The Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the final forfeiture of more than 40 properties linked to former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, to the Federal Government.
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik delivered the judgment on Wednesday, granting the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission’s (EFCC) application after ruling that the respondents failed to rebut the reasonable suspicion that the assets were acquired through unlawful activities.
Before delivering the judgment, the court dismissed several applications and motions filed by Malami, members of his family, and companies associated with the properties, describing them as lacking merit.
Justice Abdulmalik held that the central issue before the court was not ownership of the properties but whether the funds used to acquire them were legitimate.
According to the judge, the respondents failed to disprove the EFCC’s allegation that the assets were proceeds of unlawful activities. She relied on Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act in making the final forfeiture order.
However, the court lifted the interim forfeiture order on some of the properties.
The EFCC initiated the civil forfeiture proceedings in January, seeking the permanent forfeiture of 57 properties valued at approximately ₦212.8 billion. The anti-graft agency alleged that the assets were proceeds of unlawful activities linked to the former justice minister.
On January 16, during the court’s annual vacation, Justice Emeka Nwite granted an interim forfeiture order and directed the EFCC to publish the order in a national newspaper to allow interested parties to challenge the action. The properties are located across Abuja, Kano, Kebbi and Kaduna states.
Following the publication, Malami, his wife Nana Hadiza Malami, his son Abdulaziz Abubakar Malami, and several companies linked to the assets challenged the order. They argued that the properties were lawfully acquired and that the EFCC failed to establish any connection between the assets and criminal activities.
The respondents also maintained that the commission relied on speculation rather than credible evidence and failed to identify any specific offence from which the assets were allegedly derived.
After the court resumed from its annual vacation, the case was reassigned to Justice Abdulmalik for hearing.
During the proceedings, the EFCC maintained that its investigation showed the properties were purchased with proceeds of unlawful activities and held in the names of individuals and companies acting as fronts for Malami.
The commission argued that under the law, it was only required to establish reasonable suspicion, rather than prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt, to secure a civil forfeiture order.
After both parties adopted their final written addresses in May, the court reserved judgment. Although the ruling was initially scheduled for July 6, it was postponed twice before Justice Abdulmalik delivered the final decision on Wednesday.
