Reported by: Ijeoma G | Edited by: Gabriel Osa
Abuja, Nigeria — A Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court has upheld the continued detention of former Attorney‑General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN), by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and dismissed his bid for bail, intensifying a high‑profile legal and political standoff. The ruling, delivered on Thursday, affirmed that Malami’s custody is lawful and grounded in an existing remand order.
Justice Babangida Hassan, presiding over the Federal High Court in Abuja, refused the bail application filed by Malami’s legal team, ruling that the court had no jurisdiction to reconsider or overturn a remand order previously issued by another court of equal standing. The judge emphasised that Malami’s continued detention is supported by valid legal authority and noted procedural and jurisdictional barriers to granting bail in the circumstances.
Malami, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria and one of the country’s most prominent legal and political figures, had petitioned the court through his counsel, arguing that his ongoing detention by the EFCC amounted to unlawful deprivation of his fundamental right to liberty. He contended that the anti‑graft agency had not complied with constitutional safeguards and due process. However, the court determined that the remand order provided the Commission with lawful grounds to hold him as investigations continue.
In opposing the bail request, lawyers representing the EFCC maintained that the detention aligns strictly with Nigerian law, pointing to a remand order granted by another division of the FCT High Court. EFCC counsel argued that the agency acted within the provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) and the Constitution, asserting that Malami’s detention does not exceed the legal limits allowed under the remand order.
The public legal battle has drawn significant national attention, as Malami has been in EFCC custody for several days amid a sprawling anti‑corruption and financial crimes investigation. Although details of the specific allegations have not been fully disclosed in open court, multiple reports indicate that the former AGF is being probed over issues that include alleged money laundering, abuse of office, and matters linked to recovered assets, including those connected to the infamous Abacha loot recovery.
Malami’s detention and failed bail bid mark a pivotal moment in the protracted standoff between the former minister and Nigeria’s foremost anti‑corruption agency. Prior to the bail application, Malami had publicly challenged aspects of his treatment, suggesting that conditions tied to his earlier administrative bail were onerous or procedurally unfair, and hinting at political motivations behind the investigation — claims that the EFCC has repeatedly denied.
The EFCC has maintained that its actions are apolitical and strictly within the bounds of the law, emphasising that Malami was granted preliminary administrative bail which he allegedly failed to perfect before reporting for continued interrogation. The agency has reiterated that it adheres to the rule of law and that no suspect is held beyond lawful limits without appropriate court orders.
Security and legal analysts say the court’s decision to uphold the EFCC’s position reflects a strict interpretation of legal procedure, particularly the principle that one court of coordinate jurisdiction should not act as an appellate forum for decisions made by another. They add that such a stance reinforces judicial deference to existing orders when procedural and jurisdictional rules are properly observed.
Malami’s supporters and legal team have decried the ruling, framing his continued detention as an affront to due process and a potential overreach. They have signalled intentions to explore further legal options, including appeals, to challenge both the detention and the underlying remand order. Yet, in the immediate aftermath of the ruling, the former AGF remains in EFCC custody as investigations proceed.
The implications of the High Court’s decision extend beyond a single case, igniting debate across legal, political, and civil society forums about judicial independence, executive influence in anti‑corruption efforts, and the balance between law enforcement imperatives and individual rights. Critics of the EFCC’s approach warn that high‑profile detentions without charge or trial could erode public confidence in the justice system, while proponents argue that stringent action against alleged financial misconduct at the highest levels is essential to curb entrenched corruption.
The ruling arrives amid heightened scrutiny of Nigeria’s judiciary and anti‑graft agencies, with several stakeholders calling for expanded transparency and procedural safeguards. As the matter progresses, observers will be watching for developments in Malami’s legal defence strategy, potential appeals, and any movements toward formal charges or trial proceedings.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments