Court Delays Ruling on EFCC's Bid to Forfeit 57 Properties Linked to Ex-AGF Malami

Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court in Abuja adjourned the ruling on the EFCC's application for the final forfeiture of 57 properties allegedly connected to the former Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, to a later date after the matter could not proceed as scheduled.

The case, which has attracted significant public interest given the profile of the former minister and the scale of the properties involved, has been winding its way through the court system amid intense scrutiny from anti-corruption advocates, legal experts, and political observers.

The EFCC had earlier obtained an interim forfeiture order over the 57 properties, which are located across several states in Nigeria and are believed to be worth billions of naira. The commission alleged that the properties were acquired through funds that could not be connected to any legitimate source of income.

The 57 properties at the centre of the EFCC's forfeiture application include residential buildings, commercial real estate, and undeveloped land spread across Abuja, Kebbi State, and other locations. The commission's case is built on allegations that the properties were acquired through the proceeds of corruption and abuse of office during Malami's tenure as the nation's chief law officer.

The former AGF served under President Muhammadu Buhari from 2015 to 2023, a period during which he wielded enormous influence over Nigeria's criminal justice system, law enforcement operations, and legal framework. Critics had, during his tenure, accused him of selectively applying the law to protect allies and target opponents, allegations Malami consistently denied.

The EFCC's targeting of Malami's alleged assets represents one of the most significant post-tenure investigations in recent Nigerian history, given the former minister's central role in the administration that preceded the current government.

The interim forfeiture order had required Malami or anyone with a legitimate claim to the 57 properties to show cause why they should not be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government. Sources close to the matter indicate that Malami's legal team had filed a response contesting the EFCC's application and challenging the basis on which the properties were seized.

The postponement of the ruling is expected to give both sides additional time to file any outstanding processes and ensure that the matter is fully argued before the court delivers its decision.

Legal experts following the case note that final forfeiture orders of this magnitude carry serious implications, as they permanently transfer ownership of the assets to the Federal Government once granted. If the court rules in favour of the EFCC, the properties would be formally vested in the government and could subsequently be sold or repurposed for public benefit.

The former Attorney General has consistently denied wrongdoing in connection with the properties under scrutiny. His legal team has argued that the assets were legitimately acquired through his private legal practice, which spanned several decades before his appointment as a minister, as well as through other lawful sources of income.

Malami's supporters have also raised procedural concerns about the manner in which the EFCC obtained the interim forfeiture order, arguing that certain due process requirements may not have been fully followed. These arguments are expected to form a central part of his defence at the next hearing.

The case against Malami's alleged properties is part of a broader wave of asset recovery actions being pursued by the EFCC and other anti-graft agencies under the Tinubu administration. In recent months, the commission has secured final forfeiture orders against properties and funds linked to several prominent former officials, signalling an intensified effort to recover proceeds of alleged corruption.

Civil society organisations and anti-corruption advocates have welcomed the focus on high-value asset recovery, arguing that successfully prosecuting cases involving former ministers and senior government officials sends a powerful message that public office does not confer immunity from accountability.

However, some legal experts have cautioned that the pace and pattern of prosecutions must be guided strictly by evidence and due process, warning against any perception that the anti-corruption drive is being weaponised for political purposes.

The EFCC has maintained that all its cases are evidence-based and conducted within the framework of the law. The commission has said it will continue to pursue the recovery of proceeds of alleged corruption regardless of the status or influence of those involved.

With the ruling postponed, the case is expected to return before Justice Ekwo on a fresh date, when the court will consider the arguments made by both the EFCC and Malami's legal team before delivering its decision on whether to grant or refuse the final forfeiture order.

The outcome of the case is expected to have significant implications not only for Malami personally but also for the broader conversation about accountability for former public officials and the integrity of Nigeria's asset recovery framework.

As the legal proceedings continue, the matter remains one of the most closely watched corruption cases in the country, with anti-corruption advocates urging the court to deliver a speedy and well-reasoned judgment that upholds the principles of justice and the rule of law.