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 to justify the forfeiture.
- Justice Joyce Abdulmalik ruled that the respondents failed to prove the assets were acquired through legitimate means.
- The forfeited assets include universities, hotels, commercial buildings, filling stations and other high-value properties across four states.
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 in one of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission’s (EFCC) biggest civil asset recovery cases.
Delivering judgment on Wednesday, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik held that the anti-graft agency had established the reasonable suspicion required under Nigerian law to justify the permanent forfeiture of the assets.
The judge ruled that Malami, his family members and companies linked to the properties failed to rebut the EFCC’s allegation that the assets were acquired with proceeds of unlawful activities.
Justice Abdulmalik also dismissed several applications and motions filed by the respondents, describing them as lacking merit.
She held that the issue before the court was not ownership of the properties but whether the funds used to acquire them were lawfully obtained.
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 while discharging the interim forfeiture order in respect of some of the properties initially covered by the proceedings.
The Issues
The ruling reinforces the growing use of civil forfeiture proceedings by anti-corruption agencies to recover assets suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities.
Unlike criminal prosecutions, civil forfeiture proceedings require investigators to establish reasonable suspicion that assets are linked to unlawful conduct rather than proving criminal guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The judgment also highlights the judiciary’s role in determining whether respondents have sufficiently demonstrated the legitimate source of wealth used to acquire disputed assets.
What’s Being Said
Justice Abdulmalik said the focus of the proceedings was the legitimacy of the funds used to acquire the properties.
“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 investigations showed the properties were purchased with proceeds of unlawful activities and held in the names of individuals and companies allegedly acting as fronts for Malami.
The respondents, however, maintained that the assets were lawfully acquired and argued that the commission failed to establish any direct nexus between the properties and specific criminal offences.
More Insights
The forfeiture proceedings commenced 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 by Justice Emeka Nwite on January 16, after which the commission published 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 contested the application.
Among the properties forfeited are Rayhaan University in Kebbi State, Rayhaan Agro Allied Factory, Azbir Arena, Zeennoor Hotel in Kano, filling stations, commercial plazas, warehouses, estates, luxury residential buildings and other properties spread across Abuja, Kano, Kebbi and Kaduna states.
According to the EFCC, ownership of the 48 forfeited assets has now vested in the Federal Government.
What’s Next
The Federal Government is expected to take possession of the forfeited properties in accordance with the court’s judgment.
The respondents may exercise their right of appeal if they choose to challenge the ruling.
Meanwhile, Malami remains on trial in a separate criminal case alongside his wife and son over an alleged N8.7 billion fraud, a proceeding that is independent of the civil forfeiture action.
Bottom Line
The Federal High Court’s ruling marks a significant milestone in the EFCC’s asset recovery campaign, transferring 48 properties linked to former Attorney General Abubakar Malami to the Federal Government. While the decision relates to civil forfeiture rather than criminal liability, it underscores the increasing use of asset recovery laws in Nigeria’s anti-corruption framework.
