By Ayomide Otitoju
The Federal High Court in Abuja has overturned the interim forfeiture of properties belonging to Teleology Nigeria Limited, delivering a stinging rebuke to both Keystone Bank and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) over their handling of a debt recovery dispute.
In a ruling delivered on September 23, 2025, Justice Emeka Nwite held that the EFCC had “no legal authority” to act as a debt recovery agent for Keystone Bank, describing the agency’s actions as a misuse of its anti-graft mandate. The court found that the forfeiture application was based on suppressed information and amounted to an attempt at double recovery.
The judgment revealed that Keystone Bank had already secured a ₦55.7 billion judgment against Teleology in a separate case before the Federal High Court in Lagos (Suit No. FHC/L/CS/297/2023). Justice Nwite faulted the EFCC for concealing this fact, dismissing its explanation as “watery” and “insincere.”
“The forfeiture proceedings represent a clear case of double jeopardy against Teleology,” the judge ruled, stressing that the dispute was a commercial matter and not a criminal offence.
The court also cited the Supreme Court’s decision in Melrose General Services Ltd vs EFCC & Ors (2024), which clarified that the diversion of loan funds, even if proven, does not constitute a crime under Nigerian law.
Justice Nwite consequently set aside the forfeiture order, ruling that Teleology had demonstrated that its Abuja properties were not acquired with illicit funds. While the ₦55.7 billion judgment debt remains enforceable, Keystone’s attempt to involve the EFCC in the matter was deemed unlawful.
Implications for Keystone Bank
The ruling raises serious questions about Keystone Bank’s strategy and governance. Analysts warn that the decision highlights:
- Reputational Damage: The court’s language suggests the bank colluded in misusing state institutions for debt collection, potentially eroding customer trust.
- Poor Risk Management: Despite already having a judgment in its favour, the bank pursued a controversial route through the EFCC, which the court described as an abuse of process.
- Stability Concerns: The case stems from Teleology’s 2018 acquisition of 9mobile and ongoing disputes tied to large loan exposures, pointing to lingering instability in Keystone’s credit portfolio.
The ruling is a major embarrassment for the EFCC and an even greater setback for Keystone Bank, which must now pursue recovery of the outstanding debt through conventional, lawful means.
