The Federal High Court in Abuja has reversed the temporary forfeiture of Teleology Nigeria Limited’s properties and reprimanded the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for concealing a N55 billion judgment secured against the company by Keystone Bank, as well as an ongoing appeal.
Justice Emeka Nwite reversed the forfeiture on September 23, 2025, holding that the EFCC had no right to pursue recovery of the loans on behalf of Keystone Bank by alleging that Teleology acquired the properties through unlawful activities or proceeds of crime.
Nwite, while refusing EFCC’s application for final forfeiture, held that the following Teleology properties — Plot 467, Cadastral Zone, Durumi District, Federal Capital Territory, Abuja; MH 401, Maitama Heights, Plot 47, Maitama District, Abuja; and MH 601, Maitama Heights, Plot 47, Maitama District, Abuja — were not acquired from proceeds of crime or unlawful activities.
Legal Dispute
On August 27, 2024, the EFCC obtained from Justice Nwite an interim order “forfeiting to Keystone Bank Plc through the Federal Government of Nigeria” the said properties, citing suspected unlawful activities and diversion of loan funds for the purchase of those properties as grounds.
Teleology’s counsel, Femi Atteh SAN, later challenged the EFCC, accusing it of misrepresenting facts.
The senior lawyer argued that the EFCC is not a debt recovery agency and should not seek to forfeit private entities’ properties.
He further contended that merely using loan funds for purposes other than intended is not an offence under Nigerian law.
The counsel alleged that the EFCC was acting on behalf of “its adversaries” who are attempting to take control of EMTS, the company that owns 9mobile Telecommunications.
He pointed out the existing N55 billion judgment against his client and his pending appeal, claiming EFCC was allegedly aware of these.
Relying on Melrose General Services Ltd vs EFCC & Ors (2024) LPELR-62733 (SC), the counsel urged the court to hold that EFCC’s action relates to a civil/commercial transaction.
EFCC lawyer, Faruk Abdullahi Esq., submitted that the interim forfeiture proceedings are non-conviction-based and target the properties.
He argued that the forfeiture application is based not only on alleged diversion of loan funds but also on a purported loan secured through proxies without collateral, indicating possible money laundering.
Regarding suppression allegations, EFCC’s lawyer maintained the Commission was not privy to the suits linked to the Keystone Bank loan and denied suppressing any material facts.
He urged the court to grant final forfeiture of the properties.
What the Court said
According to the certified true copy of Justice Nwite’s judgment exclusively seen by Nairametrics, the judge emphasized that a party applying for an ex parte order must disclose all material facts fully for the court to make an informed decision and avoid being “deceived” into granting an improper order.
- Nwite held that EFCC’s claim of ignorance about the N55 billion suit and non-participation in the suit “is not only watery but devoid of any iota of sincerity and disclosure of material facts before this court.”
- The judge stated that EFCC, as a law enforcement agency mandated to address financial crimes in Nigeria, has a duty to conduct due diligence on all issues related to the loan transaction and associated properties.
He expressed shock that Keystone Bank had, under Suit No. FHC/L/CS/297/2023 obtained a judgment of N55.7 billion from the Lagos Division of the Federal High Court, yet EFCC sought to recover properties without disclosing that fact.
“I honestly do not believe the EFCC was unaware of this material fact before approaching this court given the circumstances,” Nwite held.
- He further observed that EFCC’s application amounts to subjecting Teleology to “double jeopardy.”
“Keystone Bank Limited has already obtained judgment for the loan granted to Teleology, and now EFCC seeks to recover the same properties in dispute relating to that loan,” Nwite stated.
- Concluding, the court found that EFCC concealed and suppressed material facts and failed to prove the properties were acquired through unlawful activities or proceeds of crime.
“On the whole, I am of the humble view that Teleology has shown that the disputed properties were not acquired from unlawful activity or proceeds of crime. I so hold,” Justice Nwite ruled.
- The judge set aside the interim forfeiture order on Teleology’s properties and refused EFCC’s application for final forfeiture.
Backstory
Previously, a Federal High Court in Ikoyi, Lagos ordered Teleology Nigeria Limited to pay N55.7 billion owed to Keystone Bank Limited.
- In proceedings filed by Keystone Bank’s counsel, Bode Olanipekun SAN, Teleology was accused of defaulting on its loan used to acquire strategic assets in Emerging Markets Telecommunication Services Ltd. (9Mobile Network).
- Olanipekun stated that despite loan restructuring offers, Teleology failed to comply with conditions precedent and other transaction terms.
- Teleology has appealed that judgment and the appeal is pending as of the time of this article.
What You Should Know
After its previous owners defaulted on bank loans, 9mobile was acquired by Teleology Nigeria Limited in 2018 through a bidding process led by Barclays Africa, involving the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Nigeria Communications Commission (NCC), and 13 Nigerian banks, including GT Bank, Zenith Bank, and Access Bank.
The acquisition concluded with an initial $50 million deposit and a further $251 million payment to the banks.
Due diligence and technical evaluations led to NCC clearance and handover of 9mobile to the new owners, who appointed a board on November 12, 2018, with His Royal Highness Prince Nasiru Ado Bayero as Chairman.
Since then, 9mobile has seen multiple board and management changes; as of October 2024, previous statements indicated Teleology Nigeria Limited was no longer the company’s majority shareholder.
