Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the final forfeiture of more than 40 properties linked to former Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, SAN.
The judge granted the application filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) after holding that the respondents failed to rebut the reasonable suspicion that the properties were acquired through unlawful activities.
Before delivering the substantive judgment on Wednesday, Justice Abdulmalik dismissed several applications, motions on notice, and applications to show cause filed by the former AGF, his family members, and some companies linked to the properties, describing them as “wanting in merit.”
She held that the issue before the court was not “who owns the property, but how legitimate are the funds used to acquire the properties,” and found that the respondents had “not dislodged the reasonable suspicion that the properties were acquired through unlawful activities.”
Justice Abdulmalik relied on Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act in granting the final forfeiture order.
She, however, vacated the interim forfeiture order in respect of some properties.
The anti-graft agency had filed the civil forfeiture proceedings in January, seeking the permanent forfeiture of 57 properties valued at N212.8 billion, which it alleged were proceeds of unlawful activities linked to Malami.
On January 16, during the Federal High Court’s annual vacation, the vacation judge, Justice Emeka Nwite, granted an interim forfeiture order over the properties.
Justice Nwite also directed the EFCC to publish the order in a national newspaper, inviting anyone with an interest in the assets to appear before the court and show cause why they should not be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government.
The properties are located in Abuja, Kano, Kebbi, and Kaduna states.
Following the publication, Malami, his wife, Nana Hadiza Malami; his son, Abdulaziz Abubakar Malami; and several companies linked to the properties filed objections, urging the court to dismiss the EFCC’s application and set aside the interim forfeiture order on the ground that it was wrongly granted.
They also argued that the properties were lawfully acquired and that the EFCC failed to establish any connection between the assets and any unlawful activity.
The respondents further argued that the EFCC relied on speculation rather than credible evidence and maintained that the Commission neither proved that the properties were proceeds of crime nor identified any specific criminal offence from which the assets were derived.
After the Federal High Court resumed from its annual vacation, the case was reassigned to Justice Joyce Abdulmalik for hearing and determination.
At the hearing, the EFCC maintained that its investigation showed that the properties were acquired with proceeds of unlawful activities and held in the names of individuals and companies acting as fronts for Malami.
The Commission urged the court to make the interim forfeiture order final, arguing that, under the law, it only needed to establish “reasonable suspicion” and not prove its case “beyond reasonable doubt.”
In late May, both sides adopted their final written addresses, after which Justice Abdulmalik reserved judgment.
The court initially fixed July 6, 2026, for judgment but later postponed the decision twice before delivering its ruling on Wednesday.
