The dispute over 79 Randall Avenue reveals forged identities, elite impunity, and the long shadow of illicit wealth as UK courts untangle a web decades in the making.
The quiet suburban street of Randall Avenue, London, would seem an unlikely setting for a decades-long legal drama that stretches from the oil wealth of Nigeria’s 1990s military regime to the forensic rigor of a British courtroom. Yet the battle over No. 79 has exposed much more than competing ownership claims it has laid bare a tapestry of forged identities, questionable legal maneuvers, and the enduring shadow of corruption that still stalks Nigeria’s political and judicial legacy.
The property at the heart of this dispute was acquired in 1993, during the reign of General Sani Abacha, an era synonymous with unprecedented looting of state resources. General Jeremiah Useni, then Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, stood at the center of this acquisition. Court records and Jersey tribunal findings show that Useni had a history of using pseudonyms like “Tim Shani” to conceal offshore assets, a practice common among members of the regime.
What seemed like a routine property purchase three decades ago has since evolved into a complex web of competing claims, contradictory testimonies, and judicial confrontations that persisted even beyond Useni’s death in January 2025.
At the heart of the case was the mysterious figure of “Tali Shani,” alleged to be a wealthy Nigerian woman who purchased the property during her “glory days.” But the identity of this supposed owner disintegrated under forensic scrutiny.
● Identity Number Manipulation: Investigators found that the National Identification Number used to support the claim was fraudulently obtained via a loophole meant for amputees to bypass biometric fingerprinting and was registered remotely from Monaco.
● Phantom Addresses: Utility bills used as proof of residence traced back to a Lagos solicitor and listed an address that police confirmed does not exist.
● Death Records in Conflict: Court documents presented multiple and contradictory causes of death for “Tali Shani,” including hospital records, a road accident affidavit, and even a Thanksgiving service date that fell on a non-existent calendar day.
The UK tribunal was unsparing in its assessment. Applying the legal maxim fraus omnia corrumpit (“fraud unravels all”), Judge Ewan Paton rejected every document that could not withstand forensic and chronological scrutiny.
Two mutually exclusive ownership claims were placed before the court , both ultimately collapsing. The first painted “Ms. Tali Shani” as a wealthy woman who entrusted the property to Useni. Witnesses produced for this narrative gave conflicting testimonies about her life and death, offered no photographs, and could not reconcile basic facts.
The second narrative, advanced by Senior Advocate of Nigeria Mike Ozekhome SAN , claimed the property was gifted to him in 2021 by a “Mr. Tali Shani” in gratitude for legal services. The tribunal found this story implausible, citing the absence of documentary evidence of legal fees and the improbability of a young cattle farmer possessing such London property wealth in 1993.
Ironically, the most decisive evidence came from Useni himself. In a 2024 video deposition, he asserted plainly, “I owned it. I bought the property. It is my property.” Rental records from the early 2000s and testimony from the property’s London letting agent corroborated his account. Useni’s admissions together with Jersey court findings that he used aliases to hide assets left little doubt about the true beneficial owner.
The case raises difficult questions about professional ethics, particularly regarding Ozekhome’s role. As a top-ranking lawyer, he was expected to perform rigorous due diligence before accepting such a valuable “gift.” The tribunal’s characterization of his narrative as “contrived” casts a shadow over the integrity of legal practice when powerful clients are involved.
This dispute also exposes a systemic issue, the casual ease with which false identities and forged documents are generated in Nigeria. It reveals a culture where legal institutions are seen as tools to be bent rather than neutral arbiters of justice.
The tribunal’s decision was ultimately grounded in the nemo dat quod non habet principle no one can give what they do not have. Since the supposed “Mr. Tali Shani” never had legitimate title, he could not transfer it to Ozekhome. As a result, the property remains legally registered to a non-existent person, creating a peculiar form of legal limbo that future heirs must now resolve through probate.
The Randall Avenue saga is more than a family dispute over bricks and mortar it is a cautionary tale about the long tail of corruption. It highlights how wealth concealed decades earlier can generate legal and ethical complications for generations, and how modern forensic methods are finally catching up with yesterday’s impunity.
It also sends a message to Nigeria’s legal profession, the era of unquestioned deference to power is waning, and lawyers must balance loyalty to clients with a duty to the truth.
For ordinary Nigerians, cases like this carry heavy consequences. Every forged identity document presented abroad increases the level of suspicion faced by legitimate applicants. Yet this same case also showcased the competence of Nigerian institutions, as NIMC officials and police investigators played crucial roles in exposing fraud.
Internationally, the case strengthens the hand of jurisdictions committed to rooting out illicit financial flows. By refusing to validate a transaction built on fabricated identities, the UK tribunal has set a precedent that could deter similar schemes.
The Randall Avenue dispute stands as a testament to the persistence of history, a reminder that corruption’s consequences do not die with its perpetrators. It challenges Nigerian institutions, lawyers, and political elites to confront a painful truth, impunity has a long memory, and in the age of globalized justice, no fabricated identity or forged document is beyond eventual exposure.
The property remains in limbo, but the case has already served its higher purpose , forcing a reckoning with the past and demanding a higher standard of integrity for the future.
Post a Comment