A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the final forfeiture of 48 properties linked to former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, to the Federal Government.
In a judgment delivered on Wednesday, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik held that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) established the “reasonable suspicion” required under the law to justify the forfeiture, ruling that Malami, his family members and associated companies failed to prove the assets were lawfully acquired.
The judge dismissed all objections and applications filed by the respondents, stating that the key issue was not 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,” Justice Abdulmalik ruled, adding that the respondents had not rebutted the EFCC’s allegations that the assets were proceeds of unlawful activities.
Relying on Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, the court granted the EFCC’s application for final forfeiture. However, it discharged the interim forfeiture order on some of the properties.
The EFCC had filed civil forfeiture proceedings in January, seeking the permanent seizure of 57 properties valued at about N212.8 billion, located across Abuja, Kano, Kebbi and Kaduna states, alleging they were acquired with proceeds of unlawful activities.
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 and arguing that the EFCC failed to establish a link between the assets and any specific criminal offence.
The anti-graft agency maintained that civil forfeiture proceedings require only reasonable suspicion, not proof beyond reasonable doubt and argued that its investigation showed the properties were held through individuals and companies acting as fronts.
After hearing final arguments in May, the court reserved judgment before delivering its ruling on Wednesday.