If Tinubu is innocent of the allegations in the forfeiture order of the US Court of the District of Illinois, why has he not appealed that forfeiture order issued since 1993? Isn’t that what innocent people do?

Obi told the court that Tinubu had never challenged the US court order in any court of competent jurisdiction since 1993 when the order was made till date.

Peter Obi, the candidate of the Labour Party (LP) in the 2023 presidential election has asked the Presidential Election Petition Court to uphold the order of the United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, in the case in which President Bola Tinubu of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) forfeited the sum of $460,000 as proceeds of narcotics trafficking and money laundering.

In his final written address in response to the final written address of President Tinubu and the Vice President, Kashim Shettima at the 2023 Presidential Election Petition Tribunal, Obi told the court that Tinubu had never challenged the US court order in any court of competent jurisdiction since 1993 when the order was made till date.

He said that his submission “is predicated on the decision of the United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, in Case No: 93C 4483, which ordered 'that the funds in the amount of $460,000 in account 263226700 held by First Heritage Bank in the name of Bola Tinubu represents the proceeds of narcotics trafficking or were involved in financial transactions in violation of 18 USC §1956 and 1957'. The decision encapsulated in the Order is tendered as Exhibit PA5 before this Honourable Court.

“The above Order made by the United States District Court, was sequel to a 'Settlement Order of Claims to Funds held by Heritage Bank and Citibank' wherein Bola Tinubu (2nd Respondent) and others, claimed ownership of the sums in the accounts. The 2nd Respondent till date has not challenged the Order of Forfeiture made by the US Court as shown above.”

Obi noted that it is important to underscore that the Proceeding in Exhibit PA5 above (Forfeiture Proceedings), “the Order was based among under things by the revelation/finding in the Affidavit of Kevin Moss, a Special Agent and investigator on financial crime, money laundering and narcotics trafficking, inter alia that "interviews with investigators from the US Customs Service disclosed that the address at 7504 S. Stewart Avenue is known as a drop-off point for packages from Nigeria that contain white heroin....." and that "in the application to open his account at First Heritage Bank, Illinois, Chicago, "Tinubu (2nd Respondent herein) stated that his address was 7504 South Stewart, Chicago, Illinois."

According to him, “The provision of Section 137 (1) (d) of the 1999 Constitution, is clear, explicit, unambiguous and clearly provides as follows: "A person shall not be qualified for election to the office of President if -

“He is under a sentence of death imposed by any competent court of law or tribunal in Nigeria OR a sentence of imprisonment or fine for any offence involving dishonesty or fraud (by whatsoever name called) or for any other offence imposed on him by any court or tribunal or substituted by a competent authority for any other sentence imposed on him by such a court or tribunal; or". (Emphasis supplied)."

He added, “We respectfully invite Your Lordships to uphold that the above sub-section, by the use of the word "OR" in the several instances envisaged therein envisages a disjunctive meaning and interpretation for those several instances, as such, the ordinary plain meaning of the sub-section is that a person shall not be qualified for the office of the President if among other things; he is under a fine for any offence involving dishonest of fraud (by whatever name called) of any offence imposed on him by any Court or Tribunal.

“It is submitted that the Order of Forfeiture made against the 2nd Respondent by the US Court as reproduced above, constitutes a fine, and it is in respect of an offence involving dishonest or fraud by a Court.

“With due respect, the submissions on pages 22-25 of the Written Address are incorrect and do not reflect the actual position of the law. It submitted that the misconception of the 2nd and 3rd Respondents to the effect that a conviction must exist before a person will be disqualified from contesting for the office of the President, and which said misconception sterns from their unfortunate, albeit, misguided reliance on Section 137 (1) (e) of the 1999 Constitution. The Petitioners case is not based on Section 137 (1) (e), but rather on the provisions of Section 137 (1) (d) of the 1999 Constitution.

“The 2nd and 3rd Respondents further attempt to discredit the evidence of PW1, by stating that he visited the United States once in 2003 is of no moment. Exhibit PA5 is documentary evidence which is certified, sealed, notarized and authenticated by the United States Court which issued it.”

He further said, “We urge Your Lordships to disregard the argument of the 2nd and 3rd Respondents to the effect that Exhibit PA5 has not been registered in Nigeria, as according to them, such registration is required by the provisions of Section 3 of the Reciprocal Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Ordinance and Foreign Judgment (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act."

He told the court that the Section 3 of the Reciprocal Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Ordinance and Foreign Judgment (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act, Tinubu and Shettima heavily relied on are completely inapplicable to the instant Petition.

“Respectfully, my Noble Lords, the cardinal question is whether a civil forfeiture under US Law as ordered in Exhibit PA5, can be equated to a fine as used in Section 137 (1) (d) of the 1999 Constitution. The answer, on settled case law in the US and legal literature is in the affirmative.

“A civil forfeiture in the US amounts to a 'fine' or a 'punitive economic sanction', and it is also "at least partially punitive" against the persons whose property is affected. Why did Timb challenge the forfeiture proceedings if he was not to be personally affected? Can it be honestly argued that the 2nd Respondent herein did not suffer economic sanction when he forfeited 460,000 USD to the US Government?

“It is submitted that, the decision of the US Supreme Court above, ranks superior to the evidence called by the Respondents and the text written by TS Greenburg et al, entitled A Good Practice Guide for Non-Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture (World Bank 2009) 13, cited by the 2nd and 3rd Respondents on pages 24-25 of their Final Written Address.

“Respectfully, My Lords, under the Nigerian law, the word "fine" used in Section 137 (1) (d) of the 1999 Constitution as amended, also contemplates an Order of Forfeiture made against the 2nd Respondent.

“Under the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 (ACJA), the Interpretation Section defines "fine" as "includes any pecuniary forfeiture or pecuniary compensation payable under this act. Penalty includes any pecuniary fine, cost, forfeiture or compensation recoverable under an order.

“The United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, which made the Order of Fine against the 2nd Respondent, comes within the category of the term 'any court' provided for in section 137 (1) (d) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended)."

https://saharareporters.com/2023/07/21/tinubu-hasnt-challenged-us-court-order-forfeiture-460000-narcotics-trafficking-any-court

Obi should go and take some rest and allow our president breathhhhhhhh

Is there any sense in challenging an order from a civil case?

So, if VIO or FRSC fines me N5k today for traffic offense, is there any sense in wasting time challenging the order?

Since it’s a forfeiture resulting from a civil case, what’s the point fighting it? Tinubu was already a Senator when the forfeiture order was made against his account. So, it makes more sense to simply allow the civil forfeiture order stand than to keep wasting money on appeal. Same way we all pay VIO and FRSC fine for traffic offense without appeal.

What’s he challenging it for? There was a forfeiture for fvck sake, he’s not denying that. It wasn’t a criminal matter

Yes. There's every sense in challenging the order if you are innocent

seunmsg:
Is there any sense in challenging an order from a civil case?

So, if VIO or FRSC fines me N5m today fir traffic offense, is there any sense in wasting time challenging the order?

seunmsg:
Is there any sense in challenging an order from a civil case?

So, if VIO or FRSC fines me N5m today fir traffic offense, is there any sense in wasting time challenging the order?

Don't mind that misguided,attention seeking bloke.the fine contemplated by the constitution must be borne out of a judgment or a guilty charge or a sentence and in Nigeria.the constitution went further to say a fine or sentence involving dishonesty or fraud which is criminal in nature.is narcotics fraud or dishonesty?

A hit below the belt for Obi;

Obi is really on this guys neck. If you were the one, would you challenge an order that was like an answer to your prayers?

He was happy that it was just a forfeiture and nothing more so asking him to challenge the order is like bringing out his legs for a second time

This Obi sef, sense will not kill you mbok

Why should he when the petition about forfeiture has been quashed severally

Infact all the opposition petitions are dustbin materials cos none of them came out with the figure they have to make them the winner, which states they have the required 25% and how they arrived at their figure

PrincessofDSS:
A hit below te belt; Obi is really on this guys neck. If you were the one, would you challenge an order that was like an answer to your prayers?

He was happy that it was just a forfeiture and nothing more so asking him to challenge the order is like bringing out his legs for a second time

This Obi sef, sense will not kill you mbok

For obi

.

Lotanna2:


Don't mind that misguided,attention seeking bloke.the fine contemplated by the constitution must be borne out of a judgment or a guilty charge or a sentence and in Nigeria.the constitution went further to say a fine or sentence involving dishonesty or fraud which is criminal in nature.is narcotics fraud or dishonesty?

No. Narcotics is not fraud, narcotics is powder🤓

In fact, it’s dusting powder😎

Una go defend defend defend tire. Tribunal go still sack Tinubu.

Penguin2:

No. Narcotics is not fraud, narcotics is powder🤓

In fact, it’s dusting powder😎

Una go defend defend defend tire. Tribunal go still sack Tinubu.

Give it up boy obi failed to prove anything.tame the bitterness

Penguin2:
If Tinubu is innocent of the allegations in the forfeiture order of the US Court of the District of Illinois, why has he not appealed that forfeiture order issued since 1993? Isn’t that what innocent people do?

https:///3K9Mwid

Nlfpmod
Mynd44

So now we have switched from wining the elections to that Tinubu was not fit to contest.

Ok
Got it.

seunmsg:
Is there any sense in challenging an order from a civil case?

So, if VIO or FRSC fines me N5m today fir traffic offense, is there any sense in wasting time challenging the order?

Since it’s a forfeiture resulting from a civil case, what’s the point fighting it? Tinubu was already a Senator when the forfeiture order was made against his account. So, it makes more sense to simply allow the civil forfeiture order stand than to keep wasting money on appeal. Same way we all pay VIO and FRSC fine for traffic offense without appeal.

The question is was VIO supposed to charge you a whopping N5million for mere traffic offense?

And this is a wrong analogy because Tinubu’s (not his bank account) offense was clearly written in the charge sheet - he was charged for narcotics. There’s nothing comparable between this and traffic offense.

Now, not only was he charged, he was ordered to forfeit a whopping $460,000 dollars and he never protested against it if he was truly innocent.

No legitimate hustler will allow the court confiscate his $10,000 dollars without threatening fire and brimstone, not to talk of when the money is above $400k.

Is Tinubu a Father Christmas?

seunmsg:
Is there any sense in challenging an order from a civil case?

So, if VIO or FRSC fines me N5m today fir traffic offense, is there any sense in wasting time challenging the order?

Since it’s a forfeiture resulting from a civil case, what’s the point fighting it? Tinubu was already a Senator when the forfeiture order was made against his account. So, it makes more sense to simply allow the civil forfeiture order stand than to keep wasting money on appeal. Same way we all pay VIO and FRSC fine for traffic offense without appeal.

If you're way no pure you go sharp sharp ignore the forfeiture.

But if you sure say you pure , you will want to clear your name and integrity.

That's how innocent people approach injustice

The argument is no longer obi won the election. It's now Tinubu is not qualified. Lol 🤣🤣🤣🤣 eye don dey clear

that's a strong point, I think the Obi Lawyers are actually doing a diligent work here, ....I have read over and over again the submission of the Tinubu group about the forfeiture,and I discovered that they have only been flogging over & over again their own interpretation, mere guessing & often imposing their own views on the Matter, but we all know that the case itself, and of course the res of the case, actually originated from a criminal proceeding, and since it hasn't been challenged to mean otherwise by any Court of jurisdiction, it can only humbly concluded that the case still sits on its originating status...that is ''criminal case''

Lotanna2:


Don't mind that misguided,attention seeking bloke.the fine contemplated by the constitution must be borne out of a judgment or a guilty charge or a sentence and in Nigeria.the constitution went further to say a fine or sentence involving dishonesty or fraud which is criminal in nature[b].is narcotics fraud or dishonesty[/b]?

So traficking narcotics is not criminal and dishonet in nature?
That is the reason why the drug lord should have appealed the forfeiture since he was trading in a legal substance that is not criminal in nature.

paramakina202:


So traficking narcotics is not criminal and dishonet in nature?
That is the reason why the drug lord should have appealed the forfeiture since he was trading in a legal substance that is not criminal in nature.

Obi failed to prove that it was a sentence from fraud and he agreed that it was a civil case

Lotanna2:


Obi failed to prove that it was a sentence from fraud and he agreed that it was a civil case

Are you one of the judges at the tribunal?
Why not allow the Judges to decide?

SledgeHammerer:
The argument is no longer obi won the election. It's now Tinubu is not qualified. Lol 🤣🤣🤣🤣 eye don dey clear

Read the address

You throw in every advantages you have to the ring to win a case. LP prayer is for the court to declare PO as the winner or invalidate Tinubu and declare a rerun

seunmsg:
Is there any sense in challenging an order from a civil case?

So, if VIO or FRSC fines me N5m today fir traffic offense, is there any sense in wasting time challenging the order?

Since it’s a forfeiture resulting from a civil case, what’s the point fighting it? Tinubu was already a Senator when the forfeiture order was made against his account. So, it makes more sense to simply allow the civil forfeiture order stand than to keep wasting money on appeal. Same way we all pay VIO and FRSC fine for traffic offense without appeal.

Lol. What a watery rebuttal. You don't challenge when you know you're on the wrong even in a VIO/FRSC matter.

Lotanna2:


Don't mind that misguided,attention seeking bloke.the fine contemplated by the constitution must be borne out of a judgment or a guilty charge or a sentence and in Nigeria.the constitution went further to say a fine or sentence involving dishonesty or fraud which is criminal in nature.is narcotics fraud or dishonesty?

Narcotics is more than fraud or dishonesty. It's worse than the two. Very close to murder.

What some APC people didn't understand is that in the case of civil forfeiture, you have to prove to the court you are not involved in any CRIMINAL ACTIVITY get back seized assets.

For Tinubu not challenge the forfeiture means he was....

You won't hear it from my mouth.

Go check the USA civil forfeiture procedure to understand why LP raise this in their address

It is an NCBF - Non-Conviction-based Forfeiture. It is an action in rem, not in personam. It was an action against Tinubu's property, not Tinubu himself. So maybe there is nothing to really appeal against from Tinubu's standpoint.

Appealing against it may have angered the Justice Department and FBI to pursue criminal charges (if they found probable cause, which will involve them empaneling a grand jury). So Tinubu just decided to forget about it since the only thing he lost was money.

That is just my opinion though

seunmsg:
Is there any sense in challenging an order from a civil case?

So, if VIO or FRSC fines me N5m today fir traffic offense, is there any sense in wasting time challenging the order?

Since it’s a forfeiture resulting from a civil case, what’s the point fighting it? Tinubu was already a Senator when the forfeiture order was made against his account. So, it makes more sense to simply allow the civil forfeiture order stand than to keep wasting money on appeal. Same way we all pay VIO and FRSC fine for traffic offense without appeal.

guy i thought you were exposed more than this... the answer is yes, you can appeal.....i have appealed a trafic case in benin appeal court and won, i won because the other opponent knew from the last sitting that they dont have a case, then they ask for the case to be withdrawn, so that we settle out of court but I ask for the case to be strucked out and it was granted....guys....pls we are on Nairaland as Nigerians, we know how to pursue our cases

BERNIMOORE:
guy i thought you were exposed more than this... the answer is yes, you can appeal.....i have appealed a trafic case in benin appeal court and won, i won because the other opponent knew from the last sitting that they dont have a case, then they ask for the case to be withdrawn, so that we settle out of court but I ask for the case to be strucked out and it was granted....guys....pls we are on Nairaland as Nigerians, we know how to pursue our cases

It is nice that you know the effect of the difference between a case struck out after the court considered the merit and that struck out just because it was withdrawn by the plaintiff.

Well done.

Penguin2:

The question is was VIO supposed to charge you a whopping N5million for mere traffic offense?

And this is a wrong analogy because Tinubu’s (not his bank account) offense was clearly written in the charge sheet - he was charged for narcotics. There’s nothing comparable between this and traffic offense.

Now, not only was he charged, he was ordered to forfeit a whopping $460,000 dollars and he never protested against it if he was truly innocent.

No legitimate hustler will allow the court confiscate his $10,000 dollars without threatening fire and brimstone, not to talk of when the money is above $400k.

Is Tinubu a Father Christmas?

This is logical argument. The judges ought to reason that why should a man be willing to forfeit $400k just like that without fighting it on appeal up to the US Supreme Court if he was not guilty of a crime?

But the nomenclature does matter sha. If it is a civil forfeiture, the nature of the activities which produced the illicit proceeds does not or will not matter to a judge. The most important thing is that it has been adjudged by a US Court to be a Civil forfeiture.

That is why law is about logic and reasoning. Well done. I hope it was included in LP written address sha?

I thought Obi had fresh evidence against this case some of his supporters bragged that they’ll summon FBI, CIA , FSB to come testify against BAT that the case has taken a new twist not knowing he’s just brainwashing them . I can’t help but to laugh , the hype they hyped Obi’s prayers saying he took APC off guard not knowing he has nothing to tender . It’s crazy how the so called “WOKE” wannabes are Fast ASLEEP intellectually. After all the rants he couldn’t prove an air .

Abi oh.
Someone in the uk that does funds transfer had his account blocked by his bank. Why? The source of the customers money had kleg.
They thought my paddy will run, overlook money in his frozen account and move on.
For where, my guy took them to court, won the case, got his account opened.
Why will anyone forfeit close to half a million dollars? He did not even apeal?

iLoveYouToo:
What’s he challenging it for? There was a forfeiture for fvck sake, he’s not denying that. It wasn’t a criminal matter

Yes oo he gift them over 400 thousand dollars to use and buy bread for their children... Otondo