Access Bank Plc and one of its employees are enmeshed in legal troubles after a four-count charge was filed against them at the Federal High Court over the alleged diversion of N825.9 million in state funds into a fraudulent account.

According to Premium Times, the e charges, filed by the federal government, followed an investigation by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC).

The charges, filed at the Sokoto Judicial Division, accused Abdulmalik Abubakar, a relationship manager at Access Bank’s Sokoto branch, and the bank itself of conspiracy, money laundering, and concealment of stolen funds.

The state counsel in count one alleged that the defendants created a fake “Internal Revenue Service Account” with number 1873016763, through which they received N825.9 million between May 2024 and January 2025, in violation of Nigeria’s Money Laundering Act of 2022 and the Corrupt Practices Act of 2000.

The second count accuses them of allegedly concealing the same funds through the same fraudulent account, said to have been created at Access Bank’s Sokoto branch.

According to the court, the bank and Abubakar committed an offence contrary to section 18 (2)(a) and punishable under sections 18(3), 18 (4), 22(1) and 22(2) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

In count three, prosecutors say the money was fraudulently received through the fake account, “thereby committing an offence contrary to section 13 and punishable under section 68 of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000”.

Count four alleges that Abubakar and the bank directly concealed the laundered funds, “thereby committing an offence contrary to and punishable under section 24 of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000”.

The federal government said the money was diverted without authorisation and concealed in breach of anti-corruption and money laundering laws.

According to a hearing notice signed on May 2, the case had been moved from the General Cause List to a hearing set for May 19 (yesterday).

It will be heard on that date if the court’s schedule allows.

Otherwise, it will be postponed without further notice.

The hearing may last up to two days.

The notice said either party wishing to postpone must apply to the court promptly and provide proof if the reason involves factual matters.

At the hearing, both parties must present all evidence, including witnesses and documents.

Evidence must be submitted during the hearing.

Failure to do so may result in exclusion or costs.

It said parties wanting witnesses to attend should immediately request the court to issue summons, allowing enough time to notify them.

If witnesses must bring documents, these must be clearly specified.

The party requesting witnesses must pay reasonable fees for their expenses and loss of time, as fixed by the court.

Attendance may be refused if fees are not deposited.

If either party wishes to use documents held by the other, they must notify them in writing ahead of the hearing.

Otherwise, they cannot present secondary evidence.

The notice was issued by order of the court.

When contacted, Kunle Aderinokun, Access Bank spokesperson, said the bank would issue an official statement on the matter, according to Premium Times.

Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday fixed 26 May to hear a suit filed by the Nigeria Inter-Bank Settlement System (NIBSS) Plc against the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and others.

NIBSS, in the suit, is seeking an order to prevent any institution from challenging its statutory authority to maintain and manage the Bank Verification Number (BVN) database in Nigeria.

BVN is a unique number that allows individual accounts to be verified across the Nigerian banking industry.

Judge James Omotosho fixed the date after dismissing an application for joinder filed by Data Privacy Lawyers Association (DPLAN).

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that NIBSS, through its lawyer, Ademolai Esan, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), had sued the Digital Rights Lawyers Initiative (ITDRLI), the CBN and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), seeking the court’s declaration that it is the body statutorily empowered to maintain and manage the BVN database.

The BVN is an identification number which holds an individual’s bank account details. The number is also connected to an individual’s National Identification Number (NIN).

Both the BVN and the NIN are key identity numbers that hold sensitive biometric imprints virtually all important personal information of millions of Nigerians.

With the diverse uses of digital platforms for daily routines such as banking and accessing the internet as well as well registration for various government and many private bodies’ services, including acquiring a passport or a SIM card, it is increasingly difficult to live in Nigeria without NIN.

No one can legitimately operate a bank account in Nigerian without BVN, and by extension NIN. You cannot also use a mobile phone without having NIN.

The dispute over the control and management of the BVN raises data privacy and surveillance concerns.

“Pursuant to the provisions of the framework, NIBSS, as a designated participant in BVN operations, is statutorily authorised to manage and maintain the BVN database and ensure its seamless operation, among other functions,” it added.

It, therefore, accused ITDRLI (1st defendant) of filing multiple suits, either directly or through proxies, challenging its authority to manage the BVN database and alleging that such management violates constitutional privacy rights.

However, ITDRLI denied the allegations in its court processes, asking the court to dismiss the suit.

Fidelity Bank has applied for the interpretation of a Supreme Court judgement on a legacy transaction between the defunct FSB International Bank and Sagecom Concepts Limited.

FSB International Bank had granted a credit facility to G. Cappa Plc in 2002 for the sum of USD3 million.

The facility was secured with a mortgage on a property located in Ikoyi.

In a statement on Monday, Meksley Nwagboh, head of Brand & Communications, Fidelity Bank, said a publication on the Supreme Court judgement, and the claim of imminent bankruptcy was done in bad faith.

Nwagboh said G. Cappa defaulted on the loan repayment and in a bid to prevent FSB from selling the mortgaged property to repay the loan, it filed a lawsuit against FSB at the Federal High Court, Lagos, seeking inter-alia to restrain the Bank from selling the property.

The spokesperson noted that the Federal High Court, in its judgment, ruled that the Bank as legal mortgagor rightfully sold the leased interest in the property to Sagecom in 2011.

“The Court, however, declined to order vacant possession of the property and directed the issue of vacant possession to the Lagos State High Court. In the meantime, G. Cappa remained in possession of the property and kept collecting rents therefrom,” the statement reads.

“Sagecom then instituted an action against the Bank and G. Cappa at the Lagos State High Court in 2011, seeking damages against the Bank for breach of contract and for possession of the property. Sagecom’s claim against the Bank was essentially for liquidated damages calculated as rentals on the several component apartments in the property plus interest on the same over different time frames.

“In 2018, the Lagos High Court awarded judgment in favour of Sagecom against G. Cappa and the Bank, which judgment was challenged by the Supreme Court. The Bank is convinced that by remaining in possession of the property and continuing to collect rents therefrom, G. Cappa orchestrated all the losses suffered by Sagecom.

“However, having exhausted the appeal process, the Bank is willing to settle the obligation. Unfortunately, there are significant ambiguities in the judgment resulting in difficulties in calculating the actual financial liability to the G.Cappa and the Bank which is about N14billion from our computation based on the exchange rate as of 2005 when the incident and cause of action arose.

“Meanwhile, the Supreme Court in the case of Anibaba v Dana Airlines Limited delivered in January 2025 has clarified that foreign currency judgment debt must be converted to Naira at the exchange rate obtainable at the date of judgment of the trial Court which in this case was 30 January 2018.

“Even if the 2018 exchange rate supported by the Supreme Court is applied, the judgment debt will just be under N30.7 billion payable G.Cappa plc (who delayed delivery of possession of the apartments from 2005 till June 2018 when possession was eventually delivered) with contribution from the Bank.

“Consequently, the Bank has applied to the Court for a clarification and inquiry into the proper interpretation of the judgment and the computation of the actual quantum properly and lawfully payable by G.Cappa and the Bank.

“The Court has accordingly ordered Sagecom to maintain status quo pending the determination of pending motions and restrained Sagecom and all persons from publishing any material in the media as the matter is still pending in court.

“The implication of this order is that the instant publication by Peoples Gazette and any other media platform or persons contain false information and are wrongful, unlawful, and constitute a contempt of court. It is unfortunate that the above clear position and injunctive order made by the Court since 7th May 2025 were not adhered to.”

Nwagboh emphasised that Fidelity Bank remains a very strong and profitable financial institution and currently amongst the most capitalized banks in Nigeria with international operations.

The official insists Fidelity Bank is under no bankruptcy and has always been in a position to discharge its obligations, assuring depositors, customers, investors and the general public of its strong financial position as shown in the Q1 2025 financial results already made public.

The statement added that all necessary steps are being taken to “apprehend and prosecute any persons or platform directly or indirectly responsible for this wicked, malicious and sponsored publication aimed at embarrassing the Bank and causing panic to its stakeholders.”