Lagos based lawyer and human rights activist, Mr. Femi Falana, on Saturday denied an allegation that he bought one of the houses recovered from pension thieves and handed over to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC.
The property was said to have been recovered by the presidential task force on pension reform under the watch of the embattled former boss, Abdulrasheed Maina.
The Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, was said to have made the claim that a “Lagos lawyer” bought the property worth about N1 billion.
He was testifying before the ad-hoc committee of the Senate probing the recall of Maina after having been sacked and declared wanted by the EFCC.
But in a statement issued on Saturday countering Malami’s claim, Falana said the allegation was the figment of the imagination of the minister.
“Contrary to Malami’s claim I never bought any property from the EFCC,” Falana said.
According to him, the house referred to was an asset used as collateral for a loan obtained from Bank PHB by A Group Properties “over 10 years ago.”
The statement issued by Falana reads in part:
Read also: Is this petty? He won’t give me a key to his apartment
“He (Malami) would also have found that the property is a subject matter of a suit which is currently pending before the federal high court sitting at Abuja. (See Suit No /2015 between Assets Management Corporation of Nigeria v A Group Properties Limited).
“The suit was instituted by AMCON due to the failure of the company to liquidate the loan. In granting the ex parte application filed by AMCON in the matter the court ordered an interim forfeiture of the assets of A Group Properties Limited including No 42, Gana Street, Maitama District, Abuja. The said order was granted on November 11, 2015.
“However, in a bid to pay the loan, A Group Properties Limited decided to sell some of the properties. The sale of the property in question to me was made subject to the setting aside of the order of interim forfeiture which had been obtained by AMCON.
“Up till now, the case has not been concluded as the parties have asked for time to resolve the dispute amicably and file terms of settlement. To that extent, the transaction on the property remains inchoate.”
He added that instead of engaging in a cheap blackmail, Malami should have recovered the said property for the federal government if he were convinced that it was a proceed of crime.
