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) successfully established the level of reasonable suspicion required by law to justify the forfeiture of the assets.
The court ruled that Malami, his family members and companies associated with the properties failed to rebut the EFCC’s allegation that the assets were acquired through proceeds of unlawful activities. Justice Abdulmalik also dismissed all applications and motions filed by the respondents, describing them as lacking merit.
According to the judge, the central issue before the court was not the ownership of the properties 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,” she stated, adding that the respondents failed to dispel the reasonable suspicion surrounding the source of the assets.
Invoking Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, the court granted the EFCC’s application for final forfeiture. However, the judge lifted the interim forfeiture order on some of the properties.
The EFCC had in January filed civil forfeiture proceedings seeking the permanent seizure of 57 properties valued at about ₦212.8 billion, alleging they were proceeds of unlawful activities linked to the former Attorney General.
An interim forfeiture order was earlier granted by Justice Emeka Nwite on January 16, with the commission directed to publish the order in a national newspaper to allow interested parties challenge the action. The affected properties are located in Abuja, Kano, Kebbi and Kaduna states.
Malami, his wife Nana Hadiza Malami, his son Abdulaziz Abubakar Malami and several companies linked to the assets challenged the interim order, insisting the properties were lawfully acquired. They argued that the EFCC failed to establish any connection between the assets and any criminal activity, relying instead on speculation.
The anti-graft agency, however, maintained that its investigation revealed the properties were purchased with proceeds of unlawful activities and held through individuals and companies acting as fronts for the former AGF. It further argued that civil forfeiture proceedings only require proof of reasonable suspicion rather than proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Following the adoption of final written addresses in May, Justice Abdulmalik reserved judgment. The ruling, initially scheduled for July 6 and later postponed twice, was eventually delivered on Wednesday, granting the EFCC’s application for the permanent forfeiture of 48 properties to the Federal Government.
