Former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN), has initiated legal proceedings seeking to overturn an interim forfeiture order placed on properties linked to him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
Court filings indicate that Malami is challenging the legality of the forfeiture, arguing that due process was not followed and that the assets in question were lawfully acquired. The EFCC had earlier secured an interim order from a Federal High Court permitting temporary seizure of several properties pending the outcome of investigations.
In his application, Malami contends that the anti-graft agency failed to provide sufficient evidence to justify the order and did not properly notify him before approaching the court. His legal team described the action as “procedurally defective” and a violation of his constitutional right to fair hearing.
The EFCC has yet to issue a detailed public response but previously maintained that the properties were suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities. Interim forfeiture orders are commonly used by anti-corruption agencies to prevent the disposal of assets while investigations are ongoing.
Legal experts say the case could test the boundaries of asset recovery laws in Nigeria, particularly regarding the balance between anti-corruption efforts and individual rights. “Interim forfeiture is a preventive measure, not a final judgment,” said a Lagos-based constitutional lawyer. “But the courts must ensure that it is not used in a way that denies citizens the opportunity to defend themselves.”
Malami served as Nigeria’s chief law officer from 2015 to 2023 and was a key figure in several high-profile prosecutions and legal reforms under the previous administration. His tenure, however, was not without controversy, with critics accusing him of selective enforcement and political bias — claims he consistently denied.
Civil society groups are watching the case closely. Some anti-corruption advocates argue that challenging forfeiture orders is a legal right and part of due process, while others worry that prolonged court battles could weaken asset recovery momentum.
The Federal High Court is expected to hear preliminary arguments in the coming weeks. If Malami succeeds, the interim order could be set aside, returning control of the assets to him pending further proceedings. If the EFCC prevails, the properties could move toward final forfeiture should the court later rule in the agency’s favor.
The outcome may influence how aggressively enforcement bodies pursue asset seizures and how carefully they prepare evidence before seeking court approval. For now, the case represents another significant legal battle in Nigeria’s ongoing anti-corruption landscape.
