A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the extradition of Nigerian national, Temitope Seyi Omotade, to the United States to face trial over allegations of mail fraud, wire fraud, conspiracy and aggravated identity theft.
Justice Peter Lifu issued the order in a judgment dismissing Omotade’s objections to the extradition request filed by the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF). The judge also rejected his bail application, which was filed on September 16.
Key Highlights
- Federal High Court in Abuja orders Temitope Seyi Omotade’s extradition to the United States.
- Omotade is wanted over a five-count indictment involving alleged mail fraud, wire fraud, conspiracy and aggravated identity theft.
- The US case was filed in the District of Minnesota on February 8, 2022.
- Omotade denied the allegations and challenged the evidence presented by the Federal Government.
- The court rejected his medical concerns, ruling that he failed to establish sufficient grounds to prevent extradition.
- Justice Peter Lifu also dismissed Omotade’s bail application.
US seeks Omotade’s trial over five-count indictment
Omotade is wanted by the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota over a five-count indictment filed on February 8, 2022, in case number 22-CR-24 SRN/HB.
The charges comprise three counts of alleged mail and wire fraud, alongside two counts of aggravated identity theft and aiding and abetting.
Under the relevant US laws, each of the first three counts carries a maximum prison sentence of 30 years, while the aggravated identity theft charges carry a maximum of two years each, to run consecutively to any other prison sentence imposed.
The Attorney-General of the Federation had approached the Nigerian court seeking Omotade’s extradition, arguing that the request was supported by diplomatic notes from the US government, a sealed indictment and an arrest warrant issued by the Minnesota court.
The Federal Government maintained that it had fulfilled all statutory requirements under the Extradition Act, insisting that the offences were neither political nor trivial and that the request was made in good faith. It also told the court that the extradition documents contained the necessary certifications, affidavits from US officials, copies of relevant American laws and Omotade’s passport details.
The AGF further argued that there were no pending criminal proceedings against Omotade in Nigeria over the offences and that adequate assurances had been obtained concerning his treatment and trial in the United States.
Omotade denies fraud allegations, questions evidence
However, Omotade opposed the extradition application, urging the court to reject the Federal Government’s request.
In a counter-affidavit filed through his lawyer, he denied involvement in mail fraud, wire fraud, conspiracy and aggravated identity theft. He also denied having any criminal agreement or participating in digital financial transactions with a woman identified as Roxanne Gilbert.
Omotade argued that the Federal Government had failed to present substantive evidence linking him to the alleged offences. He claimed that the extradition documents did not contain blockchain analysis, financial transaction records, chat messages or video call evidence.
He maintained that the documents relied heavily on identification materials, including his passport details and an airway bill, rather than evidence establishing his alleged involvement in the crimes. He also raised concerns that third parties might have used his identity without his knowledge.
Read also:
- Nigerian Man Olamide Shanu Pleads Guilty To $2.5m US Romance Fraud Scheme
- EFCC Appeals Court Ruling Rejecting Forfeiture of $912,550, Properties Linked to Ex-Warri Refinery MD
- Man Jailed Two Years for Spending ₦21.9m Mistakenly Credited to Bank Account
Court rejects medical grounds against extradition
Beyond denying the allegations, Omotade informed the court that he was receiving specialist medical treatment for hepatic steatosis, commonly known as fatty liver, and elevated liver function.
He argued that extraditing him would be unjust, oppressive and disproportionate, given his health condition and the physical demands associated with international transfer and detention.
However, Justice Lifu rejected the argument, ruling that Omotade had failed to provide sufficient evidence showing that extradition would expose him to grave and unavoidable medical risks. The judge held that the evidence before the court did not establish that the medical treatment required by Omotade would be unavailable in the United States.
He agreed with the AGF that medical facilities were available in the requesting country and that Omotade had not discharged the burden of proving that his extradition would be practically unjust or oppressive.
“In the absence of sufficient evidence establishing the asserted degree of risk, I am unable to hold that the respondent’s medical condition, standing alone, constitutes a legal bar to surrender in this case,” the judge said.
Judge says extradition is not determination of guilt
Justice Lifu also held that there was insufficient evidence to establish that the extradition request was intended to prosecute or punish Omotade because of his race, religion, nationality or political opinions.
He said the court had considered the restrictions under Section 3 of the Extradition Act but found no legal basis to prevent his surrender to US authorities.
The judge stressed that extradition proceedings were not designed to determine the guilt or innocence of a person before trial. Rather, they are intended to establish whether the statutory conditions for surrender have been satisfied. According to him, Omotade would have the opportunity to challenge the allegations against him under the applicable laws and judicial procedures in the United States.
“The objections raised by the respondent do not, on the evidence and arguments presented, constitute sufficient grounds for refusing the application,” he ruled.
Justice Lifu subsequently ordered Omotade’s extradition to the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota to face the five-count indictment. The court also dismissed his bail application.
Omotade’s extradition order does not amount to a conviction. He remains entitled to defend himself against the allegations before the US court.
For more court and crime news, follow us on X.
