Diezani Denies Ownership of Luxury Assets, Blames Associates as London Trial Resumes

–         Challenges integrity of Nigerian investigation in UK proceedings

–         Says she was made a political scapegoat amid 2015 election tensions

Wale Igbintade

The trial of former Nigerian petroleum minister, Diezani Alison-Madueke, resumed on Day 21 at the Southwark Crown Court in London, with her defence launching a detailed challenge to the prosecution’s claims that she owned a range of high-value luxury assets and improperly received benefits.

At the centre of proceedings was a document prepared by the defence, which it described as a more accurate schedule of items linked to the former minister.

The document which contrasts with the prosecution’s version, seeks to distinguish between items personally owned by Alison-Madueke and those allegedly acquired by associates or on behalf of third parties.

Under examination, Alison-Madueke acknowledged ownership of certain items, particularly clothing, accessories, and personal effects, but firmly denied ownership of several high-value assets, including expensive furniture and luxury goods.

She maintained that many of the costlier items were purchased by associates such as Benedict Peters, Kola Aluko, and Tunde Sanusi, often for their own properties or for shipment to Nigeria.

Throughout her testimony, the defence emphasised what it described as a consistent pattern: that the most expensive items listed by the prosecution were not hers, while her confirmed purchases were comparatively modest.

Many of the disputed items were said to have been delivered to locations such as St Edmund’s Terrace in London or to storage facilities, or referenced in invoices and email correspondence.

The court also heard evidence relating to luxury shopping at high-end retailers, including Harrods, where Alison-Madueke described herself as a regular customer.

However, she insisted that not all purchases made in her name or linked to her accounts were for her personal use. 

In several instances, she said transactions were carried out while she was out of the country, suggesting that others, particularly Aluko, may have acted independently.

Addressing the purchase of electronic items, including headphones and speakers, she told the court they were often intended as gifts distributed by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation.

She explained that it was customary for the corporation to present gifts to a wide range of recipients, including traditional rulers, community leaders, and business associates, particularly during festive periods.

Proceedings also examined financial transactions linked to accounts associated with individuals said to have provided logistical support to the former minister.

One such account, linked to a man identified as Prince Momoh, showed multiple cash deposits totaling over $160,000, which were subsequently used for luxury purchases. 

Alison-Madueke said the staggered deposits reflected common financial practices in Nigeria, where large sums are often paid in batches.

Questions were also raised over the funding of private jet travel, with evidence indicating that certain flights were paid for by third parties rather than the NNPC.

She defended the arrangements, citing security considerations and the demands of international engagements, including meetings of the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries.

She added that some travel costs were later reimbursed by the corporation.

The court heard details of multiple international trips across Europe and the Middle East, some of which coincided with official duties.

In one instance, she said she had to urgently return to Nigeria during the 2011 fuel subsidy crisis on the directive of then President Goodluck Jonathan, with the cost of the flight subsequently reimbursed.

In an emotional segment of her testimony, Alison-Madueke described the personal toll of the allegations and her arrest in London in October 2015.

She told the court she had been undergoing medical treatment at the time, including chemotherapy, and that her doctor intervened to secure her release from police custody.

She further alleged that she became a target of political persecution in the lead-up to Nigeria’s 2015 general elections, claiming that opposition figures had singled her out as a scapegoat for the administration of former President Jonathan. 

According to her, the period was marked by intense media scrutiny and reputational damage.

Alison-Madueke also expressed a lack of confidence in investigations conducted by Nigeria’s Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, suggesting that key records may have been lost or mishandled during transitions between administrations. 

She said this informed her decision to retain personal records relating to her official activities.

The former minister told the court that since relocating to the United Kingdom in 2015, she has been unable to return to Nigeria or secure employment, relying instead on the support of friends and family.

She said the prolonged legal battle has severely impacted her health, finances, and family life.

The defence also sought to distance Alison-Madueke from some co-defendants, including businesswoman Omolara Ayinde, with whom she said she had no substantive dealings. 

She described their interaction as limited to a brief encounter years earlier.

Additionally, the court heard references to tensions within Nigeria’s oil sector during her tenure, particularly in relation to proposed reforms under the Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB).

She suggested that some international oil companies were dissatisfied with her efforts to renegotiate production-sharing contracts, hinting at broader political and commercial pressures.

As proceedings concluded for the day, the defence continued to portray the case as one of misattribution and circumstantial association, arguing that the prosecution has failed to establish direct ownership or control over many of the assets in question.

The trial is expected to continue with further cross-examination and submissions in the coming days.