The Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the permanent forfeiture of about 48 properties linked to former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, following an application by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission.
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik delivered the ruling on Wednesday after dismissing objections filed by Malami, members of his family and several companies claiming ownership of the assets.
The judge held that the respondents failed to establish that the properties were acquired through legitimate means, stressing that the key issue before the court was the source of the funds used to purchase the assets rather than ownership claims.
“The issue before the court is not who owns the property, but how legitimate are the funds used to acquire the properties,” Justice Abdulmalik ruled.
The court further held that the respondents failed to dispel the EFCC’s suspicion that the assets were proceeds of unlawful activities.
“The respondents have not dislodged the reasonable suspicion that the properties were acquired through unlawful activities,” the judge said.
In reaching her decision, Justice Abdulmalik relied on Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act. However, she lifted the interim forfeiture order on some of the properties originally listed by the anti-graft agency.
The EFCC had sought the final forfeiture of 57 properties valued at about ₦212.8 billion, alleging they were acquired with proceeds of unlawful activities and held through individuals and companies acting as fronts for the former minister.
The anti-corruption agency first secured an interim forfeiture order in January, after which interested parties were directed to appear before the court and justify why the assets should not be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government.
Malami, his wife, Nana Hadiza Malami, his son, Abdulaziz Abubakar Malami, and companies linked to the properties challenged the interim order, insisting that the assets were lawfully acquired and arguing that the EFCC failed to establish any connection between the properties and criminal activity.
They also maintained that the commission relied on speculation rather than credible evidence and did not identify any specific offence from which the assets were allegedly derived.
The EFCC, however, argued that its investigation showed the properties were purchased with proceeds of unlawful activities.
The commission told the court that civil forfeiture proceedings only require proof of reasonable suspicion rather than proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Although the court ordered the final forfeiture of about 48 properties, the ruling does not amount to a criminal conviction.
Meanwhile, Malami, his wife and son are separately standing trial over alleged money laundering involving about ₦8.7 billion.
