The Federal High Court in Abuja has postponed the delivery of judgement in the forfeiture case involving 57 properties linked to former Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, his family members and associates. The court, which had initially scheduled Monday, July 6, for the verdict, has now set Friday, July 10, as the new judgement date.
Postponement Announced by EFCC
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), which initiated the forfeiture proceedings, announced the postponement in a statement on Monday. Judge Joyce Abdulmalik had originally chosen July 6 in May after hearing arguments from both sides regarding the forfeiture request. The EFCC's statement did not provide any reason for the delay.
During the May 26 hearing, the court adjourned for judgement after listening to Mr. Malami, companies, and other individuals who claimed legitimate interests in the assets. The EFCC is seeking a final forfeiture order for the properties to the federal government, following an earlier interim forfeiture order.
Money Laundering Charges
The EFCC is prosecuting Mr. Malami and his relatives on money laundering charges involving the alleged illegitimate acquisition of assets in a separate trial before the same judge. The commission asserts that the assets under interim forfeiture orders are proceeds of Mr. Malami's unlawful activities.
During the assets forfeiture hearing in May, prosecution lawyer Jibrin Okutepa, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), moved a motion filed in February for the final forfeiture of the listed assets. The application sought the forfeiture of 57 properties and was supported by a 47-paragraph affidavit with 46 exhibits.
Defense Arguments
Lawyer to the respondents, Adedayo Adedeji, also a SAN, moved an application filed on February 27, supported by a 109-paragraph affidavit sworn by Mr. Malami himself. Mr. Adedeji urged the court not only to set aside the earlier interim order but also to hold that the respondents had demonstrated that the properties “were not acquired from proceeds of crime” and therefore should not be subjected to interim or final forfeiture to the federal government.
In response, Mr. Okutepa said his application was backed by a 77-paragraph counter-affidavit filed on May 5 and supported by 80 exhibits marked EFCC A to EFCC E. He urged the court to hold that Mr. Malami and other respondents had “woefully failed to show cause” that the properties “were acquired legitimately,” and asked the court to order the forfeiture of the properties to the Federal Government.
Counter Arguments
Reacting, Mr. Adedeji argued that the counter-affidavit was “incompetent” and “unknown to law.” The respondents’ lawyer also argued that the EFCC merely relied on “suspicion” to allege that the properties were acquired with proceeds of crime. “The court deals with evidence, not suspicion,” he said.
Mr. Adedeji further argued that the prosecution relied on “extra judicial evidence” ordinarily meant for cross-examination during criminal trial proceedings as evidence in the current case. He said there was no way the court could properly determine the matter without oral evidence, which the court had earlier refused. He maintained that the properties, including some acquired before Mr. Malami assumed office, “were not proceeds of crime.”
Multiple Counter-Affidavits
The respondents’ lawyer also moved several other separate counter-affidavits and further affidavits on behalf of other respondents and companies listed in the matter, urging the court to refuse the forfeiture request. All aimed at showing that the properties were “legitimately acquired.” Lawyers representing other individuals and companies seeking to show cause also urged the court to dismiss the final forfeiture application “in the interest of justice,” while the prosecution asked the court to dismiss their counter-affidavits.
After all parties adopted their processes, the judge adjourned the matter until July 6 for ruling and judgment, now rescheduled to be delivered on Friday.
Background of the Case
PREMIUM TIMES reported that up to 57 assets seized from Mr. Malami, valued at N212.8 billion by the EFCC, are currently under an interim forfeiture order of the Federal High Court in Abuja. In early January, the court issued the interim forfeiture order over the 57 properties after the prosecution told Judge Emeka Nwite, who handled the case as a vacation judge at the time, that the assets were proceeds of unlawful activities.
The multi-billion naira properties, largely luxury residential and commercial assets, are located in Abuja, Kebbi, Kano and Kaduna states. But Mr. Malami insists he acquired the assets legitimately. The case was later transferred to Judge Abdulmalik after the court vacation ended.
On April 21, the prosecution told Judge Abdulmalik that the lead lawyer for the respondents had an engagement at the Court of Appeal. Responding, the judge emphasized the need for strict compliance with court directives. She noted that the interim forfeiture order had been published with a 14-day notice to allow interested parties to show cause. She subsequently ordered all parties and interested persons to file and serve their processes on or before April 27. The judge also warned lawyers against conduct aimed at delaying proceedings.
