Reported by: Ijeoma G | Edited by: Oravbiere Osayomore Promise.
The Federal High Court in Abuja has adjourned until Friday, 10 July 2026, its judgment in the high-stakes forfeiture suit filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) seeking the permanent forfeiture of 57 properties allegedly linked to former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, SAN. Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, who had initially fixed Monday, 6 July 2026, for the ruling after the parties adopted their final written addresses on 26 May 2026, postponed the judgment without stating a reason for the adjournment. The case, which was listed as number four on Monday's cause list, was among four matters assigned fresh dates out of the 13 cases scheduled before the court.
The EFCC is seeking a final order forfeiting the 57 properties to the Federal Government, contending that they are reasonably suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities. The commission had previously secured an interim forfeiture order on 6 January 2026, when Justice Emeka Nwite, who was then presiding over the case, granted the order following an ex-parte motion moved by EFCC counsel, Ekele Iheanacho, SAN. The properties, valued at approximately N213.2 billion, are located across Abuja, Kebbi, Kano, and Kaduna states. The EFCC has argued that Malami could never have legitimately owned the properties, largely acquired during his eight years in office as the Attorney-General.
At the proceedings leading to the judgment date, EFCC counsel Jibrin Okutepa, SAN, urged the court to grant the commission's application, which was filed in February 2026 and supported by a 47-paragraph affidavit with 46 documentary exhibits contained in three volumes. Okutepa argued that the respondents had failed to satisfactorily explain the legitimate sources of funds used to acquire the properties, insisting that they had "woefully failed to show cause" why the assets should not be permanently forfeited. He maintained that the commission had established sufficient grounds to believe the properties were proceeds of unlawful activities and urged the court to grant the final forfeiture order.
However, counsel to Malami and the other respondents, Adedayo Adedeji, SAN, urged the court to dismiss the EFCC's application and vacate the earlier interim forfeiture order. Adedeji informed the court that Malami personally deposed to a 109-paragraph affidavit filed in opposition to the commission's application, insisting that the respondents had demonstrated that the properties were lawfully acquired and not proceeds of crime. He argued that the EFCC's case was based largely on suspicion rather than admissible evidence, submitting that "the court deals with evidence, not suspicion". The senior advocate further contended that the EFCC relied on extra-judicial statements ordinarily meant to be tested through cross-examination during criminal proceedings, arguing that such materials could not properly determine the issues before the court in a civil forfeiture case.
Adedeji also maintained that several of the disputed properties had been acquired before Malami assumed office as Attorney-General of the Federation, and therefore could not reasonably be linked to alleged proceeds of crime. He urged the court to set aside the earlier interim order, holding that the respondents had shown that the properties "were not acquired from proceeds of crime". In addition, Adedeji filed separate counter-affidavits and further affidavits on behalf of other respondents and companies joined in the suit, all opposing the application for final forfeiture. Lawyers representing the other individuals and corporate entities equally urged the court to dismiss the EFCC's application, insisting that their clients had sufficiently accounted for the ownership and lawful acquisition of the assets.
The case is one of several high-profile asset recovery proceedings initiated by the EFCC against former public office holders and politically exposed persons as part of its anti-corruption drive. Beyond the asset forfeiture proceedings, Malami, his wife, Bashir Asabe, and his son, Abubakar Abdulaziz, are also facing an alleged N8.7 billion money laundering charge before Justice Nwite. The judgment, now scheduled for 10 July 2026, is expected to determine whether the court will grant the EFCC's request for the permanent forfeiture of the 57 properties or uphold Malami's objections and dismiss the application. The decision is likely to be closely watched by legal practitioners, anti-corruption advocates, and political observers, given Malami's prominent role as Nigeria's chief law officer during the administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari. The ruling could also provide further judicial guidance on the evidentiary threshold required in civil asset forfeiture proceedings brought under Nigeria's anti-corruption laws.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters News | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments