The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has intensified its anti-corruption drive by approaching the Federal High Court in Abuja for the final forfeiture of 57 properties allegedly linked to former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN).
In a motion on notice filed before the court, the EFCC argued that the respondents in the case failed to provide sufficient and convincing evidence to warrant the setting aside of an earlier interim forfeiture order granted by the court. The anti-graft agency is now urging the court to make the forfeiture permanent, effectively transferring ownership of the properties to the Federal Government.
The properties in question are said to be spread across various high-value locations and are allegedly linked not only to Malami but also to members of his immediate family and several associated entities.
Those listed as respondents in the suit include Malami himself, his son Abdulaziz, his wife Hajia Bashir Asabe, and Abiru’ Rahman Abubakar Malami. The EFCC also named a number of companies and individuals believed to be connected to the assets under investigation.
Among the corporate entities listed are Rayhaan Bustan and Agro Allied Limited, Mountain View Gold and Jewellery Limited, Amasdul Oil and Gas Limited, Azbir Arena Nigeria Limited, and Meethaq Hotels Limited. Others include Rayhaan University Limited/GTE, Rayhaan Hotels Limited, Zeenoor Hotels Limited, and Real Edge Agro Services Limited.
Additional individuals mentioned in the proceedings include Kawsar Ben of Brahim and Alhaji Muktaka Usman Junju, all of whom are alleged to have links to the properties sought to be permanently forfeited.
According to the EFCC, the interim forfeiture order was granted after it presented prima facie evidence suggesting that the assets were proceeds of unlawful activities. The agency maintained that despite being given the opportunity to contest the interim order, the respondents failed to satisfactorily justify the legitimate acquisition of the properties.
The EFCC emphasized that under Nigerian law, particularly in cases involving suspected proceeds of crime, the burden shifts to the respondents to demonstrate that the assets were acquired through lawful means once the commission establishes reasonable suspicion.
Legal experts note that final forfeiture proceedings are a critical stage in anti-corruption litigation, as they determine whether the government can permanently seize assets suspected to have been acquired illegally. They also point out that courts typically require clear and compelling evidence before granting such orders, given the significant implications for property rights.
The case is expected to attract significant public attention, given Malami’s prominent role in the administration of justice during his tenure as Attorney General. Observers say the outcome could have far-reaching implications for accountability and the ongoing fight against corruption in Nigeria.
While the court is yet to fix a date for hearing the motion, the proceedings mark another high-profile legal battle involving politically exposed persons and alleged illicit assets.
The EFCC reiterated its commitment to pursuing cases of corruption to a logical conclusion, stressing that no individual, regardless of status or past office, is above the law.
As the matter unfolds, Nigerians and civil society organizations are likely to closely monitor the case, viewing it as a test of the country’s judicial system and its resolve to tackle corruption at the highest levels of government.
