Former Justice Minister Abubakar Malami, SAN, has prayed the Federal High Court in Abuja to vacate the interim order made against three of the 57 property listed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for forfeiture to the Federal Government.
Malami, former Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) Muhammadu Buhari administration, is challenging the EFCC on the property listed as No. 9, No. 18 and No. 48 in the ex-parte motion it brought to the court on Jan. 6.
The three property, sought to be discharged, include Plot 157, Lamido Crescent, Nasarawa, GRA, Kano, purchased in July 31, 2019 with no specific amount stated in the schedule as No. 9.
They also include a Bedroom Duplex and Boys Quarters at No.12, Yalinga Street, Off Adetokunbo Ademola Crescent, Wuse Il, Abuja, purchased in October 2018 at N150 million, and ADC Kadi Malami Foundation Building, bought at N56 million listed as No. 18 and No. 48.
Justice Nwite, who sat as vacation judge, had, on Jan. 6, ordered the temporary forfeiture of 57 property suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities linked to Mr Malami.
Justice Nwite had granted the order following an ex-parte motion moved by the EFCC’s lawyer, Ekele Iheanacho, SAN, to the effect.
The judge then directed the commission to publish the order in a national daily for interested person(s) to show cause, within 14 days, why all the property should not be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government.
The multi-billion naira landed property are located in Abuja, Kebbi, Kano and Kaduna States.
However, in a motion on notice filed on Malami’s behalf by a team of lawyers led by Joseph Daudu, SAN, the ex-AGF alleged that the anti-corruption agency got the interim order by suppression of material facts and misrepresentation.
Malami, who urged the court to dismiss the suit to prevent “conflicting outcomes duplicative litigation,” argued that the proceeding was an assault on his fundamental right to owned property, his presumption of innocence and his right to live in peace with his family.
In the application dated Jan. 26 but filed Jan. 27 by Daudu marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/20/2026, Malami sought two orders:
“An order of this honourable court vacating, setting aside and/or discharging the interim order(s) of this honourable court made on the 6th of January, 2026 against the respondent/applicant’s (Malami’s) properties listed as Nos. 9, 18, and 48 in the schedule of properties attached to the interim order of forfeiture of 6th January, 2026, the said properties having been duly declared in the respondent/applicant’s asset declaration forms throughout his tenure as a public officer and No. 48 is held in trust for the Estate of Late Khadi Malami Nassarawa.
“An order of this honourable court restraining the applicant/respondent (EFCC), acting by itself or through its servants, agents and proxies from interfering with the respondent/applicant’s (Malami’s) properties in issue or disturbing the respondent/applicant’s ownership, possession and control thereof in the course of purportedly giving effect to the order of this honourable court made on the 6th of January, 2026.”
In a 14-ground argument, Daudu argued that the assets Nos. 9, 18, and 48, the subject of interim forfeiture, especially those declared in the various asset declaration forms of Malami are not linked by prima facie evidence of an unlawful activity or a specific offence.
He said Malami had declared the assets listed as Nos. 9, and 18 in his asset declaration forms filed with the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) in 2019 and 2023 respectively.
He said property No. 48 is held in trust by the former AGF for the benefit of the estate of his late father, Late Kadi Malami.
“These assets, their value and their root of title have been clearly stated and specifically demonstrated in the various asset declaration forms spanning from 2019 to 2023.
“The declaration above is prima facie evidence of the legitimacy of the acquisition and ownership of the properties,” Daudu said.
The senior lawyer submitted that Malami copiously declared his source of income in his asset declaration filed with the CCB to include: N374, 630,900 million income from salaries, estacodes, severance allowance and others;
“Sitting allowances as a board/committee member of the Federal Judicial Service Commission, Federal Capital Territory Judicial Service Commission, Legal Practitioner Privileges Committee, and a high-powered presidential committee.
“N574, 073, 000 (Five hundred and seventy-four million, and seventy three thousand naira) as Income generated through disposed assets
“N10, 017,382,684 (Ten billion, seventeen million, three hundred and eighty-two thousand, six hundred and eighty-four thousand naira) turnover from businesses.
“N2, 522, 000, 000 (Two billion, five hundred and twenty-two million naira) being loans to businesses
“N958,000,000 (Nine hundred and fifty-eight million naira) as a traditional gift from personal friends.”
Daudu equally explained that a total sum of N509, 880, 000 (Five hundred and nine million, eight hundred and eighty thousand naira) was realised as income from the launch and public presentation of a book titled, “Contemporary Issues on Nigerian Law and Practice, Thorny Terrains in Traversing the Nigerian Justice Sector: My Travails and Triumphs” by Malami.
“These streams of income, and the continuing profits generated from the businesses over the years, sufficiently show that the properties sought to be forfeited were acquired through legitimate and lawful means as stated in the asset declaration forms,” he said.
According to the senior lawyer, the order of interim forfeiture is not based on any prima facie establishment of unlawful purpose and is liable to be set aside.
He submitted that the court wrongly granted the order of interim forfeiture against these property “which were lawfully acquired post appointment of the respondent/applicant and declared with the Code of Conduct Bureau as legitimate assets of the respondent/applicant, in compliance with the 5th Schedule to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, in 2019 and 2023.
“The interim order was obtained ex-parte by suppression of material facts and misrepresentation.
“The interim order for forfeiture was obtained by manifest exaggeration, malicious inflation of the value of the assets, and unreasonable and incompetent valuation deliberately manipulated to mislead the court, negatively affecting its discretion in granting an order based on manipulated facts and conclusions deliberately cooked up by the applicant/respondent (EFCC).
“That there is no prima facie evidence placed before this honourable court by the applicant/respondent (EFCC) to warrant the properties linked to the respondent/applicant (Malami) to be liable for forfeiture to the Federal Government of Nigeria.
“The proper remedy for preventing conflicting outcomes duplicative litigation is for this honourable court to dismiss or strike out this suit.
“That this proceeding is an assault on the applicant’s fundamental right to property, his presumption of innocence and his right to live in peace with his family,” the counsel submitted.
NAN recalls that Justice Nwite had, on Jan. 6, adjourned the matter until Jan. 27 for report of compliance on the publication of the interim order for forfeiture.
But the matter could not go on because the case was not on the cause list for the day because the matter was heard during vacation period and the judge, having concluded the vacation cases, remitted the case file back to the chief judge for re-assignment.
It was also observed that there were lawyers in the courtroom on Jan. 27, who had filed processes on behalf of their clients to stop the court from going ahead with the proceedings for final forfeiture of the assets.
Malami, who is facing a money laundering charge preferred against him by EFCC, is also presently detained at the Department of State Services (DSS)’ facility for another offence bordering on alleged terrorism financing.
