Wambai, who holds the title of Wakilin Raya Kasar Zazzau, was reacting to a report linking him to Maina, who was convicted over a N2 billion pension fraud.
He made the clarification in a correspondence to the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) in Abuja.
Wambai, who drew attention to a July 4 judgment of the Federal High Court setting aside his property from the list of those presented by EFCC for final forfeiture, dissociated himself from any relationship with the pension convict.
NAN reports that Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of a Federal High Court, Abuja had ordered final forfeiture of at least 20 property linked to the ex-chairman of PRTT.
The EFCC had, on Oct. 22, 2019, obtained an order of interim forfeiture over 23 properties in different parts of the country, which the commission said it suspected were acquired by Maina with proceeds of unlawful activity, allegedly using family members and associates.
In response to the court’s interim order for people with interest in the affected properties to show cause why they should not permanently forfeit the properties to the Federal Government, some individuals applied to claim some of the properties.
Those who applied to claim some of the properties are: Hajia Laila Maina, Uwani Usman, Alhaji Aminu Yakubu Wambai, Haruna Mu’azu Musa and Aliyu Abdullahi.
In the judgment, a copy of which was seen on Tuesday, Justice Abdulmalik agreed with lawyer to the EFCC, Farouk Abdullah, that most of those who claimed to own the properties failed to effectively establish their claims by producing credible evidence.
However, Abdulmalik held that Wambai and Abdullahi succeeded in their claims in respect of the properties listed as numbers 3 and 20 in the schedule of properties attached to EFCC’s application for final forfeiture.
In respect of the property identified as “Flat 42C SMC Quarters, Unguwan Dosa, Kaduna, Kaduna State” claimed by Alhaji Wambai, the judge noted that the EFCC did not dispute the claim by Alhaji Wambai.
Justice Abdulmalik said: “It is pertinent to mention that the learned counsel for the applicant filed no response to controvert this process.
“He, in fact, urged this honourable court to vacate the interim order of forfeiture granted on 22nd October, 2019 against property No: 3.”
In respect of the property claimed by Abdullahi, identified as “Plot of C of O BO/426 beacon B5086, B5087, B5105, B5104, B5099 Cadastral zone B05 Utako, Abuja, FCT,” the judge also agreed with Abdullahi.
The judge said: “It suffices to mention in this instance, that the learned counsel for applicant (EFCC) informed the court that he is not opposed to the claim of Aliyu Abdullahi in respect of property No: 20.
“He urged the court to vacate the interim order of forfeiture granted by this honourable court in respect of the aforementioned property on 22nd October, 2019; this honourable court ordered accordingly on 8th day of May 2024.”
In respect of property No. 14 identified as “Plot 18 Road F on TPO 462B C of O Kd5469 Kaduna, Kaduna State,” Abdulmalik excluded the property upon an application to that effect by the EFCC.
She said: “Learned counsel for applicant drew court’s attention to Property No: 14 claimed by Mr. Maina; he applied that this court expunge Property No: 14 from the schedule of properties listed in applicant’ motion on notice filed 19th November, 2019 for final forfeiture on the premise that the applicant had erroneously listed the said.
“Property No: 14; that same was not included in the interim order granted by this court on 22nd October, 2019.
“Consequently, this honourable court expunged Property No: 14 from this proceedings on 8th day of May, 2024,” the judge said.
Abdulmalik further said: “It is trite in law that civil cases in non-conviction forfeiture are hinged on the preponderance of evidence.
“Again, I hold that the respondents have failed woefully in tilting the scale of evidential weight in their favour.”
Abdulmalik, however, ordered the final forfeiture of 20 property listed in the schedule for failure of the claimants to show good and credible cause on the history of their legitimate earnings.
“In view of this grave omission on the part of the claimants to show good and credible cause on the history of their legitimate earnings, I hereby find merit in applicant’s application for final forfeiture of properties Nos: 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22 and 23 set out in schedule one, attached to the order of interim forfeiture, save properties No: 3, 14 and 20. I so order,” she stated.
Although three property listed in the suit by the anti-graft agency were vacated by the court, it inadvertently cited Wambai and Abdullahi’s names as associates of Maina in its earlier reports.
But Wambai, in his July 15 letter, said he was neither Maina’s associate nor his relative.
“Firstly, as per attached, being a one time member of the NNPC Newsletter Editorial Board, I know the effect of what inaccurate reporting means as contained in the Ethics and values of a reporter.
“Secondly, I took EFCC to court over erroneous inclusion of my house No. 42c SMC Quarter, Kawo Kaduna in Addulrashid Maina’s case which I fought and won my case against EFCC as per attached ‘court order (INC/ABJ/CS/1154/2619) of 8th May, 2024, ruled by Justice J.0. Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court Abuja, who vacated the EFCC’s application.
“Thirdly, therefore, I have nothing to do with Abdulrashid Maina, in terms of association or relationship.
“As such, it will be wrong of anyone to refer to me as associate or relative of Abdulrashid Maina.
“Fourthly, as ruled by the judge, I claimed only my house (No. 42c SMC Quarters), therefore I have nothing to do with the 23 houses you reported as having been claimed by the associate and relatives of Abdulrashid Maina,” he said.
NAN
