Alleged ₦4.29bn Forex Fraud: UBA Faces Arraignment In Lagos Court
A Lagos State Special Offences Court sitting in Ikeja has authorised the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to serve United Bank for Africa Plc and four co-defendants through substituted means in an alleged ₦4.29bn foreign exchange fraud case, paving the way for their arraignment on October 22.
Justice Rahman Oshodi granted the order after the defendants failed to appear for arraignment, directing the prosecution to paste the charge and accompanying court documents at designated addresses or other locations known to the commission.
The defendants are UBA, Muyiwa Akinyemi, Amangbo Eziashi-Stephen, Geeos Global Service Limited and Fedat Global Limited. They are facing a four-count charge bordering on alleged foreign exchange violations, concealment of proceeds of unlawful activities, retention of criminal proceeds and money laundering.
The latest development follows previous delays that prevented the defendants from entering their pleas. The court’s decision is expected to address the dispute over service of court processes and determine whether the arraignment can proceed at the next hearing.
EFCC counsel, Temitope Banjo, had approached the court for permission to serve the defendants through substituted means after their absence stalled the proceedings. The prosecution proposed pasting the charge and accompanying documents at addresses associated with the defendants to ensure that they became aware of the case.
Granting the application, Justice Oshodi held that the proposed method offered reasonable assurance that the court processes would come to the defendants’ attention. He authorised the prosecution to paste the documents at 19 Nnebue House, Festac, and 57 Marina Street, Lagos, or any other address known to the commission.
The judge, however, rejected a separate request by the prosecution to serve lawyers representing some of the defendants, describing the proposed relief as unclear. He subsequently struck out that part of the application while granting permission for substituted service through the approved method.
Justice Oshodi further directed the prosecution to file affidavits confirming compliance with the order before the next hearing. He said service carried out in accordance with Section 88 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law of Lagos State would be recognised as proper service.
In one of the charges, the EFCC alleged that the defendants conspired between September 14, 2022, and March 20, 2023, to sell foreign exchange at rates above those stipulated by the Central Bank of Nigeria. The commission is expected to establish the transactions involved and demonstrate how the alleged conduct violated the applicable regulations.
Another count accuses the defendants of concealing ₦4,290,112,796.72 in a UBA account in September 2022. The prosecution alleged that the money was derived directly from unlawful activities, an assertion that the court is yet to determine.
The case had previously stalled on June 3, 2026, when the defendants failed to appear for arraignment. At the time, Banjo told the court that the prosecution had served the charge and other processes and had filed affidavits of service.
The prosecutor also claimed that the commission had made efforts to arrest Akinyemi and Eziashi-Stephen after they allegedly breached the conditions of administrative bail granted to them during the investigation. The claims remain assertions by the prosecution and have not, by themselves, established criminal liability.
However, Adewale Kamourudeen, counsel who represented UBA and the two individual defendants at the earlier hearing, disputed the prosecution’s position on service. He told the court that his clients had not received the charge or hearing notices and had learnt about the proceedings through newspaper reports.
Kamourudeen said he needed to examine the court file to establish the nature of the proof of service being relied upon by the EFCC. Banjo countered that UBA’s compliance officer, Chima Okugbo, had received the documents on behalf of the bank and the two officials, but the defence counsel declined to accept service on their behalf, saying he had no instructions to do so.
The allegations have raised questions about compliance with foreign exchange regulations and the handling of substantial financial transactions within Nigeria’s banking sector. Nevertheless, the existence of a criminal charge does not establish guilt, and the prosecution must prove its case with admissible evidence before the court.
The matter has been adjourned until October 22 for arraignment and further proceedings. The prosecution is expected to complete the substituted service and file the required affidavits, while the defendants will have the opportunity to enter their pleas in accordance with the court’s directions. No determination of guilt has been made against UBA or any of the other defendants.
