*Refunded Only N50 Million Of N118 Million And Threatened His Arrest When He Demanded The Balance
Senator Ireti Kingibe, the representative of the Federal Capital Territory in the 10th National Assembly, has been petitioned to the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission over allegations that she collected $65,000, equivalent to N118 million at the time, from a businessman to facilitate a Federal Government contract that the petitioner alleges never existed, subsequently denied receiving the money, then reluctantly refunded only N50 million, and allegedly threatened to have the businessman arrested when he insisted on recovering the outstanding N68 million balance.
The petition, dated April 27, 2026, was filed by lawyer Elochukwu Obi on behalf of his client, Mr. Nonso Okafor, and addressed to the office of the ICPC Chairman, requesting an urgent investigation to determine whether criminal infractions and abuse of public office have occurred, and seeking the recovery of the outstanding funds.
The allegations, if proven, would implicate a sitting senator in the use of her legislative office to solicit and retain money under false pretences, a conduct that falls squarely within the ICPC’s mandate to investigate and prosecute corruption and related offences by public officers.
According to the petition, the arrangement began in October 2024 when Mr. Osereme Christian Omofoma, Senator Kingibe’s Senior Legislative Aide, approached the businessman.
The SLA allegedly pleaded with Okafor “to help him raise $100,000 for the Senator to enable her to meet urgent financial needs,” promising that the money would be repaid in full or, alternatively, that the senator would facilitate the award of Federal Government contracts to Okafor through which he would recoup his money.
The petition stated that Okafor was initially reluctant to participate in the arrangement, “especially as he did not have the huge amount of money that was demanded at that time.”
However, the SLA allegedly exerted “enormous pressure” on the businessman, who was eventually “forced into borrowing from friends in order to meet up with the cash demand.”
Okafor managed to raise $65,000 of the $100,000 initially demanded, borrowing the funds “at exorbitant interest rates,” a detail that underscores the financial strain the arrangement placed on the businessman even before the alleged fraud was discovered.
The petition stated that the $65,000 was paid to Senator Kingibe in two tranches in October 2024. The businessman was told that the promised contract award would materialise within a few weeks of payment.
“After the payment, our client futilely waited far beyond the envisaged timeframe for the promised contracts, but nothing materialised,” the petition stated.
After several months of waiting, the petition alleged, “it dawned on our client that there was no contract for him and that he had simply been misled.”
At this point, Okafor began requesting a refund of his money.
When the businessman sought his money back, the senator’s response, according to the petition, shifted from evasiveness to outright denial.
“The Senator not only refused to refund the money, but she also began to actively claim that she did not receive any money from our client,” the petition stated.
The denial, if accurate, represents a significant escalation, as it would mean the senator was not merely failing to fulfil a promise but was denying the existence of the transaction itself, despite the businessman having records of the payment.
Unable to communicate directly with the senator after being cut off, Okafor continued to press for his refund through the SLA, Omofoma.
When Okafor expressed his determination to involve law enforcement, the response from the senator’s side shifted again.
“Upon our client’s expression of his determination to get the law enforcement involved in the matter, they reluctantly decided to unilaterally pay only N50,000,000 out of the total $65,000 (N118,000,000),” the petition stated. This payment was made in May 2025.
The N50 million refund created a new problem. At the exchange rate at the time of the original payment, Okafor had paid N118 million. The N50 million refund left an outstanding balance of N68 million.
“After this, Senator Kingibe and her aide tried to compel our client to accept the payment as full and final, with threats to arrest him if he refuses to forgo the balance,” the petition alleged.
The alleged threat of arrest is particularly significant. If a senator uses the implied power of her office to threaten a citizen with arrest for seeking recovery of money that was owed to him, it crosses the line from a civil debt dispute into potential abuse of office, a criminal offence under the ICPC Act and the Criminal Code.
Despite the threats, the petition stated that “our client continued to peacefully press for the completion of his money, which remains N68,000,000. All subsequent appeals for the payment fell on deaf ears.”
The petitioner’s lawyer drew the critical conclusion that underpins the criminal nature of the complaint.
“Our client believes that there were no contracts for the Senator to facilitate in the first place. On the contrary, the facilitation of contract was a deceitful gimmick which was deployed to fraudulently collect money from him, without any intention of refunding the same,” Obi stated.
If this allegation is correct, the case is not one of a contract facilitation that failed to materialise due to bureaucratic delays or changed circumstances. Rather, it is an allegation that a serving senator and her aide fabricated the promise of government contracts as a pretext to extract a large sum of money from a private citizen, with no intention of delivering the promised contracts or returning the money.
This would constitute obtaining money by false pretences, a criminal offence under both the ICPC Act and the Advance Fee Fraud Act.
The petition implicates the senator’s Senior Legislative Aide, Osereme Christian Omofoma, as the intermediary who initiated contact, applied pressure, facilitated the payment, and served as the channel through which the businessman communicated after being cut off from direct access to the senator.
The SLA’s role raises questions about whether he was acting on the senator’s instructions or whether he was independently exploiting his position to solicit funds. The petition clearly alleges the former, stating that the money was paid “to Senator Kingibe” and that the SLA was acting on her behalf.
If the ICPC investigates, Omofoma’s testimony regarding who directed the solicitation, who received the funds, and who authorised the partial refund and the subsequent threats will be critical to establishing the chain of responsibility.
Lawyer Obi made several specific requests of the ICPC chairman.
He asked for urgent intervention in the matter and for ICPC officers to investigate the allegations to determine whether criminal infractions and abuse of public office have occurred.
He specifically requested the recovery of the outstanding N68 million, which he described as “deceitfully collected from his client and wrongfully retained by Senator Kingibe.”
The ICPC has jurisdiction over the matter under the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act 2000, which covers obtaining or retaining property or benefits through corrupt means, abuse of office by public officers, and gratification by public officials.
As of the time of this report, Senator Kingibe has not issued a public response to the petition. The ICPC has not confirmed receipt of the petition or indicated whether an investigation will be opened.
