Reported by: Ijeoma G | Edited by: Gabriel Osa
Abuja — In a significant development in one of Nigeria’s high‑profile anti‑corruption cases, the Federal High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja has granted interim bail to Abubakar Malami, SAN, the former Attorney‑General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, in a matter involving the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). The case has been adjourned to 5th January 2026 for the hearing of a substantive motion on notice.
The ruling was delivered on 23 December 2025 by Justice Bello Kawu while presiding over Motion No: M/17220/2025. In his ruling, the judge granted Malami’s application for interim bail on the basis of exceptional hardship, allowing him temporary release from custody as the court prepares to hear further arguments.
Under the terms of the bail order, which mirrored conditions earlier proposed by the EFCC, Malami was required to surrender his international passport and execute bail bonds with two sureties. The court accepted as sureties the Director‑General of the Nigerian Legal Aid Council and a serving member of the House of Representatives representing the Augie/Argungu Federal Constituency. The bail conditions, which had been initially fulfilled on 28 November 2025, were reviewed and reactivated by Justice Kawu.
The adjournment to early January 2026 marks the next procedural milestone in the litigation, giving both the prosecution and defence teams further time to prepare for the substantive motion on notice that will determine whether Malami’s interim bail should stand until trial or if additional conditions should be imposed.
Malami served as Nigeria’s Attorney‑General and Minister of Justice from 2015 to 2023, under President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration. He has been in the spotlight of intensive investigation by the EFCC, which accuses him of multiple alleged offences, including money laundering, abuse of office, and other financial irregularities connected with his tenure. While specific details of the charges remain partly sealed or subject to court confidentiality, reports indicate that investigators have looked into high‑value financial transactions and alleged mismanagement of public funds, including dealings related to recovered loots from the era of the late Head of State, General Sani Abacha.
Prior to the interim bail ruling, Malami had been in EFCC custody after reportedly failing to meet stringent bail conditions initially set by the agency. The anti‑graft commission had at one point detained him after he could not fulfil the requirements originally imposed for his provisional release. However, his legal team successfully argued that continued detention without formal resolution of bail conditions amounted to “exceptional hardship,” prompting the court’s intervention.
The EFCC has maintained that its investigations into Malami’s conduct are apolitical and strictly rooted in evidence, dismissing claims that any enforcement actions were influenced by external factors or political considerations. In a recent statement responding to Malami’s public assertions, the commission emphasised that administrative bail is a discretionary provision and that his inability to meet specified requirements justified continued detention before the court intervened.
Legal analysts say interim bail rulings in high‑profile cases such as this are not uncommon, especially where the court is convinced that the continued incarceration of a defendant pending preliminary legal arguments would be unjust. Such decisions do not signify any determination of guilt or innocence but are meant to strike a balance between individual rights and the interests of justice.
The adjourned date of 5 January 2026 will now be pivotal, as the High Court is expected to hear the motion on notice that could shape the trajectory of Malami’s defence strategy and the timeline of subsequent court proceedings. Both prosecution and defence counsel are likely to present comprehensive legal arguments regarding bail continuity, evidentiary demands, and potential conditions for further release or detention ahead of trial.
Observers of Nigeria’s legal and political landscape have noted that the case carries broader implications for anti‑corruption enforcement, judicial independence, and the accountability of public officials. The manner in which the court navigates procedural fairness while handling complex financial crime allegations against a former chief law officer will be closely watched by civil society organisations, legal experts, and the international community.
As developments unfold toward the January hearing, stakeholders from various quarters — including governance advocates and anti‑graft campaigners — continue to call for transparent judicial processes and adherence to the rule of law, emphasising that high‑profile cases must be resolved on the strength of evidence and legal merits.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments