Reported By Mary Udezue | Edited by: Gabriel Osa
The Federal Government of Nigeria has filed a fresh criminal prosecution consisting of twelve counts against Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mike Ozekhome, and co-defendant Ponfa Useni, over allegations connected to forgery, impersonation, conspiracy and property-related fraud. The charge was lodged before the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory in Abuja and reflects an expanded prosecutorial strategy following the withdrawal of an earlier case brought by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission.
The prosecution, filed through the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation, alleges that the defendants were involved in a scheme to produce and use a falsified Nigerian international passport purportedly issued by the Nigeria Immigration Service. According to the government’s accusation, the passport was created around 2020 under the identity “Tali Shani,” which prosecutors describe as a fictitious or impersonated persona allegedly constructed to support claims relating to a disputed property located at 79 Randall Avenue in London, United Kingdom.
Authorities further allege that the defendants collaborated in sustaining the validity of the forged identity across multiple years. The charge sheet claims that the alleged false passport was presented and relied upon between 2020 and 2025 to advance legal and financial claims connected to the foreign property. The government contends that the documentation was intentionally used to create the appearance of lawful identity authentication and thereby facilitate control or benefit from assets considered to have been improperly obtained.
Prosecutors also allege that the defendants engaged in impersonation and cheating by personation through the creation and use of the fictitious identity associated with the disputed passport. The charge suggests that legal instruments, including an irrevocable power of attorney executed in the name of the non-existent persona, were deployed to strengthen the claim over the London property. The government maintains that such actions constitute conspiracy and unlawful manipulation of official identity documentation under Nigerian criminal statutes.
The prosecution further alleges that rental income amounting to approximately eighteen thousand British pounds was derived from the disputed property and that such proceeds were associated with the contested ownership arrangement. Investigators reportedly view this financial transaction as evidence that the defendants exercised some level of control or economic benefit from the property while legal questions surrounding its acquisition remained unresolved.
The fresh twelve-count charge replaces an earlier three-count prosecution filed by the ICPC in January 2026. That case was subsequently withdrawn after the Attorney-General of the Federation applied to take over the prosecution, citing the need for broader investigation and legal reassessment. Following the withdrawal, federal prosecutors prepared an expanded charge structure reflecting additional allegations discovered during investigative review.
The government’s case is anchored on provisions of the Penal Code Law applicable in the Federal Capital Territory, which criminalise forgery, conspiracy, impersonation and cheating. Legal authorities have long emphasised that forgery offences involving official immigration documents are treated with particular severity due to their potential implications for national security, international mobility and financial integrity.
Ponfa Useni, who is also named in the charge, is identified in court filings as being connected to the alleged execution of the disputed irrevocable power of attorney. Government prosecutors claim that Useni and Ozekhome acted in concert in facilitating the creation and use of the alleged false identity document. The filing also references the late General Jeremiah Useni as having been associated with earlier stages of the property dispute, although legal proceedings cannot be pursued against a deceased individual under Nigerian criminal procedure.
At the time of filing, the case had not yet been assigned to a judicial officer for trial commencement. Court administrative processes require that criminal matters be formally allocated before arraignment proceedings can begin. Officials from the judiciary have not released a schedule indicating when the defendants will appear in court.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission is reported to be holding the defendants in custody pending procedural arrangements, although official confirmation of their detention status has not been fully disclosed. Defence representatives have previously dismissed allegations relating to the matter as unfounded, describing earlier prosecutions as politically motivated or legally defective.
The new prosecution has attracted considerable public attention because of Ozekhome’s status as a senior constitutional lawyer and prominent advocate involved in high-profile litigation across Nigeria’s political and human rights landscape. Cases involving senior legal practitioners tend to generate heightened scrutiny due to their implications for judicial independence, professional ethics and prosecutorial discretion.
Legal analysts note that forgery and impersonation charges require the prosecution to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the defendants knowingly participated in the creation or use of fraudulent documents with intent to deceive. Documentary evidence, financial records, expert authentication of the passport, and witness testimony are expected to play central roles if the matter proceeds to full trial.
Public reaction to the filing has been mixed, reflecting Nigeria’s broader polarised political and legal environment. Some observers have welcomed the prosecution as evidence that no individual should be immune from criminal accountability regardless of professional status. Others have cautioned that prosecutions involving prominent figures must be carefully scrutinised to avoid perceptions of selective justice or misuse of state power.
The federal government has not issued an extensive public statement beyond confirming the filing of the charges. Officials have maintained that the prosecution is driven purely by investigative findings and legal considerations rather than political factors.
The matter now awaits judicial assignment and arraignment proceedings. If the case proceeds to full trial, it is expected to attract significant national and possibly international attention due to the profile of the defendant and the cross-border dimension of the alleged property dispute.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments