Britain's National Crime Agency wants to know where Hajiyeva got the money to fund her Harrods shopping sprees and buy two United Kingdom properties worth 22 million pounds ($29 million).
An Azerbaijani woman who spent £16 million (US$20.87 million) at London's up-market Harrods department store and was the first to be targeted by new British legislation on "unexplained wealth" was freed on bail Thursday (Nov 8) as she fights an extradition request by Baku.
The National Crime Agency accused Ms Hajiyeva of fleeing her home country to avoid criminal investigations.
Zamira Hajiyeva, 55, is the wife of an ex-state banker who is serving a 15-year prison sentence for embezzlement in their home country of Azerbaijan.More news: Rams' Marcus Peters to Saints' Sean Payton: 'Keep talking'
A judge at Westminster magistrates court ruled on Tuesday that Hajiyeva could be released on bail under certain conditions, including remaining at her Knightsbridge home, reporting to police daily and paying a £500,000 bond. Harrods department Store in Knightsbridge where Hajiyeva is said to have spent more than £16 million over a decade.
People who fail to account for the sources of their assets are liable to have assets seized.
Police first went after Mrs Hajiyeva in February but her lawyers had claimed that her husband was the victim of an unfair trial.
Last week the agency, which investigates cross-border and organized crime, seized 49 items of jewelry worth 400,000 pounds from Christie's auction house, where Hajiyeva's daughter had taken them to be valued. She will will appeal the decision to refuse her bail at London's High Court today, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said.More news: Tuukka Rask granted leave of absence for personal matter
Her husband was the chairman of the state-controlled International Bank of Azerbaijan from 2001 until his resignation in 2015, and was subsequently jailed for fraud and embezzlement.
Hajiyeva has denied any wrongdoing.
The UWO means she has to explain the origin of her fortune.
They said the UWO was part of an investigative process, not a criminal procedure, and did not involve the finding of any criminal offence, and they said an application to appeal against the judge's order had been filed.More news: Saints fear Achilles tear for Bryant