Firm reveals link to Abacha case

The connection between Watford firm Matthew Arnold & Baldwin and the billion-pound Abacha fraud case in which it was recently named as a defendant emerged this week.The firm has received a demand for financial information as part of an action brought by the Nigerian government - advised by City firm DJ Freeman - against 106 defendants, including many well-known City institutions (see [2001] Gazette, 4 October, 3).Matthew Arnold acted for a man now alleged to be a front-man for the Abacha family as well as a member of the Abacha family who went by a different name.Between them, they bought three leases of London properties through the firm between 1997 to 1998.Alan Piper, a partner at the firm, said: 'It is possible we were handling some of this money that the Nigerian government alleges was stolen and salted away all over the world.'He said there was no cause to be suspicious at the time the leases were bought, but in February this year the firm received a payment into its client account of 36,000 from Standard Chartered Bank, following instructions received by the bank.The firm could think of no reason why this money had been deposited, and immediately reported the matter to the National Criminal Intelligence Service, Mr Piper said.He added: 'The firm has nothing to be embarrassed about - we have procedures in place and we implemented them.'Meanwhile, policymakers at the Home Office are looking specifically at the scope for delay in extraditing material from the UK caused by judicial review proceedings.This follows the failure last week of the Abachas to block parallel mutual assistance proceedings against them in London.The High Court agreed to Nigerian and Swiss requests for banking information relating to the alleged 2 billion theft by the late dictator Sani Abacha and family members, refusing to overturn an earlier Home Office decision.The attempted judicial review of the mutual assistance request has lasted almost a year.Dechert - the City firm acting for the Abachas - may attempt a further judicial review after the Serious Fraud Office has provided mutual assistance documentation to the Home Office.

But Home Office fears probably centre on the scope for delay inother cases, especially those relating to extradition of terrorists and information relating to the current conflict in Afghanistan.Jeremy Fleming