Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the final forfeiture of more than 40 properties linked to Abubakar Malami, the former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice.
The judge granted the application filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCS) after ruling that the respondents failed to disprove the reasonable suspicion that the assets were acquired using funds from unlawful activities.
Before delivering her final judgment, Justice Abdulmalik dismissed several applications, motions on notice, and applications to show cause filed by Mr. Malami, his family members, and various companies linked to the assets, labeling them as “wanting in merit.”
She emphasized that the core issue before the court was not the identity of the property owners, but rather the legitimacy of the funds used for their purchase.
According to the judge, the respondents had “not dislodged the reasonable suspicion that the property was acquired by unlawful activities”.
In granting the final forfeiture order, Justice Abdulmalik relied primarily on Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act. She did, however, lift the interim forfeiture order on a few of the listed properties.
The legal battle began in January when the EFCC initiated civil forfeiture proceedings, seeking the permanent seizure of 57 properties valued at ₦212.8 billion, which the anti-graft agency alleged were proceeds of unlawful activities tied to the former AGF.
On January 16, during the Federal High Court’s annual vacation, vacation judge Emeka Nwite granted an interim forfeiture order on the assets.
He directed the EFCC to publish the order in a national daily so that any interested party could appear before the court to show cause why the assets should not be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government.
The properties in question are scattered across Abuja, Kano, Kebbi, and Kaduna states.
Following the newspaper publication, Mr. Malami, his wife Nana Hadiza Malami, his son Abdulaziz Abubakar Malami, and several associated companies filed objections.
They urged the court to dismiss the EFCC’s case and lift the interim order, claiming it was granted in error.
The respondents maintained that the assets were acquired legally and accused the EFCC of relying on speculation rather than credible evidence.
They argued that the commission failed to link the properties to any specific crime or prove they were proceeds of illegal acts.
Once the court’s vacation ended, the case was reassigned to Justice Abdulmalik. During the proceedings, the EFCC argued that its investigations proved the properties were acquired through unlawful means and registered under fronts, including individuals and companies connected to Malami.
The commission urged the court to make the temporary forfeiture permanent, pointing out that, under the law, it only needed to establish “reasonable suspicion” rather than proof “beyond reasonable doubt.”
Both parties adopted their final written addresses in late May, after which the court reserved its judgment.
Originally scheduled for July 6, the ruling was postponed twice before being delivered on Wednesday.
