The Lagos State Special Offences Court in Ikeja has struck out a ₦6 billion money laundering charge against Ismaila Mustapha, known as Mompha, and his company, Ismalob Global Investment Limited. The trial judge, Mojisola Dada, ruled that the EFCC’s decision to prosecute while a related case was pending before the Federal High Court was an abuse of court process. She described the parallel prosecution as forum shopping.
The ruling is a rebuke, not an acquittal. The judge did not say Mompha was innocent. She said the commission used the wrong procedure. That distinction matters. The EFCC has now lost a case on process, not on evidence. The evidence may still be tested in the Federal High Court, where a separate charge accuses the defendants of retaining about ₦32.9 billion through company accounts.
The pattern is familiar. The EFCC has a history of filing multiple charges across jurisdictions, hoping one court will be more receptive. In 2018, a similar strategy collapsed in the case of a former governor, and the commission was ordered to consolidate. The lesson was not learnt. The Mompha case shows the same habit, and the same outcome.
The commission also alleged that Mompha failed to disclose assets. The judge found he had disclosed them in an extrajudicial statement two days after submitting his asset declaration form. That is a factual finding against the prosecution’s case. It does not clear him. It does undermine the charge.
For the EFCC, the loss is reputational. The commission’s public messaging is built on convictions and forfeitures. A struck-out charge in a high-profile case weakens that message. For Mompha, the win is procedural. The Federal High Court case remains, and the commission can still pursue it. For the public, the lesson is that a charge is not a conviction, and a court is not a press release.
Winners: Mompha and his company, for now. Defence lawyers who can cite the ruling. Losers: The EFCC, which loses a case on process. Public confidence in the commission’s charging decisions. Any investigator who warned against parallel filings.
Bottom Line: A struck-out charge is not a defeat for justice. It is a warning that the EFCC’s charging strategy needs a lawyer’s discipline, not a prosecutor’s enthusiasm.