The Office of the Attorney General of the Federation has officially withdrawn the criminal charges against renowned senior advocate, Mike Ozekhome, over alleged forgery. The development was announced on Tuesday at the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Maitama.
The withdrawal was communicated by the Director of Public Prosecution of the Federation, Rotimi Oyedepo, who told Justice Peter Kekemeke that the AGF had opted to take a “holistic review” of the case to determine the most appropriate legal course of action. The defence team, led by Paul Erokoro, did not oppose the application, prompting the court to strike out the three-count charge against Ozekhome.
Ozekhome was initially arraigned following a case instituted by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC). The three-count charge accused him of alleged fraud, forgery, and the use of false documents related to a property dispute in London. Prosecutors claimed that Ozekhome received a property at 79 Randall Avenue, London NW2 7SX, which he asserted was gifted to him, and allegedly supported this claim with a forged Nigerian passport. These acts were said to contravene provisions of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act and the FCT Penal Code.
On January 29, 2026, Oyedepo informed the court that the AGF had assumed control of the prosecution from the ICPC pursuant to Section 174 of the Nigerian Constitution, which grants the Attorney General the authority to institute, take over, or discontinue criminal proceedings. Oyedepo explained that the decision was taken in collaboration with the ICPC to ensure the prosecution aligns with the highest standards of due process, efficiency, and public interest.
He also emphasized that the takeover was guided by considerations of fairness, competence, and inter-agency cooperation in Nigeria’s fight against corruption, assuring that the rights of the defendant would be fully protected during the review. The court granted the application, formally striking out the charge and paving the way for a thorough review of the case files.
The withdrawal marks a significant procedural development in the high-profile case and underscores the AGF’s discretion in criminal prosecutions, especially where inter-agency coordination and due process are concerned.
