EFCC Challenges Acquittal Of Former NHIS Boss, Seeks Conviction In $2.2m Money Laundering Case

The Federal Government has appealed the acquittal of former Executive Secretary of the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS), Dr. Femi Thomas, in a $2.2 million money laundering case.

In a judgment delivered on July 24, 2024, Justice Ayokunle Faji of the Federal High Court in Lagos discharged and acquitted Thomas on five out of six counts filed against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), citing the agency’s failure to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.

However, Thomas was convicted on one count of violating Nigeria’s cash transaction limit law and was fined N10 million in lieu of imprisonment. The court also ordered the EFCC to return the $2.2 million seized from him within 14 days of the fine being paid.

Dissatisfied with the ruling, the EFCC filed a notice of appeal through E.E. Iheanacho (SAN) and a team of lawyers, asking the appellate court to overturn the acquittals and convict Thomas on counts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 7 of the amended charge. The commission is also seeking the permanent forfeiture of the $2,198,000 (approximately N433 million) to the Federal Government.

In its grounds of appeal, the EFCC argued that the trial court dismissed what it described as compelling evidence of unlawful enrichment and instead relied on “imaginary and fanciful doubts” to absolve the defendant.

The agency said Thomas failed to adequately explain the sharp increase in his assets while in public office, as required under Section 140 of the Evidence Act 2011, Section 19(5) of the EFCC Act, and Section 82 of the Lagos State Criminal Law 2011.

It also faulted the court for disregarding key documentary evidence—including audited financial statements—that allegedly contradicted Thomas’ claims. For example, the EFCC cited that Safeline Agro Business Ltd, a company reportedly owned by Thomas, declared a pre-tax profit of just N3.9 million in 2014 but somehow accounted for $2.2 million in the same year, calling the explanation “unreasonable and unsatisfactory.”

The agency further argued that the court erred by selectively accepting portions of Thomas’ inconsistent testimony instead of dismissing it in totality and upholding the prosecution’s case. It also criticized the court’s handling of Thomas’ asset declaration forms (Exhibits G1–G12), which the EFCC believes should have undermined his defense.

The appeal is currently pending before the Court of Appeal.