The former First Lady of Nigeria, Hajia Mariam Sani Abacha, along with her son, Mohammed Sani Abacha, has filed an appeal against President Bola Tinubu, Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Nyesom Wike, and two other individuals at the Court of Appeal in Abuja.
The legal action centers around the alleged unlawful revocation and subsequent sale of a property originally owned by the late General Sani Abacha.
The contested property, located in the Maitama District of Abuja, was reportedly reclaimed by the Federal Government and sold to a private entity, Salamed Ventures Limited, without the consent or involvement of the Abacha family. The family is seeking the Court of Appeal’s intervention to overturn the decision made by Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja on May 19, 2024, which dismissed their claim to the property.
The Abacha family’s appeal lists several respondents, including the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (MFCT), the Federal Capital Development Authority (FCDA), the President of Nigeria, and Salamed Ventures Limited. Represented by Reuben Atabo, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, the family’s appeal argues that Justice Lifu committed multiple errors in law and justice during the initial adjudication.
The appeal is based on eleven grounds with two primary requests for relief. Key points of contention include:
- Justice Lifu’s dismissal of their claims at both the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (case No: FCT/HC/CV/317/2006) and the Court of Appeal (Appeal No: CA/A/197/2010) due to alleged lack of jurisdiction.
- The assertion that the judge incorrectly interpreted Section 39 of the Land Use Act, which he cited to conclude that the Federal High Court lacked jurisdiction to recover land.
- The claim that the judge violated the principles of fair hearing under Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution by deciding the case without consulting the parties.
The Abacha family argues they have the legal standing to initiate the action either personally or through letters of administration for the late General’s estate. They also challenge Justice Lifu’s ruling that their case was statute-barred, arguing exceptions should be applied to the Public Officers Protection Act.
According to the family, the initial summons leading to this appeal was lodged at the Federal High Court on May 25, 2015, following a Court of Appeal decision on May 18, 2015, which highlighted a judicial omission. They also claim a legal misstep by the judge in acknowledging Salamed Ventures Limited as a respondent, arguing that the property’s title transfer occurred during ongoing litigation, which is prohibited.
In their notice of appeal, the Abacha family contends:
- The Certificate of Occupancy claimed by the fourth respondent was issued during their ongoing appeal, which violates judicial authority.
- The revocation of their title was not in accordance with Section 28 of the Land Use Act, as the property was not taken for overriding public interest.
- Justice Lifu erroneously awarded N500,000 in costs to the fourth respondent, who was neither a proper nor necessary party in the case.
The family urges the Court of Appeal to overturn the lower court’s judgment, asserting that their property’s revocation and subsequent sale were illegal.
In his May 19 decision, Justice Lifu dismissed the Abacha family’s lawsuit against the Federal Government, citing statute-barred status and a lack of legal standing due to missing required documents, such as letters of administration for the Abacha Estate.
The Abacha family disputes the revocation of their Certificate of Occupancy for Plot 3119 in Maitama, arguing it was done unlawfully and violated constitutional and statutory provisions.
A date for the appeal hearing has not yet been established.
