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, to the Federal Government.
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, in a judgment delivered on Wednesday, held that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission established the reasonable suspicion required by law to justify the forfeiture of the assets.
The judge ruled that Malami, his family members and companies linked to the properties failed to rebut the commission’s allegation that the assets were acquired with proceeds of unlawful activities.
Before delivering the substantive judgment, Justice Abdulmalik dismissed several applications, motions on notice and applications to show cause filed by the respondents, describing them as lacking merit.
She held that the issue before the court was not ownership of the properties but the legitimacy of the funds used to acquire them.
“The issue before the court is not who owns the property, but how legitimate are the funds used to acquire the property.”
The judge 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 final forfeiture.
The court, however, discharged the interim forfeiture order on some of the properties.
The EFCC had, in January, instituted civil forfeiture proceedings seeking the permanent forfeiture of 57 properties valued at N212.8 billion, alleging they were proceeds of unlawful activities linked to the former AGF.
On January 16, vacation judge Justice Emeka Nwite granted an interim forfeiture order and directed the EFCC to publish the order in a national newspaper to enable interested parties to show cause why the assets should not be permanently forfeited.
The properties are located in Abuja, Kano, Kebbi and Kaduna states.
Following the publication, Malami, his wife, Nana Hadiza Malami; his son, Abdulaziz Abubakar Malami; and several companies linked to the assets challenged the interim forfeiture order.
They argued that the properties were lawfully acquired and maintained that the EFCC failed to establish any nexus between the assets and alleged unlawful activities.
The respondents also contended that the commission relied on speculation rather than credible evidence and neither proved 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, the EFCC argued that its investigation 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 further submitted that, under the law governing civil forfeiture proceedings, it only needed to establish reasonable suspicion rather than prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.
Following the adoption of final written addresses in May, the court reserved judgment, which was initially scheduled for July 6 but deferred twice before Wednesday’s ruling.