By George Ozalla
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 after holding that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) established that the assets were reasonably suspected to have been acquired with proceeds of unlawful activities.
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, who delivered the judgment, dismissed all applications, motions on notice and objections filed by Malami, members of his family and companies connected to the assets, describing them as lacking merit.
The judge held that the respondents failed to rebut the EFCC’s case that the properties were acquired through unlawful means, stressing that the central issue before the court was not ownership of the properties but the legitimacy of the funds used in acquiring them.
Justice Abdulmalik further stated that the respondents failed to dislodge the reasonable suspicion raised by the anti-graft agency and consequently granted the application for the permanent forfeiture of the assets to the Federal Government pursuant to Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act.
The forfeited properties form part of 57 assets initially traced by the EFCC and valued at about ₦212.8 billion. The commission alleged that the assets were acquired during Malami’s tenure as Attorney General and held through family members and companies acting as fronts. The court, however, vacated the interim forfeiture order in respect of nine properties after finding insufficient evidence to sustain their forfeiture.
The forfeited assets are spread across the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, Kaduna, Kano and Kebbi States and include some of the country’s most valuable private real estate investments.
Among the assets are Rayhaan University, an agro allied factory, luxury residential estates, high value duplexes, mansions, blocks of flats, shopping plazas, office complexes, commercial buildings, warehouses, hotels, filling stations and vast parcels of land located in strategic parts of Abuja and northern Nigeria.
The judgment followed months of legal proceedings that began after the EFCC filed a civil forfeiture application seeking the permanent seizure of the properties on the grounds that they represented proceeds of unlawful activities.
Following an interim forfeiture order earlier granted by the court, Malami, his wife, son and several companies challenged the proceedings, insisting that the properties were lawfully acquired and arguing that the EFCC failed to establish any criminal conduct linking the assets to illicit activities.
The anti-graft agency, however, maintained that under Nigeria’s civil forfeiture regime, it only needed to establish reasonable suspicion that the assets were proceeds of unlawful activities rather than secure a prior criminal conviction.
In her judgment, Justice Abdulmalik held that the respondents failed to provide satisfactory explanations regarding the legitimate sources of funds used to acquire the properties. She further observed that the evidence placed before the court was sufficient to establish that the assets were proceeds of unlawful activities and therefore liable to forfeiture.
The court consequently ordered that the 48 properties be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government.
The ruling represents one of the largest single asset forfeiture cases involving a former public office holder in Nigeria and has once again drawn attention to the enormous cost of corruption on national development. The sheer value of the recovered assets illustrates resources that could have transformed critical sectors of the economy through the construction of modern hospitals, quality schools, reliable road networks, affordable housing, improved electricity supply, potable water projects and employment opportunities for millions of Nigerians. Instead, corruption has continued to drain public resources, deepen poverty, widen inequality, discourage investment and weaken public confidence in government institutions.
