The Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the final forfeiture of 48 properties linked to a former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, to the Federal Government.
Delivering judgment on Wednesday, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik held that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission had established the reasonable suspicion required under the law to justify the forfeiture.
The judge ruled that Malami, members of his family and companies linked to the properties failed to rebut the commission’s allegation that the assets were acquired with the proceeds of unlawful activities.
Before delivering the substantive judgment, 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 the ownership of the properties but whether the funds used to acquire them were lawfully obtained.
“The issue before the court is not who owns the property, but how legitimate are the funds used to acquire the property,” the judge said.
She added that the respondents had “not dislodged the reasonable suspicion that the property was acquired by unlawful activities.”
Relying on Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, Justice Abdulmalik granted the EFCC’s application for the final forfeiture of the assets.
The court, however, discharged the interim forfeiture order in respect of some of the properties.
The EFCC instituted the civil forfeiture proceedings in January, seeking the permanent forfeiture of 57 properties valued at N212.8 billion, alleging that they were proceeds of unlawful activities linked to the former Attorney General.
On 16 January, Justice Emeka Nwite, sitting as a vacation judge, granted an interim forfeiture order and directed the commission to publish the order in a national newspaper to enable interested parties to show cause why the properties should not be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government.
The properties are located in Abuja and in Kano, Kebbi and Kaduna states.
Following the publication of the interim order, Malami, his wife, Nana Hadiza Malami, his son, Abdulaziz Abubakar Malami, and several companies linked to the assets challenged the proceedings.
They argued that the properties were lawfully acquired and contended that the EFCC failed to establish any connection between the assets and the alleged unlawful activities.
The respondents further maintained that the commission relied on speculation rather than credible evidence and neither proved that the properties were proceeds of crime nor identified any specific criminal offence from which they were allegedly derived.
After the court resumed from its annual vacation, the case was reassigned to Justice Abdulmalik for hearing and determination.
At the hearing, counsel for the EFCC argued that investigations showed 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 also argued that, under the law governing civil forfeiture proceedings, it was only required to establish reasonable suspicion rather than prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt.
After the parties adopted their final written addresses in May, the court reserved judgment.
The judgment, initially scheduled for 6 July, was postponed twice before Justice Abdulmalik delivered the ruling on Wednesday.
