The family of the late military Head of State, General Sani Abacha, has filed an 11-ground appeal against President Bola Tinubu and the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike, over the revocation of their property in Abuja’s upscale Maitama district.
In their appeal to the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal, Hajia Maryam Abacha and her eldest surviving son, Mohammed, seek the return of the property.
They argue that the Certificate of Occupancy (C of O) for the property, marked FCT/ABUKN 2478 and issued on June 25, 1993, was unlawfully revoked and handed over to Salamed Ventures Limited.
Alongside President Tinubu and Minister Wike, the Federal Capital Territory Development Authority (FCDA) is also named as a respondent.
The Abacha family’s legal team, led by Dr. R. O. Atabo, SAN, is requesting the appellate court to overturn a July 19 ruling by the Federal High Court in Abuja, which stripped them of the property’s ownership.
The Abachas claim that Justice Peter Lifu erred in law by upholding the dismissal of their claim, originally struck out by the High Court of the FCT and the Court of Appeal in 2009 and 2015 due to jurisdictional issues.
They contend that only the Federal High Court has the jurisdiction to hear the case and that they were not given the opportunity to address the court on the matter of their legal standing (locus standi).
The family disputes the trial court’s declaration that their suit was statute-barred, noting that they filed their case on May 25, 2015, shortly after the appellate court’s decision on May 18, 2015.
They also argue that the court erred by recognizing Salamed Ventures Limited as a respondent, alleging that the property’s title was transferred unlawfully during the pendency of their original case.
Citing Section 6 of the 1999 Constitution, the appellants argue that judicial powers are vested in the courts, which should determine disputes between individuals and government entities. They assert that transferring property title during ongoing litigation undermines judicial authority and violates extant law.
The Abachas claim that the revocation of their title was invalid as it was not carried out according to Section 28 of the Land Use Act and was not for public interest, given that Salamed Ventures is a private company. They also criticize the trial court for awarding costs to Salamed Ventures and request the appellate court to either set aside the lower court’s judgment or hear their case as a court of first instance.
The matter has yet to be scheduled for a hearing. Justice Lifu had dismissed the initial case, ruling it was filed too late and lacked merit, also noting the Abachas breached agreements in their Right of Occupancy by erecting structures without proper approval. The court also ordered the family to pay N500,000 in litigation costs to Salamed Ventures.
