On September 24, 2024, social media sensation Vincent Otse surfaced with explosive allegations against a prominent legal family, the Falanas. He claimed that Mr. Femi Falana SAN, the head of this notable family, has strayed from his long-standing commitment to justice, now allegedly aiding the controversial crossdresser Idris Okunneye (Bobrisky) in securing a presidential pardon despite ongoing money laundering charges. Otse cited an alleged private conversation between Bobrisky and another individual, asserting that the legal services surrounding this pardon were priced at an astonishing 10 million Naira. This claim, he argued, is surprising behavior for a man of Falana’s stature, whose greatest fault, according to Otse, is being a human rights lawyer.
The story quickly gained traction, weaponized by Falana’s critics, who not only targeted him but also threatened harm to his daughter should he attempt legal action to defend his name.
In a parallel situation, Mike Ozekhome SAN finds himself embroiled in a scandal that has garnered viral, sponsored publicity from those he deems “enemies” who unsuccessfully sought to undermine his property rights. Ozekhome’s involvement in the case Tali Shani V. Mike Abu Ozekhome presents a more pronounced challenge than Falana’s alleged connection to the Bobrisky affair. Ozekhome, having collaborated closely with the late General Jeremiah Useni—a prominent figure in the Nigerian Army during General Abacha’s regime—claims to have met Tali Shani, a businessman from Plateau, Nigeria, around 2019. Shani allegedly purchased a valuable property at 79 Randall Avenue, London NW2, in 1993, at only 20 years old, being from a wealthy family. Ozekhome noted that he frequently handled significant legal projects for Shani, though he refrained from detailing what these involved, mentioning only legal advice, written work, and court appearances.
On May 30, 2019, Ozekhome was granted power of attorney over the property, with a second power of attorney executed on May 20, 2020, resulting in the title’s transfer to him. He asserts that he was unaware of the property until 2019, when he assumed its management.
Throughout this case, Ozekhome’s status and power of attorney have not been contested. It became clear that he had more connections to the property than anyone else, being the only party able to present documentation related to the property’s pre-registration and conveyancing.
In the Judge’s words: “It is true that it was the Respondent (Ozekhome) in this case, and not the applicant or anyone on her behalf, who provided disclosure of what appear to be the only surviving pre-registration title and conveyancing documents.”
The Judge further noted: “Some of these documents were largely of historical interest, such as pre-registration conveyances, charge searches, and correspondence between 1933 and 1985. Their only significance is that it is the Respondent (not the Applicant) who has them.”
If the real owner of this property were not intent on transferring title to Chief Ozekhome, he would not have had access to these authoritative documents.
According to Ozekhome, “the transfer of the property by Shani was a ‘gift’ and ‘out of gratitude’ for the numerous legal services rendered.” He described Shani’s feelings of obligation, stating “he sees me as a father” and denied making any payment to the seller.
I take exception to the judge’s remarks labeling the Shanis (both male and female) as phantom claims, suggesting he doubted their existence. While the purported Ms. Shani—a “successful businesswoman” conducting trade across West Africa—might be a fabrication, Mr. Tali Shani is a real individual, recognized by General Useni, who has intimate knowledge of him.
In response to the claims regarding Ms. Tali Shani, Ozekhome stated, “Ms. Tali Shani never existed. She is a phantom identity created by someone not party to these proceedings for the fraudulent purpose of taking control of the above property.”
To substantiate his position against an array of dramatic litigants, led by Mr. Patrick Afemuai of Westfields Solicitors, Ozekhome enlisted verified professionals, including Mr. Festus Esangbedo of the National Identity Management Commission, Police Superintendent Ibrahim Sani, and his own legal practitioner son, Osilama. This legal confrontation is connected to ongoing disputes regarding the property’s management, particularly with an agent named Mr. Nicholas Ekhorutowen over the receipt of funds. To mitigate further complications, Ozekhome sought possession against current tenants who had concocted a fictitious Ms. Tali Shani to reclaim the property.
Their arguments revolved around Ms. Tali Shani, who purportedly oscillated between illness, critical surgery, and death, with minimal physical interaction with her solicitor. Other characters, such as Mr. Ayodele Damola (claiming to be her son) and Anakwe Marcel Obasi (masquerading as her cousin), were introduced into this elaborate narrative.
They reinforced their claims with a death certificate dated October 9, 2024, stating that a “Shani Tali” (female) died on October 3, 2024, at a location labeled “Hospital” on 10 Commercial Road, Jos.
Judge Ewan Paton noted that both the Applicant’s previous statements and the recent information regarding her alleged death prompted a further response from the Respondent, supported by multiple exhibits. This evidence revealed that: (i) the “medical report” was a forgery, (ii) the mobile phone bill was similarly fraudulent, (iii) the provided NIN number was suspended due to application irregularities, (iv) the address given—”10 Commercial Road, Jos”—did not exist, and (v) the report of the Applicant’s alleged “death” was fabricated, as she had never existed, with documents obtained through deceit.
Esangbedo meticulously unraveled the deception behind the claimed National Identity Number (NIN), stating that while a NIN had been obtained, the attached photo did not comply with ICAO standards. The NIN was subsequently suspended pending further investigation, revealing that it had been acquired through “irregular means.”
Superintendent Ibrahim Sani testified regarding the alleged forgery of the NIN and the mobile utility bill attributed to Tali Shani at the nonexistent address. His findings, corroborated by further inquiries with the telephone company, concluded that the billing address was fictitious and that the mobile account belonged to Mohammed Edewor, the Lagos solicitor referenced by Mr. Efemuai.
Miffed by the strength of the rebuttals brought forward by these professionals, Mr. Obasi, the cousin and presenter of the obituary for Ms Tali Shani, slammed the duo with weighty allegations, he claimed that the Respondent’s evidence provided by Mr. Esangbedo and Superintendent Sani was false and had essentially been obtained by corruption or duress from the Respondent. However, under cross-examination, he admitted to lacking concrete evidence for his claims, attributing them to hearsay.
“Under cross-examination by the Respondent, Mr. Obasi accepted that he had no other evidence for the multiple and very serious allegations he had made against the Respondent and others, saying that these were “things you hear by the sidelines.”
“When asked what evidence he had for the allegation that Superintendent Sani was “employed” by the Respondent, all he could say was “He’s your man, he’s your man.”
Despite the turmoil surrounding this case, General Useni’s testimony affirms the existence of Mr. Tali Shani, confirming their acquaintance over the past seven to eight years. While Judge Ewan Paton believes Useni is the true property owner—not Tali Shani—he acknowledges that Useni transferred the title to Chief Ozekhome. The Judge’s pronouncement supports this: “I do not, however, need to find precisely whether (and if so, how much) money was owed. The transfer may have been made out of friendship and generosity, or in recognition of some other service or favor. The one finding I do make, however, is that it was the decision of General Useni to transfer the property to the Respondent.”
This property may be linked to remnants of Abacha’s loot, as highlighted in the case Attorney-General v. (1) Jeremiah Useni (2) Standard Chartered Bank[2022] JRC 230 (May 19, 2022], where the Jersey Royal Court issued a forfeiture order under anti-money laundering legislation. The Court determined that approximately £1.9 million in four Jersey accounts belonged to General Useni and constituted “tainted property” from “unlawful conduct.”
Furthermore, in Federal Republic of Nigeria v. Chief Mike Ozekhome, the court ruled that lawyers are not obligated to investigate the source of their clients’ funds. This principle resonates with UK law, as demonstrated in a notable case where the EFCC sought to freeze a lawyer’s accounts receiving professional fees from then-Governor Ayo Fayose. The Court of Appeal ruled unanimously that a lawyer is entitled to fees for services rendered, and such fees cannot be deemed proceeds of crime without proper inquiry.
If the property was transferred by Useni as a gesture of appreciation to Chief Ozekhome for successful legal representation, it is unjust to label him corrupt, especially when UK law does not require lawyers to vet their clients’ funds as long as identity checks are conducted.
Instead of placing the blame on Chief Ozekhome, accountability should extend to figures like Anakwe Marcel Obasi, Kingsley Efemuai, Ayodele Damola, and Solicitor Edewor, who have woven a tapestry of deceit through the fictitious Ms. Tali Shani to benefit without merit.
If there is any commendation due to Chief Ozekhome, it is for his adept legal maneuvers, which have been pivotal in uncovering the truth.
If Chief Ozekhome believes the foreign judgment is not an indictment, I share the same perspective.
_Tunde Akingbondere is a law graduate and author_
