2017.

EFCC had in the charge marked FHC/ABJ/CR/92/2016, accused him of complicity in money laundering and procurement fraud, to the tune of about N9.7 billion.
The anti-graft agency, among other things, alleged that the Defendant, while in office as the Air Force Chief, withdrew N700m from the NAF account, and used same to purchase a choice property at a highbrow area within the Maitama District of Abuja.

He was further alleged to have fraudulently withdrawn N500m from the said NAF account to buy a four-bedroom duplex at Road 3B, Street 2, in Mabushi Ministers Hill, Abuja.
Besides, EFCC told the court that the defendant also took N250m from the NAF’s coffers to buy a property at No. 14, Audu Bako Way, GRA, Kano State in 2011.
The prosecution closed its case on September 29, 2020, after it called a total of 12 witnesses and tendered 19 documentary evidence before the court.

Thereafter, the defendant, who earlier pleaded not guilty to the charge, opted to make a ‘No Case Submission’ in line with Section 303 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015.
But, the court, in a ruling delivered on February 23, 2021, discharged and acquitted the Defendant on six out of the seven-count charge.

The court held that a holistic review of the totality of evidence before it, showed that the EFCC failed to establish a prima facie case that would warrant the Defendant to be called upon to enter his defence to the six counts.
Following a directive of the court, the Defendant opened his defence by appearing as his own witness in the matter.

However, in his judgement, yesterday, Justice Dimgba noted that whereas the EFCC had in the sole count of the charge pending before the court, alleged that N66m was removed from NAF account to renovate Dikko’s Abuja property, he said available evidence showed that what was actually transferred out of the account was N57m.
The court held that the EFCC failed to establish that it was Dikko that gave the directive for the fund to be withdrawn for the renovation of the property.

“Granted that the evidence led by the prosecution in this case is not strong enough to warrant the conviction of the defendant as charged, it will be against good conscience for the Court to shut its eyes to the fact that the defendant benefitted from funds belonging to the NAF, even if not in a manner sufficient to warrant his conviction for the offence that he has been charged or any other offence that he could have been found liable for.
“The question that agitates my mind is: What is to be made of the sum of N57 million? Should the benefit of the funds be allowed to be retained by the defendant so that the defendant becomes unjustly enriched at the expense of the public?

“I am satisfied that the said sum of N57 million was not payment for any value received by the NAF from the Defendant nor did it fall within the lawful expenditures of the force. It was rather made for the renovation of the Defendant’s property. Allowing the Defendant to retain the benefit will be a clear case of unjust enrichment under the Law of Restitution.  

“Any civilised system of law is bound to provide remedies in situations of this nature, so that a man is prevented from retaining funds, or some benefit derived from those funds, of another, which it is against conscience that he should keep, even if the man did not act criminally or with a mind to defraud.
“The Court must be vigilant and quick to deny everyone, whether innocent of crime or guilty of same, of opportunity for unjust enrichment, or of reaping of any unjust benefit.

“The duty on the court to prevent unjust enrichment in deserving cases is in my view connected to its inherent powers under Section 6(6)(a) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended). Courts of law can no longer sit at the sidelines and watch the perpetration of illegality or of wrongdoing in any guise.
“In this case, the paramount consideration lies in what action is required to be taken in light of clear evidence showing that the defendant has derived some benefit from a public institution, which is against conscience that he should keep, even if he has not acted criminally in the context of the charge preferred against him.
“Should the Court be blinded while the defendant enjoys the benefit of a public resource, which are not due to him? Certainly not! The Court must invoke its special powers and take such measures as the justice of the case dictates.

“Therefore, pursuant to Section 333(1) of the ACJA 2015, and the inherent powers of the Court to be exercised as the justice of the case demands, I am of the view that notwithstanding his discharge and acquittal for the reasons amply explained in the body of this judgment, the defendant shall not be allowed to keep the benefit of the N57 million funds of the NAF actually used by the prosecution’s own witnesses (PW1, PW2 and PW6) at the time when the defendant was the Chief of Air Staff to renovate/improve his personal property.

“Allowing him to retain this benefit will violate good conscience and in violation of the equitable principles of the Law of Restitution, and which abhors unjust enrichment,” Dimgba stated.