Keypoints:
- Court forfeits 48 linked properties
- Nine properties escape final order
- Separate criminal case remains unresolved
NIGERIA’S Federal High Court has ordered the final forfeiture of 48 properties linked to former attorney-general Abubakar Malami after finding that the assets were reasonably suspected to have been acquired through unlawful activities rather than legitimate income.
The ruling gives the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission a major civil asset-recovery victory involving a former chief law officer. It does not constitute a criminal conviction against Malami, his relatives or the companies connected to the properties.
What’s changing?
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik delivered the judgment in Abuja on July 15, ordering the 48 properties permanently transferred to the federal government.
The International Centre for Investigative Reporting said the court found that Malami, members of his family and companies linked to the assets had failed to rebut the reasonable suspicion raised by the EFCC.
‘The issue before the court is not who owns the property, but how legitimate are the funds used to acquire the property,’ Abdulmalik said.
The disputed properties are spread across Abuja, Kano, Kebbi and Kaduna states, giving the order substantial geographic and financial reach.
The EFCC’s original application covered 57 properties valued collectively at about N212.8bn (about $154.8m). That amount applies to the original portfolio, not solely to the 48 properties covered by the final order.
Nine properties escape order
The court discharged the interim forfeiture order covering nine properties after finding credible evidence concerning their ownership.
The decision means the EFCC did not obtain everything it requested and shows that the court considered the disputed assets separately rather than treating the full portfolio as a single block.
Malami and the other respondents maintained that the properties were lawfully acquired. They argued that the commission relied on suspicion, failed to establish a connection to unlawful activity and did not identify a predicate criminal offence.
Abdulmalik nevertheless ruled that the respondents linked to the 48 forfeited properties had not displaced the legal suspicion established by the commission.
Civil order, not criminal conviction
The proceedings were brought under Section 17 of Nigeria’s Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act and focused on the legitimacy of the funds used to acquire the properties.
Under the civil forfeiture process, the EFCC was required to establish reasonable suspicion rather than prove a criminal offence beyond reasonable doubt.
Malami served as Nigeria’s attorney-general and justice minister from 2015 to 2023 under former president Muhammadu Buhari.
He is separately standing trial alongside his wife, Hajia Bashir Asabe, and his son, Abubakar Abdulaziz Malami, on 16 charges involving alleged conspiracy, concealment and money laundering totalling N8.7bn (about $6.3m).
The three defendants have pleaded not guilty. That criminal case remains unresolved and must be treated independently from the civil forfeiture decision, with the presumption of innocence maintained unless a court reaches a verdict.
Wider accountability test
The judgment strengthens Nigeria’s asset-recovery campaign, but the credibility of that effort will depend on how recovered properties are managed and whether related criminal cases are concluded fairly.
Authorities will face scrutiny over whether the properties retain their value and whether any eventual sale, transfer or public use is disclosed transparently.
The case follows Africa Briefing’s coverage of Nigeria’s wider asset-recovery drive, EFCC’s response to global corruption rankings and international action involving former oil minister Timipre Sylva.
What happens next?
The respondents may challenge the final order before Nigeria’s appellate courts.
Attention will also turn to how the federal government takes possession of the properties and reports their eventual management, use or disposal.
