Revealed: How the Embassy of Nigeria Washington Ordered EFCC to Arrest Emeka Ugwuonye
- Details
- Category: GENERAL
- Published on Thursday, 05 July 2012 11:57
- Written by Elombah.com
Elombah.com has obtained a rare picture of how and why the Nigeria’s Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (the EFCC) got involved in the case of the Embassy of Nigeria in Washington against Emeka Ugwuonye. The picture shows how and why the EFCC arrested Ugwuonye. Elombah.com is in a position to confirm that every step
taken by the EFCC in relation to Emeka Ugwuonye can be traced to an email dated December 4, 2010. That email was from Ambassador Adefuye, Nigeria’s Ambassador to the United States, addressed to Farida Waziri, the then Chairman of the EFCC.
Evidently, what has transpired between the EFCC and Emeka Ugwuonye over the past one year and a half is traceable to this strange email from Ambassador to Mrs. Farida Waziri. Many will contend that it is highly unusual that an event of so much consequence could have originated from an act so casual as an email from an Ambassador directing the EFCC Chairman to arrest “this man” for "sitting on [money]" belonging to the Embassy of Nigeria Washington, in an effort to make the Embassy’s civil case in Washington look strong.
Below is the pictorial story of the case of EFCC against Emeka Ugwuonye told by exhibiting three critical documents, starting with the email from Adefuye to Waziri.
(1)The first document is an email dated December 4, 2010 from Adefuye to Mrs. Farida Waziri, directing the latter to place Emeka Ugwuonye on a wanted list and to arrest him upon entry into Nigeria. The following elements of that email are striking.
The email shows the following:
(a) It was Ambassador Adefuye who directed for Ugwuonye to be arrested at the point of entry into Nigeria.
(b) The Amabassador did not even state that Ugwuonye stole or misappropriated the funds of the Embassy. Instead Adefuye’s mail only stated that Ugwuonye was "sitting on 1.9 million dollars belonging to the Embassy”.
(c) Adefuye was not even attentive enough to know the amount in issue. He said it was 1.9 million dollars, whereas the amount in issue had been 1.5 million dollars.
(d) Adefuye referred to Ugwuonye as "this man". He didn't even remember Ugwuonye’s name in this decisive email to Waziri.
(e) Adefuye did not make a complaint against Ugwuonye. Rather, he directed that he be arrested. He directed as to how and when it should be done. That went beyond filing a complaint that someone had committed a crime.
(f) Adefuye made it clear in his email that the reason they were to arrest Ugwuonye was because he delayed in answering to the summons in the civil case the Embassy filed in Washington DC. He claimed that Ugwuonye lied that he was going to meet with Nigerian Government officials in Nigeria.
(g) Adefuye believed that Ugwuonye’s travel to Nigeria would make the Embassy case weak.
(h) Clearly the arrest and detention of Ugwuonye by the EFCC was to help the Embassy win its case in Washington, by default.
(i) From the handwritten notations on the email print out, Mrs. Farida Waziri acted on Adefuye's instructions as if he was her boss. EFCC did not conduct any investigation at all over the matter. What they did was shown in the handwritten notation by Mrs. Waziri on December 7, 2010, directing, thus: “You should take steps to watch list the suspect at once. Confirm compliance”.
(2)The second document relevant to the understanding this case is a detention order, which a court purportedly issued on February 22 for Ugwuonye’s detention.
(a)The order says that Ugwuonye was brought before the judge. However, Ugwuonye was not taken to that court at all. The EFCC officer who obtained the order went to the court without Ugwuonye.
(b)The order referred, in handwritten note, to Kuje Prison or EFCC cell.
(c) The order was procured 9 days after Ugwuonye was taken into detention. But the constitution demands that a person arrested should be brought to the court within 24 hours.
(d) For the purpose of the order, the EFCC increased the charges against Ugwuonye, making them more grievous than was the case in order to ensure that an order was granted.
(e) The order directed that Ugwuonye be detained from February 22 through March 8, 2011, but Ugwuonye was detained till March 21, when Ugwuonye was arraigned for the single charge of criminal breach of trust.
(3) The third document attached is the last page of the statement that Adefuye gave to the EFCC on March 3, 2011. It contains the conclusion of Adefuye’s statement to the EFCC. Note the following about this document:
