Alleged $1.3m Fraud: Court Upholds Arrest Warrant Against Sadiya Farouq
ABUJA, NIGERIA — The Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court sitting in Apo, Abuja, has dismissed an application filed by former Minister of Humanitarian Affairs, Disaster Management and Social Development, Sadiya Umar Farouq, seeking to set aside a bench warrant and warrant of arrest issued against her in an ongoing corruption case.
The ruling, delivered on Monday by Justice Jude Onwuegbuzie, represents a significant development in the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission’s (EFCC) prosecution of the former minister and two other defendants over allegations involving the diversion of public funds.
Farouq, alongside Bashir Nura Alkali and Sani Nafiu Mohammed, is facing charges bordering on criminal conspiracy, abuse of office, and the alleged misappropriation of public funds amounting to $1.3 million and N746.7 million.
The court had earlier issued a warrant for Farouq’s arrest after she failed to appear for scheduled proceedings. Her legal team subsequently approached the court, urging it to vacate the order, citing health concerns as the reason for her absence.
However, Justice Onwuegbuzie held that the application lacked merit, stressing that the defendant had failed to provide sufficient justification for repeatedly staying away from court.
According to the judge, criminal proceedings require strict adherence to legal procedures, and a defendant who is aware of a pending criminal matter cannot simply ignore court appearances without convincing evidence.
“The defendant who is fully aware that this is a criminal proceeding has willfully failed to appear in court without a valid reason,” the judge ruled.
He further questioned the medical grounds presented by the former minister, noting that the documents before the court did not demonstrate why her reported health conditions prevented her from appearing before the court.
Justice Onwuegbuzie observed that the medical report cited arthritis and heart-related issues but failed to establish that such ailments made it impossible for Farouq to attend proceedings.
The judge also dismissed suggestions that the former minister could not receive adequate medical care within Nigeria, describing the explanations offered by the defence as insufficient.
“There is nothing in the exhibit explaining why the defendant who has mere arthritis and heart disease cannot appear before the court. Is it that there are no medical facilities in Nigeria?” the judge asked.
He concluded that the defendant appeared to be relying on what he described as “bogus excuses” to avoid appearing before the court and subsequently dismissed the application.
Reacting to the ruling, counsel to the EFCC, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), welcomed the court’s decision and urged the judge to enforce an earlier undertaking reportedly made by Farouq’s lead counsel, A.A. Ibrahim (SAN), to produce the former minister before the court.
Jacobs argued that the medical report relied upon by the defence only recommended a six-to-eight-week treatment period, which he said expired on June 9, 2026. He further informed the court that the anti-graft agency was prepared to enforce the arrest warrant if necessary.
“My lord, we have decided to give effect to the arrest of the first defendant, and we also ask the counsel to cooperate and produce his client on the next adjournment to avoid coercive measures,” Jacobs told the court.
In response, A.M. Lawal, who represented Ibrahim during Monday’s proceedings, requested that the senior advocate be given an opportunity to personally address the court regarding the alleged undertaking.
Justice Onwuegbuzie granted the request, stating that Ibrahim should be allowed to defend himself on the issue before any further decision is taken.
The matter was subsequently adjourned until July 2, 2026, when the defendants are expected to be formally arraigned.
The case remains one of the most closely watched anti-corruption prosecutions involving a former cabinet member, with the EFCC maintaining that it possesses evidence linking the defendants to the alleged diversion of substantial public funds.
Source: Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC)
