In the law of contract, when someone (a guarantor) indemnifies another party (the borrower) and guarantees the payment of a loan, the guarantor becomes liable for the debt if the borrower defaults. This is precisely what happened in a case that some individuals are now attempting to twist and take out of context—trying to make a mountain out of a molehill and send the wrong signal to the public that Hon. Oden Ewa did something wrong.
Hon. Oden Ewa was merely a guarantor of a loan of ₦209,811,317.76 taken from Diamond Bank by a company known as Internex Limited. His role was to guarantee repayment in the event the borrower failed to pay. There is no scintilla of criminality in Suit No. HUG/101/2017 between Diamond Bank and Internex Ltd, John Effiong Uma, Oden Ewa, Mrs. Rita Uma, and Glory Uma (for themselves and on behalf of the administrators of John Uma’s estate).
In the Writ of Summons filed by the Claimant, Diamond Bank sought the following reliefs:
1. The sum of ₦209,811,317.78 (Two Hundred and Nine Million, Eight Hundred and Eleven Thousand, Three Hundred and Seventy-Eight Kobo) being the principal sum borrowed by the Defendants, plus interest as of 30 November 2016.
2. Interest at the rate of 20% per annum on the above sum until the date of judgment.
3. Interest at the rate of 10% per annum on the judgment sum until it is fully liquidated.
4. The sum of ₦1,000,000.00 being the cost of prosecuting the proceedings.
On 30 September 2025, Honourable Justice Ebuta of the High Court, Calabar, found in favour of the Claimant. However, nowhere in the judgment did the Judge state that the 3rd Defendant—Honourable Oden Ewa—committed any fraud.
The only mention of the word “fraud” appears in paragraph 12.5 on page 23 of the judgment, where the Learned Counsel to the 4th and 5th Defendants submitted that the Claimant failed to respond to the issue of fraud raised by the 4th and 5th Defendants, alleging that Diamond Bank’s third-party mortgage was fraudulently procured.
On page 37 of the judgment, the Learned Trial Judge held:
“I find and hold that by the totality of the evidence adduced by the Claimant and the 4th and 5th Defendants, the 4th and 5th Defendants have established their counterclaim that the mortgage property forms part of the estate of late Chief John Uma. In the absence of a valid third-party mortgage, it is void ab initio. I hereby set aside the Tripartite Legal Mortgage executed between the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Defendants.”
In summary, Honourable Oden Ewa did not borrow money from Diamond Bank. He merely guaranteed the loan collected by the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Defendants out of kindness and generosity.
Conclusion:
The narrative being peddled by hatchet men and junk online platforms—paid to smear Hon. Ewa with allegations of fraudulent activity—is nothing but fiction and, indeed, a fable. The facts and the judgment speak for themselves.
@ Obol Okoi Obono-Obla