adanny01:


You are turning in circles.

Suspicion of what? Money laundering. What is money laundering? Crime or not?

From what i know, a lot of the arrest we claim in Nigeria may not be but we use the language to describe presence in the police station, barracks, or in this case EFCC.

What EFCC does is to invite you for questioning and it can take days and they could also detain.

Check out how Daily trust puts it

Evercurious:



How then do you know it is without economic justification?

“Also the team recovered the said $1.6million USD but already $141,000.00 USD had been exchanged to Naira at N358/ per dollar which amounted to N50,500,000.00 while the balance of $1,459.000.00 USD could not easily be exchanged due to the [b]Naira scarcity [/b]in the market.

Evercurious:



How then do you know it is without economic justification?

adanny01:


The justification is the reason why interrogation is carried out.

adanny01:


You must be kidding.

When government suspects you committed a crime, they dont need hard facts to invite you to write a statement on the suspicion. You have a chance to come clean or fabricate stories, however, the statement can be used against you in court.

adanny01:


You are turning in circles.

Suspicion of what? Money laundering. What is money laundering? Crime or not?

From what i know, a lot of the arrest we claim in Nigeria may not be but we use the language to describe presence in the police station, barracks, or in this case EFCC.

What EFCC does is to invite you for questioning and it can take days and they could also detain.

Check out how Daily trust puts it

adanny01:


You are turning in circles.

Suspicion of what? Money laundering. What is money laundering? Crime or not?

From what i know, a lot of the arrest we claim in Nigeria may not be but we use the language to describe presence in the police station, barracks, or in this case EFCC.

What EFCC does is to invite you for questioning and it can take days and they could also detain.

Check out how Daily trust puts it

Hedonisst:


And I can choose not to say any gaddem thing at all, so that they would charge me to court and tender their 'suspicion' as evidence! The primitive model used in Nigeria is to arrest you first and expect you to supply them with 'confession' that would be used to nail you in court. Madness.

You see why Nigeria is not a serious country? Which serious country would waste its resources in arresting people without substantial evidence and charging them to court on thin and watery charges? To what end?

Hedonisst:


And I can choose not to say any gaddem thing at all, so that they would charge me to court and tender their 'suspicion' as evidence! The primitive model used in Nigeria is to arrest you first and expect you to supply them with 'confession' that would be used to nail you in court. Madness.

You see why Nigeria is not a serious country? Which serious country would waste its resources in arresting people without substantial evidence and charging them to court on thin and watery charges? To what end?

sonofElElyon:
https://www.google.com/amp/thenationonlineng.net/efcc-still-owes-me-n5m-says-sen-bala-mohammed/amp/


Senator bala Mohammed sued EFCC for unlawful detention and won. The court awarded N5m damages!

sonofElElyon:
So suspicion translates to commission?

adanny01:


Do you know what unlawful detention is?

Now, you are really turning in circles. What is the lawful detention period?

The context with which you quoted that story is not the subject here.

adanny01:


Jeeeeez!

Commission again?

What are you up to really?

adanny01:


Jeeeeez!

Commission again?

What are you up to really?

Esseite:
This is just media propaganda, he was obviously released because the accusation holds no water..

From the article above, it was not cash hauled but transactions made via the banks and a system is in place in all banks to report transactions above $10,000.

The monies were moved from institutions to institutions whom were aware and no trace of government funds from both ends, neither was it tagged fraudulent.

Bureau de change operators and other suspects allegedly involved in the laundering of €150m have told the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission how Atiku Abubakar’s lawyer, Uyiekpen Osagie-Giwa, and the ex-Vice-President’s son-in-law, Abdullahi Babalele, used an offshore firm, Intels West Africa, and shell companies to launder millions of dollars.

Osagie-Giwa and Babalele, who have been arrested by the EFCC, allegedly attempted to use money to induce voters to vote Atiku, who represented the Peoples Democratic Party in the February 23 presidential poll.



Following an intelligence report that some certain politicians and their associates were attempting to convert huge foreign currencies into naira to influence the elections, the EFCC set up a special team to monitor the activities of bureau de change operators in the country.

According to reports, the team thereafter made contacts with major BDC companies and got information that $1.6m brought from Abuja had been given to a popular bureau de change operator on Lagos Island identified as Lawal Abdullahi of Three Brothers BDC for the purpose of converting same to naira.

Our correspondent learnt the EFCC officials arrested two BDC operators, Abdullahi Shehu, working with Abdullahi Munaciki of Hasbunallahu BDC, Abuja, and Lawal Abdullahi of Three Brothers.

It was learnt that the team recovered the said $1.6m, but $141,000 had already been exchanged, while the balance of $1.459,000 could not be exchanged due to naira scarcity in the market.

https://punchng.com/atikus-lawyer-son-in-law-used-intels-wafrica-firms-to-launder-e150m-report/

sonofElElyon:
Don't be lazy and click on the link. Must I spell it all out for you? You said questioning can take days and EFCC can detain in the process of that questioning. Detention should not exceed 2 days. That is the law. Ideally, there is even no need to detain. I said before that EFCC can get search warrant, freeze accounts, go to people's offices to question them instead of detaining them. The truth is that detention is used as a tool of psychological torture to break the will of suspects so that they can admit to a crime.

sonofElElyon:

You obviously don't know your rights! Detain someone indefinitely? You cannot detain anyone beyond 48 hours. If they do so, you have a right to go to court to apply for enforcement of your fundamental human rights. The proper thing is to do your investigation before arrest. You can go to people and question them. You can get a search warrant to search their house, documents, computers, even get an order to temporarily freeze their account. You can not just arrest or detain a person in a proper democracy under the rule of law except you have built a case against them. You need to know your rights!

EFCC obtains court order to detain Fayose for two weeks …ex-gov to sue anti-graft agency

https://punchng.com/efcc-obtains-court-order-to-detain-fayose-for-two-weeks/

adanny01:


All the energy you have used here should have first been channeled to reading the money laundering act first before you post here and there.

Do you mean money laundering act does not apply to corporations?

Read section 19

adanny01:


You must be kidding.

When government suspects you committed a crime, they dont need hard facts to invite you to write a statement on the suspicion. You have a chance to come clean or fabricate stories, however, the statement can be used against you in court.

dominusgai:

And that is why the government is not winning cases. I can decide to keep quite and there is nothing they can do about it. The court sentence on investigated evidence that is beyond reasonable doubt, not based on suspension.

dominusgai:

A person is not responsible for a limited company. If it is a person that the money is transferred to, the person himself can be arrested immediately. But if it is a limited company, the books of the company has to be checked first, and the laundering linked to the owner before he is arrested. If direct arrest was possible, why do you think USA has not arrested all the drug lords in their country.
Know the difference. The investigation to indict the owner of a company is much more harder than one needed to indict a person.
As far as it is a limited, the acts of the company cannot be placed on the owner without proof. The company itself can be closed down to force an investigation of it's books, but no owner of a company can be arrested without thorough investigation done on the records (both sales, services rendered, LPOs, invoices) of the company.
For EFCC to arrest the owner, they have to prove that the money was not for services rendered, after which they have to prove that the transfer was instigated by the owner. It could have been done by the manager, secretary or accountant. EFCC has not gotten proof that the money was not for services rendered, not to talk of proof that it is the owner that instigated it. Without any of the proof, they can and should do nothing.
To get those proof though is not a two months investigation. It sometimes take years. Why did they not show the company account since its inception so we can compare what they have been having with what they had in the three months. Or are they telling us the company was established in January 2019?

19. (1) Where an offence under this Act which has been committed by a
body corporate is proved to have been committed on the instigation or with the connivance of or attributable to any neglect on the part of a director, manager, secretary, or other similar officer of the body corporate, or any person purporting to act in any such capacity, he, as well as the body corporate where applicable shall be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and
punished accordingly.

adanny01:


Are you thinking at all, would EFCC charge someone to court without any fact or evidence? Do you think a judge would hear the case without facts or evidence. Most of the cases EFCC lost are based on technicalities.

adanny01:


I think am lazy.

Seeing this post, i am at lost how to reply you. I asked you to read section 19 only, but obviously you didnt.



All the other guys arguing on this matter will not even think to follow this line of thought you are going.

adanny01:


Are you thinking at all, would EFCC charge someone to court without any fact or evidence? Do you think a judge would hear the case without facts or evidence. Most of the cases EFCC lost are based on technicalities.

dominusgai:

To personal account yes, but to corporate account hell no. You can transfer any amount of dollars to any corporate account provided you pay tax on it or they have a legitimate proof that it is from an illegal origin.

Now the transfer is between two corporate bodies, you have not carried out investigation to ascertain the source of the money or if the money was paid for a job done. I repeat, there are legitimate companies in Warri that do these amount of transactions in a month, not to talk of the son in-law of Atiku.

If they had told us that they did not pay tax on the money, or no contract was carried out on that payment they would have been legal.

But here they are, showing us only accounts of his corporate companies and telling us to accept it is money laundry. Well, I guess most of you do not do business.

adanny01:


Are you thinking at all, would EFCC charge someone to court without any fact or evidence? Do you think a judge would hear the case without facts or evidence. Most of the cases EFCC lost are based on technicalities.

adanny01:


Are you thinking at all, would EFCC charge someone to court without any fact or evidence? Do you think a judge would hear the case without facts or evidence. Most of the cases EFCC lost are based on technicalities.

deomelo:






Fayose spent 2 weeks in detention.

All they need is a valid court order to detain till whenever.

adanny01:


EFCC is allowed to detain for 2 days but no need to detain. How does this sound to you.

Search warrant, freeze account which one is applicable to this context.

Next, you mean EFCC should take their office to the suspect's office to take his statement. Besides why is it that you dont know what a statement is that you think you can write it at the comfort of your own office.


Are you aware that a statement is officially a part of the case and admitted in court. An EFCC case officer should leave his office to all the cases on his table. If there are 10 cases he handles a day, he will be in 10 different offices to take their statements. Please next time think of the implications before making comments.

Next time the court session will hold in Atiku's pocket.

Next time my house is burgled, i will invite the police to come and take my case.

Next time also, advice Atiku's son in-law to invite the EFCC to his office when he thinks he has a case.

dominusgai:

Please what evidence did they present other than their bank transactions? Did they get any of the staffs of both companies to deny the transaction? Did they arrest him because he transferred the money to his personal account? Did they investigate and not see an invoice? Not once did EFCC say any of that. The only thing they are presenting is a bank statement of a limited company. In Warri that is not a corporate hub, they can find at least 10 companies that have that amount of transaction in a Month. So you expect the son in-law of Atiku to do business in thousands? Eh you would have told us Idimi's son that married Buhari's daughter should also do business in thousands. You tell me what evidence they provided.

7.5 The maximum amount per transaction for a BDC shall be determined from time
to time by the CBN with respect to business and personal travel allowances.
The maximum amount currently for PTA and BTA per quarter is $4000 and
$5000,respectively.