Alleged N4.29bn Forex Fraud: UBA, 4 others miss arraignment as court adjourns case

The arraignment of United Bank for Africa, UBA, Plc and four other defendants over an alleged N4.29 billion foreign exchange fraud was stalled on Wednesday following their absence before the Lagos State Special Offences Court sitting in Ikeja.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, had scheduled the defendants to be arraigned before Justice Rahman Oshodi on a four-count charge bordering on foreign exchange infractions, concealment of proceeds of unlawful activities, retention of criminal proceeds and money laundering.

Besides UBA, the other defendants are Muyiwa Akinyemi, Amangbo Eziashi Stephen, Geeos Global Service Limited and Fedat Global Limited.

According to the anti-graft agency, the defendants allegedly engaged in unlawful foreign exchange transactions and concealed proceeds amounting to N4.29 billion.

One of the charges alleged that between September 14, 2022 and March 20, 2023, the defendants conspired to sell foreign exchange above rates stipulated by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), contrary to relevant laws.

The EFCC further alleged that the defendants concealed the sum of N4,290,112,796.72 in a UBA account, claiming the funds were proceeds derived from illegal activities.

One of the counts reads: “That you, United Bank for Africa Plc, Muyiwa Akinyemi, Amangbo Eziashi Stephen, Geeos Global Service Limited and Fedat Global Limited, between 14th September, 2022 through 20th March, 2023 at Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, conspired to sell Forex above the rates stipulated by the Central Bank of Nigeria and thereby committed an offence.”

Another count reads: “That you, United Bank for Africa Plc, Muyiwa Akinyemi, Amangbo Eziashi Stephen, Geeos Global Service Limited and Fedat Global Limited, sometime in September 2022, at Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, concealed the aggregate sum of N4,290,112,796.72 (Four Billion, Two Hundred and Ninety Million, One Hundred and Twelve Thousand, Seven Hundred and Ninety-Six Naira, Seventy-Two Kobo) in your United Bank for Africa Account No. NGN09991931102 derived directly from your illegal act.”

When the matter came up for arraignment, EFCC counsel, T.J. Banjo, informed the court that all defendants had been duly served with the charge and other court processes, adding that affidavits of service had already been filed before the court.

Adewale Kamourudeen appeared for UBA, Muyiwa Akinyemi and Amangbo Eziashi Stephen, while I.S. Hassan represented the fourth defendant. There was, however, no legal representation for the fifth defendant.

Banjo told the court that the defendants’ absence appeared to be another attempt to frustrate the prosecution of the case. He also disclosed that the EFCC had previously made efforts to arrest the second and third defendants after they allegedly jumped administrative bail granted by the commission.

The prosecution expressed surprise that the defendants failed to appear in court despite being served with the charges and hearing notices.

However, counsel to UBA and the two individual defendants disputed the claim, insisting that his clients had not been served with either the information or any court process relating to the case.

“The first, second and third defendants have not been served with the information or the hearing notice for today’s proceedings or the previous adjourned date. We got wind of it through newspaper reports. That is why we are here,” Kamourudeen told the court.

He further requested an opportunity to examine the court file to determine the basis of the prosecution’s claim that service had been effected.

In response, Banjo maintained that service had been properly carried out. He informed the court that UBA’s Compliance Officer, Chima Okugbo, received the court processes on behalf of the bank as well as the two individual defendants.

According to the prosecutor, Okugbo had consistently represented the bank during the EFCC’s investigation and was the official who accepted service on behalf of the affected parties.

Justice Oshodi subsequently asked the defence counsel whether he was willing to accept service on behalf of his clients. The lawyer declined, stating that he had not been instructed to do so.

Following arguments from both parties, Justice Oshodi adjourned the matter until June 16, 2026, for a report on service, arraignment and further proceedings.

The case is one of several ongoing prosecutions by the EFCC involving alleged violations of foreign exchange regulations and financial crimes.