News

Six Years After Arrest Over Emefiele Allegation, Court Frees George Uboh

Six Years After Arrest Over Emefiele Allegation, Court Frees George Uboh
  • PublishedJune 25, 2025

A Federal Capital Territory High Court has dismissed the criminal defamation charges filed against whistleblower and anti-corruption advocate, Dr. George Uboh, over his 2019 allegations against former Central Bank of Nigeria Governor, Godwin Emefiele.

Uboh was arrested on May 15, 2019, at his office in Maitama, Abuja, by officers from the Force Criminal Investigation Department, led by Superintendent Stanley Kwaphoor under the then-Deputy Inspector-General of Police, Mike Ogbizi.

He claimed the arrest came shortly after he publicly opposed Emefiele’s reappointment as CBN Governor, citing corruption concerns.

The police subsequently charged him with criminal defamation in suit number FCT/HC/CR/366/2019, but the case dragged on without trial or conviction.

Despite spending over 120 days in detention and losing access to his seized properties, Uboh was never convicted.

On June 16, 2025, the court struck out the case due to the consistent absence of the police prosecutor and witnesses.

“Upon the matter coming up for hearing and upon the application of Idumodin Ogumu Esq., counsel for the defendant, for the charge to be dismissed due to the absence of the prosecution counsel and witnesses, it is hereby ordered as follows: Pursuant to Section 351(1) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015, the charge is dismissed. The defendant is discharged,” the ruling read.

Following the ruling, Uboh wrote a letter dated June 23, 2025, to the Inspector-General of Police requesting the return of his seized items.

He listed the items as an Apple MacBook Pro, Sony Laptop (Model PCG-7184M), iPhone 6s Plus, Samsung Duos, iPhone 5, iPad, Nokia 1034, GTBank and Zenith Bank cheque books, eight CDs, six flash drives, two ID cards, and several legal and anti-corruption files, including correspondences and proposals.

Uboh insisted the police no longer had legal grounds to withhold his property, as the case had been dismissed and could not be reopened.

He attached an inventory of the items, tagged “Exhibit A”, signed by the involved officers, his secretary, and himself, to reinforce his demand for their immediate return.