Interim Forfeiture of Assets and Fundamental Rights of Accused Persons

Abstract

The paper discusses the paradox resulting from the powers of the EFCC of interim forfeiture of assets without the usual recourse to fundamental rights of the defendant. It posits that while at a face value the EFCC powers appear to override the rights provisions in the Constitution, the extensive circumscription of the powers act as sufficient brakes on right violation. It submits that the powers and its procedures are similar to those of Mareva and Anton Piller Orders, and so should be considered as occupying the same square. It rather suggests that it is a veritable means of temporarily preventing an accused person from disposing the assets allegedly obtained from economic and financial crimes before the final disposal of the case.