The Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the permanent forfeiture of 48 properties linked to former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, to the Federal Government.
Delivering judgment on Wednesday, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik held that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) established sufficient reasonable suspicion to justify the forfeiture under the law.
The judge ruled that Malami, members of his family and companies associated with the properties failed to rebut the EFCC’s claim that the assets were acquired with proceeds of unlawful activities.
Justice Abdulmalik dismissed all applications and motions filed by the respondents challenging the forfeiture proceedings, describing them as lacking merit.
She stressed that the central issue before the court was not ownership of the assets but whether the funds used to acquire them were legitimate.
“The issue before the court is not who owns the property, but how legitimate are the funds used to acquire the property,” the judge held, adding that the respondents failed to dispel the reasonable suspicion surrounding the assets.
Relying on Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, the court granted the EFCC’s application for final forfeiture of the 48 properties.
However, it discharged the interim forfeiture order on some of the remaining assets.
The anti-graft agency had in January sought the permanent forfeiture of 57 properties valued at about ₦212.8 billion, alleging they were proceeds of unlawful activities linked to the former justice minister.
The assets, located across Abuja, Kano, Kebbi and Kaduna states, were initially placed under an interim forfeiture order by Justice Emeka Nwite, who also directed the EFCC to publish the order to allow interested parties to contest the action.
Malami, his wife Nana Hadiza Malami, his son Abdulaziz Abubakar Malami and several companies subsequently challenged the order, insisting the properties were lawfully acquired and arguing that the EFCC failed to establish any link between the assets and any criminal activity.
The respondents also contended that the commission relied on speculation rather than credible evidence and did not identify any specific offence from which the assets were allegedly derived.
Following the court’s annual vacation, the matter was reassigned to Justice Abdulmalik, who heard arguments from both parties before reserving judgment in May.
Although the judgment was initially scheduled for July 6, it was twice postponed before Wednesday’s final ruling.
