- Files additional amicus brief in $ 200 million Atiku Bagudu money laundering case in Washington
International human rights lawyer, Emmanuel Ogebe has filed an additional amicus brief in the ongoing $ 200 million Atiku Bagudu money laundering case in Washington.
Ogebe said the additional filing was to alert the court how President Bola Tinubu who forfeited $460,000 appointed a more massive forfeiter of $460 million as his budget minister,
Abubakar Atiku Bagudu the current Nigerian minister of budget and national planning.
The rights advocate also added Nigerian states to the list of proposed victims to be compensated from the latest Abacha loot.
Below are the court papers,
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
VS. Civil Action No. 13-1832 (JDB)
ALL ASSETS HELD IN ACCOUNT NUMBER
80020796, IN THE NAME OF
DORAVILLE PROPERTIES CORPORATION,
AT DEUTSCHE BANK INTERNATIONAL,
LIMITED IN JERSEY, CHANNEL ISLANDS,
AND ALL INTEREST, BENEFITS, OR ASSETS
TRACEABLE THERETO, et al.,
Defendants.
FURTHER SUPPLEMENTARY AMICUS BRIEF ADDENDUM(2nd)
Now comes Amicus/Movant with a further supplementary brief (hereinafter known as the Second Supplementary Addendum) as addendum to the initial Amicus brief dated January 20, 2023 in order to furnish the court with vital information which is crucial to the proceedings. Since the matters addressed herein, relate specifically to emergent events, findings and developments referenced in the main Amicus Brief and the First Supplementary Addendum, Amicus respectfully seeks to submit same as a further addendum without requiring leave of court, other than that originally prayed the court in the other original motion.
Now therefore, Movant Amicus adds further as follows:
- CABINET APPOINTMENT OF ATIKU BAGUDU
On 4th August 2023, impacted non-party Mr. Atiku Bagudu was confirmed as a federal minister nominated by President Tinubu whose election is currently being litigated in court over US money laundering forfeiture (amongst other grounds.)
- THE NECESSITY OF THIS SECOND SUPPLEMENTARY BRIEF
2.1 Amicus had warned in First Supplementary Addendum that, considering their close antecedents, US money laundering, senatorial and gubernatorial career paths and joint membership of the ruling party, Nigeria’s newly installed president Tinubu was more than likely going to continue a pattern of support for Bagudu versus Nigeria’s interest in recovery of the defendant funds.
2.2 Further, Amicus predicted that Bagudu would probably vie to succeed him subsequently and thus have access to more federal funds. However, last week, Tinubu appointed Bagudu Minister of the multi-billion Budget of the nation – fully vindicating and validating aforesaid concerns much earlier than expected.
2.3 Given the nature of the case and the potential impact it may have on the rights and interests of all parties involved (inclusive of impacted non-parties) Amicus firmly believes that it is critical for the court to be made aware of this significant development.
2.4 Given the current state of the case, it may be unlikely that either of the parties would necessarily bring this relevant information to the fore immediately.
2.5 Amicus is of the opinion that the newfound position of authority of Bagudu as Federal Budget and Planning Minister, not only compromises the ability of the new Nigerian administration to seek the best interest of Nigeria in this matter but, arguably, even any future further settlements or repatriations involving Nigeria as they would be subject to Bagudu’s office.
2.6 The very fact that Nigeria’s national budget, which Bagudu now controls, will be denied the entirety of the defendant funds in this case, whether this case resolves in judgment or settlement, reveals how deeply strategic and conflicted his current position is. Indeed, short of being appointed Attorney General (for which he is also not qualified not being a lawyer or having requisite character) Tinubu has placed him in the most crucial position to influence any future repatriated funds issuing from this court or other jurisdictions abroad.
- THE DISTURBING NEXUS BETWEEN THE EVENTS OF 1990s AND GOVERNANCE IN PRESENT DAY NIGERIA
3.1 The 2013 complaint by the Justice Department stated thus;
“Bagudu played an instrumental role in setting up and executing the complicated financial transactions used to launder the proceeds of the conspiracy” that took place under Gen. Abacha.
3.2 As this court narrated previously, “The process of using security votes letters “to take [funds] from the [Central Bank of Nigeria] violated what the [Central Bank of Nigeria] has described as ‘accepted government procedures.’” Id. ¶ 27. “The proper procedure required the Minister of Finance and the Accountant-General to each approve disbursements in accordance with Nigeria’s budget.” Id. The security votes letters at issue were not properly approved “and were also not included in Nigeria’s budget for the relevant fiscal years.” Id. After General Abacha’s death, Nigeria established a Special Investigation Panel, “which found that General Abacha and his co- conspirators had used the false security votes letters to steal and defraud more than $2 billion in public funds, including: (1) at least $1.1 billion and £413 million pounds sterling (GBP) in cash; (2) at least $50,456,450 and £3,500,000 GBP in traveler’s checks; and (3) at least $386,290,169 through wire transfers.” Id. ¶ 29.
After the funds were disbursed from the Central Bank of Nigeria, bank staff and “other individuals known and unknown to the United States” would deliver the funds to National Security Advisor Gwarzo at his residence. Id. ¶ 31. “Gwarzo and others acting at his direction would [then] repackage the currency in secure bags and…deliver it to General Abacha at his residence.” Id. “General Abacha, or those acting at his direction, [then] delivered more than $700 million of these funds to [General Abacha’s son] Mohammed Abacha in bags or boxes full of cash.” Id. ¶ 32. Mohammed Abacha, in turn, gave that cash to Bagudu, who “arranged for the money to be transferred to accounts controlled by Bagudu and Mohammed Abacha in foreign countries.” Id. ¶ 33. “In order to move the money overseas,” Bagudu deposited the money, which he referred to as his “‘cash swaps,’” in two local Nigerian banks, and then he “and/or Mohammed Abacha” instructed those banks to transfer the funds to accounts overseas owned by Mohammed Abacha and Bagudu. Id. ¶ 34. “Transfers included deposits into accounts in the
name of [defendant corporations]” under the control of Bagudu and Mohammed Abacha. Id. ¶¶ 33–34. “[A]t least $137 million” of these funds were “transported into and out of the United States.” Id. ¶ 35. The complaint describes various specific transactions in support of these allegations. Id. ¶ 35(a)–(f). And as discussed below, the funds were later pooled with funds from the second scheme and then laundered and transferred to defendant investment portfolios. See id. ¶¶ 52–93.
The second scheme, referred to as the “Debt Buy-Back Fraud,” began in 1996, when Bagudu and others arranged for the Nigerian government, with General Abacha’s approval, to repurchase its own debt from Mecosta—a company owned by Bagudu and Mohammed Abacha—at a price significantly higher than what Nigeria would have paid on the open market. Id. ¶¶ 36–44.” https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1:2013cv01832/163245/79/0.pdf?ts=1426843689
3.3 Perhaps there is no more apt descriptor of Mr. Bagudu’s qualification to be Budget Minister than the August 23rd Bloomberg headline “US Targeted His Assets; Nigeria’s Made Him Budget Minister.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-08-23/us-targeted-his-assets-nigeria-s-made-him-budget-minister
3.4 The story above is just the latest shocking installment a step up in incremental impunity from Bloomberg’s prior headline referenced in First Supplementary Addendum “Nigeria Targeted a UK Mansion; Its Next Leader’s Son Now Owns It” https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-05-02/a-1-8-billion-oil-probe-a-london-mansion-and-nigeria-s-next-president
For illustrative purposes, the following massive malfeasance, in uncanny similitude to Gen. Abacha’s Central Bank seen in this case, occurred under Gen. Buhari’s Central Bank recently:
E-Nigeria Newspaper reports that “at the expense of impoverished Nigerians, the embattled CBN Governor opened a forex credit line for Rabiu which enables him to borrow at the official rate of N199 at the time, resell at a black-market rate of N495, and rake in billions of naira in turnover in quick succession.
For instance, Emefiele allegedly ordered the transfer of N1,382,500,000 being a forex purchase to BUA on 8th January 2016.
On 18th January, BUA International purchased the dollar equivalent of N386,799,033.70 using the official rate of N199 while the black-market rate at the time was N495.
On the same day, Emefiele was said to have ordered another disbursement of forex worth N520,217,528 to BUA.
Another N1,382,500,000 was also sent on the same day as well as on 22nd Januaryrespectively.
On 22nd January, another N386,799.033 and N520,217,528 was again wired from CBN account in forex to BUA.
On 15th February, similar disbursements of N386,799.033, N1,382,500,000, and N520,217,528 left the nation’s account to BUA.
Similarly, on 23rd February, N386,799.033 and N520,217,528 made BUA International smile on the order of Emefiele.
In like manner, again on 2nd March the company got another lodgment of N386,799.033 and N520,217,528.
On 11th March, BUA further purchased $12,282,002 in double tranches from CBN while on 23rd March, $29,625,000 was also moved from CBN to the government-fed billionaire to its BUA Sugar Refinery account to Ecobank account number 9992021618.
On 31st March, the country’s foreign reserve depleted with $49,375,000 from CBN to BUA into its Ecobank account number 9992023306.
Via its GTB account 214161839, USD sale of forex at the official rate of N197.5 worth N2 billion was again given to the company by CBN.
Via CBN intervention fund when the company was financially viable, the sum of N392,034,060 in three tranches was paid to BUA Sugar Refinery using the official rate of N198 to its Stanbic IBTC account number 11889618.
Troves of these financial documents saw over N40 billion in returns to Abdul Samad Rabiu-led BUA alone, in the year 2016 with the active connivance of Godwin Emefiele.” https://e-nigeriang.com/buas-abdul-samad-rabiu-emefieles-multi-billion-dollar-racketeering-deals-exposed/
3.5 That Nigeria’s Tinubu appointed a fellow US money laundering forfeiter as Budget Minister, having forfeited at least 1000 times more money than him in the US alone – $458,000,000 to $460,000 – one could reasonably infer that this is to facilitate a grander scale national larceny from within government than he did from outside government decades ago.
- FUTILITY OF ACTION OR DOMESTIC REMEDIES IN NIGERIA
4.1 On the 4th of August, 2023, Amicus went to submit a petition to Nigeria’s senate opposing Mr Bagudu’s nomination, on the grounds of:
•Financial malfeasance
•Ongoing litigation
4.2 However senators informed him that President Tinubu had warned that the nomination was not to be opposed in any way thus forestalling legitimate legislative checks and balance oversight and stultifying separation of powers.
4.3 In a case decided by the Supreme Court this year, (Mohammed Abacha v A.G Federation SC/641/2013) “A five-man panel of the Supreme Court yesterday refused to grant a request by members of the family of the late General Sani Abacha, for the stoppage of fresh criminal forfeiture proceedings against the ex-Head of State and some members of his family.”
https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2023/01/14/scourt-paves-way-for-fresh-criminal-forfeiture-actions-against-abacha-family
The court ruled that the Abachas did not have an immunity deal with the Nigerian government for crimes related to the defendant funds in these proceedings amongst others and are still liable to prosecution.
Despite the decision of the Nigerian Supreme Court this year, permitting prosecution of crimes in which Bagudu was involved, rather than face prosecution by the government, he received an appointment into the government.
4.4 From the foregoing, neither legislative, judicial or executive action has succeeded in holding Bagudu fully accountable within Nigeria for serious fraud against his country and countrymen. This court presents a fair forum for justice to find its course than Nigeria has.
- AMICUS’ PROPOSAL ON EQUITABLE RESOLUTION OF THE SITUATION
5.1 Following Mr Bagudu’s ministerial appointment, Plaintiff United States may well recommend the Bagudus’ relinquishment of this litigation in view of the overcompensation with a prime cabinet office.
5.2 It may also ask that the Federal Government of Nigeria remediate this unsavoury situation in an acceptable manner that could be considered “cooperation” that would reentitle it to reclaim the funds, for example remove Bagudu as Minister, change his ministerial portfolio and obtain his termination of all claims to these funds.
5.3 The following are updated and expanded Proposed Beneficiary Classes for the defendant funds, regardless of whether the funds are reclaimed by Nigeria via the process above or are subject to settlement:
i. Victims of Abacha and other human rights abuses. These can be found in the report of Nigeria’s Federal post-dictatorship Truth and Reconciliation
Commission known as the Justice Oputa Panel. This would provide relief to historical recorded victims nationwide prior to year 2000 and Victims exiled abroad who were unable to participate in that hearing by that account.
ii. Victims of State brutality. These can be found in the reports of over 30 Nigerian States’ judicial commissions of inquiry into police brutality following the famous #endSARS protests of 2020. This would provide relief to recent victims across the states and could be administered in concert with human rights organizations and the Commission. Victims holding judgments against FGN for rights abuses could also be satisfied from these funds thus extirpating FGN’s legal liabilities. An excerpt of the report of an ad hoc state Judicial Panel of Inquiry is attached here as Appendix JPI1 for indicative purposes.
iii. Victims of Terrorism. These can be found in recent reports of organizations providing humanitarian assistance across Nigeria and reach victims across the nation. It could be administered in partnership with these.
iv. Uncompensated documented 2011 Victims of Election violence as captured by the PEV Presidential Commission and victims of 2023 election violence.
v. Judicial technological upgrades for electronic case filing and court recording.
Last month a Justice of Nigeria’s Court of Appeal died and this month, a Justice of the Supreme Court also died largely due to horrific working conditions. Amicus’ father who retired from the Supreme Court says even at the apex court, Justices still take notes in long hand.
By its resumption next month, the Supreme Court will have less than 40% of its justices and is currently backlogged by 10 years. Urgent upgrades and investments in court technology and infrastructure would literally save the lives of justices and the legal system.
vi. Rebuilding of Nigerian communities destroyed by flooding and conflict other than terrorism aforestated.
vii. Nigerian states who are constitutional co-owners of corporate funds who approach this forum to state a claim
- CONCLUSION: RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 Upon the strength of the facts in this second supplementary brief, Amicus maintains that it is necessary for the court to withhold approval of any proposed settlement based on the ministerial appointment of Mr Bagudu into Nigeria’s federal government, which is a material change in circumstances, that threatens or impacts every future action taken by this court and others with respect to the Abacha loot.
6.2 Amicus believes that in this light, as the court previously did in directing the parties to brief it on the implications of the $300 million repatriation in 2020, it should similarly order parties to brief it on the impact of this appoint and allow Amicus to reply to said briefs.
6.3 Amicus believes that a status conference should be held by the court to review this matter.
6.4 Amicus believes that a mandatory referral to mediation for the parties and impacted non-party (Abacha victims) should then be considered as this case is already in its 11th year.
Wherefore, Amicus once again respectfully urges the inclusion of this Second Supplementary Addendum into his Amicus Brief and for said leave to be granted for filing as prayed.
Emmanuel Ogebe
Amicus Curiae
It is now available open source on the court’s website per details below.
NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS Judicial Conference of the United States policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing. However, if the referenced document is a transcript, the free copy and 30 page limit do not apply.
U.S. District Court
District of Columbia
Notice of Electronic Filing
The following transaction was entered on 9/5/2023 at 3:02 PM and filed on 8/31/2023
Case Name: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ALL ASSETS HELD IN ACCOUNT NUMBER 80020796, IN THE NAME OF DORAVILLE PROPERTIES CORPORATION, AT DEUTSCHE BANK INTERNATIONAL, LIMITED IN JERSEY, CHANNEL ISLANDS, AND ALL INTEREST, BENEFITS OR ASSETS TR et al
Case Number: 1:13-cv-01832-JDB
Filer: EMMANUEL OGEBE
Document Number: 400
Docket Text:
SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM to re [384] MOTION for Leave to File filed by EMMANUEL OGEBE. (Attachment: # (1) Appendix)(zjm)
1:13-cv-01832-JDB Notice has been electronically mailed
