Key points
- A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the final forfeiture of 48 properties linked to former Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami (SAN), to the Federal Government.
- The court held that the EFCC established the reasonable suspicion required under the law for civil forfeiture.
- Malami, his family members and associated companies failed to rebut allegations that the assets were acquired with proceeds of unlawful activities, the court ruled.
- Some properties were excluded from the forfeiture after the court discharged the interim order relating to them.
Main Story
The 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 (SAN), to the Federal Government.
Delivering judgment on Wednesday, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik held that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had established the reasonable suspicion required under Nigerian law to justify the permanent forfeiture of the assets.
The court ruled that Malami, his family members and companies associated with the properties failed to disprove the commission’s claim that the assets were acquired with proceeds of unlawful activities.
Justice Abdulmalik dismissed several applications and motions filed by the respondents, describing them as lacking merit.
She held that the central issue before the court was not ownership of the assets but whether the funds used to acquire them were legitimate.
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, the court discharged the interim forfeiture order in respect of some of the properties that were initially covered by the proceedings.
The Issues
The case highlights the use of civil forfeiture proceedings in recovering assets suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities.
Unlike criminal trials, civil forfeiture proceedings require the anti-graft agency to establish reasonable suspicion that assets were unlawfully acquired, rather than proving criminal guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The judgment also underscores the burden on respondents to demonstrate the lawful origin of assets once the court is satisfied that sufficient grounds exist for forfeiture proceedings.
What’s Being Said
Justice Abdulmalik said the dispute before the court centred on the source of the funds used to acquire the assets.
“The issue before the court is not who owns the property, but how legitimate the funds used to acquire the properties are.”
She further held that the respondents had “not dislodged the reasonable suspicion that the property was acquired by unlawful activities.”
The EFCC argued that its investigations showed the properties were acquired with proceeds of unlawful activities and held through individuals and companies allegedly acting as fronts for Malami.
The commission maintained that the applicable law only required it to establish reasonable suspicion to support a civil forfeiture application.
The respondents, however, argued that the assets were lawfully acquired and contended that the EFCC failed to establish any direct link between the properties and specific criminal offences.
More Insights
The forfeiture proceedings began in January 2026 when the EFCC sought the permanent forfeiture of 57 properties valued at about N212.8 billion.
An interim forfeiture order was granted on January 16 by Justice Emeka Nwite, who directed the commission to publish the order to allow interested parties to challenge the application.
Following the publication, Malami, his wife Nana Hadiza Malami, his son Abdulaziz Abubakar Malami and several companies linked to the assets opposed the forfeiture.
After the court’s annual vacation, the matter was reassigned to Justice Abdulmalik, who reserved judgment after final written addresses were adopted in May.
Among the assets forfeited are Rayhaan University in Kebbi State, Rayhaan Agro Allied Factory, Azbir Arena, Zeennoor Hotel in Kano, hotels, commercial plazas, filling stations, warehouses, estates, residential buildings and other properties located across Abuja, Kano, Kebbi and Kaduna states.
According to the EFCC, ownership of the 48 forfeited properties has now vested in the Federal Government.
What’s Next
The forfeited assets are expected to be transferred to the Federal Government in line with the court’s order.
The respondents retain the legal right to challenge the judgment at the Court of Appeal if they choose to do so.
Meanwhile, Malami is separately standing trial alongside his wife and son over alleged fraud involving N8.7 billion, proceedings that are independent of the civil forfeiture case.
Bottom Line
The Federal High Court’s decision marks one of the most significant civil asset forfeiture rulings in recent years, transferring 48 properties linked to former Attorney General Abubakar Malami to the Federal Government. While the ruling concerns the legitimacy of the assets rather than criminal liability, it represents another milestone in the EFCC’s asset recovery efforts, subject to any appeal by the respondents.
