-Journalist’s Special Report on the Trial That Has Shocked the Legal Profession
By A Legal Affairs Correspondent
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is currently basking in the glow of media attention following the conviction of three men in Charge No. LD/6407C/2017. Newspapers are filled with self-congratulatory statements. Television anchors are reading press releases. The narrative being sold to the Nigerian public is one of triumph against corruption.
I covered this trial from beginning to end. I sat in the courtroom through every hearing. I watched the witnesses testify. I read every document tendered. And I can tell you, without any hesitation, that the story the EFCC is telling bears little resemblance to the evidence presented in court.
This is the true story of what happened.
THE CIVIL SUIT THAT STARTED IT ALL
Before there was any criminal charge, there was a civil dispute over a piece of property at Oregun, Lagos. The nominal complainant, Godwin Nweze, had filed a suit—before the same High Court of Lagos State, Ikeja Judicial Division. The suit sought to set aside certain transactions relating to the property on grounds of alleged fraud.
The matter came before Honourable Justice Onigbanjo.
After hearing the parties, reviewing the evidence, and considering the arguments, Justice Onigbanjo did something remarkable: he dismissed the suit with the wave of a hand.
The phrase used in legal circles is not metaphorical. The judgment was brief, dismissive, and definitive. The court found no merit whatsoever in the allegations of fraud. The transactions were upheld. The defendants—the same individuals now convicted—had won completely.
Let me repeat that: Before any criminal proceedings began, a competent court of the High Court of Lagos State had already considered the allegations of fraud and thrown them out. The complainants had their day in court. They presented their case. And they lost.
“IF YOU GO TO COURT, WE WILL GO TO EFCC”
What happened next is documented in sworn testimony before the criminal trial court.
A prosecution witness, Jonathan Uwota (PW3), took the stand and revealed the strategy of the complainants. Under oath, he stated openly:
“If you go to court, we will go to EFCC.”
This was not an offhand remark. It was a confession of strategy. Having lost in the legitimate forum—the courts—the complainants decided to weaponize the EFCC. They would use the criminal justice system to achieve what the civil courts had denied them.
The petition they wrote to the EFCC did not allege any financial crime in the strict sense. Instead, it demanded that the defendants be “tamed.”
Yes. Tamed. Like wild animals that needed to be broken.
THE FORGED FOUNDATION
The criminal charge that eventually emerged was based on a document called the “Further Amended Information.” This document, which formed the entire foundation of the prosecution, was later revealed to be forged.
It was never properly filed. It bore no valid endorsement from any court official. Its signature block belonged to an individual who was never the Head of Legal at the EFCC and who had no authority to file any charge. It had been surreptitiously inserted into the court file of a completely different case—Suit No. ID/92C/2004—to create a false appearance of legitimacy.
A prosecution built on a forged document is not a prosecution. It is a persecution.
THE LOOTING CONFESSIONS
Perhaps the most damaging evidence to emerge during the trial was the testimony regarding what happened to assets seized from the main defendant, Emmanuel Nwude.
Witnesses—including individuals directly involved—testified that EFCC officials, working alongside certain lawyers and prosecutors, had entered into arrangements to share the proceeds from assets seized from Nwude.
Confessions were placed before the court. Documents corroborated those confessions. The evidence was unchallenged. It showed that the very institution meant to fight corruption was itself engaging in it, dividing the spoils among conspirators.
This evidence was simply ignored by the trial court.
THE PROPERTY THAT WAS NEVER FORFEITED
The prosecution’s entire case rested on the claim that the property in dispute had been forfeited under a previous judgment—the Oyewole judgment in Suit No. ID/92C/2004.
But the Enrolled Order of that judgment—the official, conclusive record of what was actually decided—was tendered in evidence. It listed every property that had been forfeited.
The Oregun property was not on that list.
Not once. Not anywhere. The property that formed the subject matter of the entire criminal trial had never been forfeited by any court. Yet the trial court, in its judgment, simply declared that it was forfeited. It invented a forfeiture that never existed.
THE PERJURED WITNESSES
The prosecution’s case rested on three key witnesses. All three were comprehensively discredited.
Yet the trial court convicted based on these witnesses.
THE SUPPRESSED EVIDENCE
The prosecution concealed evidence that would have exonerated the defendants.
A forensic report—concluded that there was insufficient data to link the Defendant to any alleged forgery. This report was suppressed. It was not placed before the court by the prosecution. The defence had to tender it themselves.
Written statements explaining the professional roles of the lawyers were ignored. The statements of other witnesses were withheld. The prosecution did not want the truth; they wanted a conviction.
THE JUDGE WHO WOULD NOT RECUSE HIMSELF
During the trial, the judge denied bail to 1st defendant on the ground that he was “already serving a prison sentence.” This was false. There was no such sentence.
1st defendant appealed. The Court of Appeal, in its decision, indicted the trial judge for inflicting injustice and for relying on fabricated facts.
Following this indictment, the defence applied for the trial judge to recuse himself. Any reasonable person would have stepped aside. A judge found by a superior court to have fabricated facts against a defendant cannot possibly be impartial.
He refused. He stayed on. He proceeded to convict.
WHAT WAS THE CRIME?
Let us be clear about what the lawyers in this case actually did:
They filed Suit before the Courts of Lagos State. That suit sought a declaration of title to property. It was a legitimate legal action, filed in a court of competent jurisdiction, by lawyers representing their client.
The same High Court, per Justice Onigbanjo, dismissed the complainant’s fraud-based suit with a wave of the hand.
For this—for filing a legitimate lawsuit, for representing their client effectively, for winning—they were prosecuted. They were convicted. They are now being paraded in the media as criminals.
WHY THIS MATTERS
If lawyers can be prosecuted for filing suits in court,
If lawyers can be convicted for obtaining favorable judgments,
If citizens can be “tamed” by the EFCC for exercising their constitutional right of access to court—
Then the rule of law is dead.
The complainants in this matter lost in civil court. They should have accepted that loss. Instead, they went to the EFCC. And the EFCC, rather than uphold the law, became their instrument of vengeance.
THE APPEAL
A strong appeal has been lodged at the Court of Appeal. The grounds are devastating:
• The EFCC lacked jurisdiction to prosecute state-created, non-financial offences.
• The trial judge was biased and should have recused himself.
• The charge was founded on a forged document and is therefore a nullity.
• The conviction is perverse, ignoring overwhelming evidence of forgery, perjury, and corruption.
• The prosecution criminalized legal practice and violated the constitutional right to counsel.
The EFCC’s media campaign is designed to create a narrative. But narratives built on lies eventually crumble.
I watched this trial. I saw the forged documents. I heard the confessions of looting. I witnessed the perjured testimony. I observed a judge who should have stepped aside. I read the forensic report that was suppressed.
The truth is simple: These lawyers are not criminals. They are victims—victims of a conspiracy that used the EFCC to “tame” those who dared to win in court.
The Court of Appeal will now decide whether to validate this travesty or to restore justice.
The legal profession—indeed, all of Nigeria—watches and waits.
— A Legal Affairs Correspondent
March 2026
Note: This report is based on the official record of proceedings in Charge No. LD/6407C/2017. The journalist covered the trial from inception to judgment.
GUEST OPINION
FOR PUBLICATION IN NEWSPAPERS AND ONLINE MEDIA
The Conviction That Should Terrify Every Nigerian: When Winning in Court Becomes a Crime
By a Legal Affairs Correspondent
Last week, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) erupted in celebration. Press releases flooded newsrooms. Television anchors announced a major victory against corruption. Three men had been convicted. Justice, we were told, had been served.
I covered the trial that led to those convictions. I sat through every hearing, watched every witness, read every document. And I am compelled to write this because the story being sold to the Nigerian public bears no resemblance to what actually happened in that courtroom.
Here is the truth they are not telling you:
The men convicted are not fraudsters. They are not corrupt officials. They are not money launderers.
They are lawyers who represented their client in civil proceedings—and won.
Their crime? Filing Suit No. ID/3938/2014 before the High Court of Lagos State seeking a declaration of title to property. The same High Court, per Justice Onigbanjo, had earlier dismissed the complainant’s fraud-based suit with what lawyers call “a wave of the hand.” The allegations had been considered and thrown out.
But the complainants did not accept their loss. Instead, as a prosecution witness confessed under oath: “If you go to court, we will go to EFCC.”
That is not a figure of speech. That is sworn testimony. Having lost in the legitimate forum—the courts—they weaponized the criminal justice system to achieve what the civil courts had denied them.
The petition they wrote did not allege a financial crime. It demanded that the defendants be “tamed.” Tamed. Like wild animals that needed to be broken.
And the EFCC obliged.
The Forged Foundation
The entire prosecution was built on a document called the “Further Amended Information.” It was later revealed to be forged. Never properly filed. No valid endorsement. No lawful authority. A fraudulent document surreptitiously inserted into a court file to create a false basis for prosecution.
A prosecution founded on a forged document is not a prosecution. It is a persecution.
The Looting Confessions
Evidence placed before the court—unchallenged evidence—revealed that EFCC officials, working with lawyers and prosecutors, entered into arrangements to share proceeds from assets seized from the main defendant. Confessions were made. Documents corroborated them. The very institution meant to fight corruption was itself engaging in it, dividing the spoils among conspirators.
This evidence was simply ignored.
The Property That Was Never Forfeited
The prosecution’s case rested on a claim that the property had been forfeited under a previous judgment. But the Enrolled Order of that judgment—the official record of what was actually decided—was tendered. It listed every forfeited property.
The Oregun property was not on that list.
The trial court simply invented a forfeiture that never existed.
The Perjured Witnesses
Yet the court convicted based on these witnesses.
The Suppressed Evidence
A forensic report——concluded that there was insufficient data to link one of the lawyers to any alleged forgery. This report was suppressed by the prosecution. The defence had to tender it themselves.
The Judge Who Would Not Recuse Himself
During the trial, the judge denied bail to the main defendant on the false ground that he was “already serving a prison sentence.” This was a lie. The Court of Appeal, in its decision, indicted the trial judge for inflicting injustice and for relying on fabricated facts.
The defence applied for him to recuse himself. Any reasonable person would have stepped aside. A judge found by a superior court to have fabricated facts against a defendant cannot possibly be impartial.
He refused. He stayed on. He proceeded to convict.
The Question Every Nigerian Must Ask
If lawyers can be prosecuted for filing suits in court,
If lawyers can be convicted for obtaining favorable judgments,
If citizens can be “tamed” by the EFCC for exercising their constitutional right of access to court—
Then what is left of the rule of law?
The complainants in this matter lost in civil court. They should have accepted that loss. Instead, they went to the EFCC. And the EFCC, rather than uphold the law, became their instrument of vengeance.
What Happens Next
A strong appeal has been lodged at the Court of Appeal. The grounds are devastating: lack of jurisdiction, judicial bias, a forged charge, suppression of evidence, and the criminalization of legal practice.
The EFCC’s media campaign cannot hide the truth. The forged documents exist. The confessions of looting exist. The perjured testimony exists. The suppressed evidence exists.
The Court of Appeal will now decide whether to validate this travesty or to restore justice.
A Final Word
This case is not about three men. It is about every Nigerian who may one day need a lawyer. It is about every citizen who believes that the courts are the proper place to resolve disputes. It is about whether the rule of law still means anything in this country.
The EFCC is celebrating. But what exactly are they celebrating? The conviction of lawyers for doing their jobs? The “taming” of citizens who dared to win in court? The successful cover-up of institutional corruption?
I covered this trial. I saw what happened. And I can tell you with certainty: This is not a victory against corruption. This is a victory against justice.
And when justice dies, it dies for all of us.
— A Legal Affairs Correspondent
March 2026
The writer covered Charge No. LD/6407C/2017 from inception to judgment and has reviewed the full record of proceedings, including Suit No. ID/3938/2014.
FOR EDITORS
Word count: Approximately 1,000 words
Suggested headline options:
• The Conviction That Should Terrify Every Nigerian
• When Winning in Court Becomes a Crime
• Behind the EFCC’s Celebration: A Story of Forged Documents and Perjured Witnesses
• Lawyers Convicted for Doing Their Jobs: The Trial the EFCC Doesn’t Want You to Understand
Author: Legal Affairs Correspondent (anonymous to protect ongoing legal processes)
Contact for verification: All facts are drawn from the official record of Charge No. LD/6407C/2017 and Suit No. ID/102c/2005, which are public documents.
