By Headlinenews.news Investigations Desk
Former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN), has spent a second consecutive night in the custody of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) as investigators intensify inquiries into serious allegations of financial misconduct.
According to EFCC sources, Malami is being questioned over multiple bank accounts—reportedly up to 46—linked to suspected financial irregularities, abuse of office, and unexplained wealth during and after his tenure as Nigeria’s chief law officer under President Muhammadu Buhari.
Malami has not been convicted of any crime and is entitled to the constitutional presumption of innocence. However, the breadth of the allegations, the documentary evidence being reviewed, and the long trail of past controversies surrounding his office make it increasingly difficult to dismiss the current probe as simple “political witch-hunt”.
What the EFCC Is Probing
Investigators are said to be focusing on:
The number and structure of bank accounts allegedly linked directly or indirectly to Malami;
Transaction patterns that appear inconsistent with his legitimate earnings and declared income;
Possible abuse of office involving legal settlements, recovered assets, and discretionary approvals processed through the Ministry of Justice;
Potential violations of anti-money laundering and public finance laws.
Having several bank accounts is not, in itself, a crime. The problem arises when:
There are signs of layering or concealment,
Funds appear linked to public resources or asset recoveries,
Or the financial flows cannot be reconciled with any lawful source of income.
These are the questions EFCC operatives are now trying to answer with the help of bank records, transaction histories and other forensic evidence.
Legal Foundation: EFCC Is Acting Within Its Mandate
The EFCC’s actions are rooted in clear statutory powers.
Under the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act, 2004:
Section 6(b) empowers the Commission to investigate “all financial crimes, including advance fee fraud, money laundering, and other economic and financial crimes.”
Section 7(1)(a) authorises the EFCC to cause investigations to be conducted as to whether “any person” has committed an offence under the Act or any law relating to economic and financial crimes.
The language is deliberate. It does not exempt former ministers, senior advocates, ex-attorneys-general or any other category of public official. Once reasonable suspicion arises, investigation is not optional; it is a legal duty.
So long as due process is observed—respect for rights, access to counsel, judicial oversight—Malami’s detention and questioning fall squarely within the EFCC’s lawful mandate.
Malami’s Record: A Tenure Marked by Repeated Controversies
The current investigation did not appear out of nowhere. Allegations and concerns have followed Abubakar Malami for most of his time in office and beyond.
2015–2017: Recovered Assets and Transparency Questions
Shortly after his appointment in 2015, Malami became central to Nigeria’s high-profile asset recovery drive, particularly in relation to Abacha loot. Civil society groups and anti-corruption advocates soon began raising concerns over:
The opacity of recovery processes;
The use of intermediaries and foreign lawyers;
Inadequate public disclosure of exact amounts and terms.
While the government defended its actions, the lack of detailed, timely reporting created a perception of opacity around the AGF’s office.
2018–2019: Legal Fees, Settlements, and Dropped Cases
Malami’s management of legal fees and settlements became another flashpoint. Questions emerged over:
Billions of naira reportedly paid out as legal fees to select firms;
The absence of clear competitive procurement;
The withdrawal or weakening of certain high-profile corruption cases.
Senior lawyers and civil society organisations accused the AGF’s office of using technicalities and plea bargains to protect politically connected suspects.
2020–2022: Abacha Loot and Abuse-of-Office Petitions
International partners insisted on strict monitoring frameworks for repatriated funds due to concerns about domestic misuse. At home, multiple petitions were filed against Malami to anti-graft agencies, alleging:
Abuse of office,
Conflict of interest,
Unexplained wealth and lifestyle inconsistent with official income.
Although no immediate prosecution followed, these petitions formed a body of unresolved allegations that did not disappear when he left office.
2023 Onwards: Post-Tenure Accountability
With the change of administration and Malami’s exit in 2023, post-tenure scrutiny intensified. It is standard practice in democracies for former top officials—especially those responsible for law and justice—to have their conduct reviewed after leaving office.
The current EFCC investigation appears to be the culmination of years of complaints, petitions, and financial red flags, now being examined more seriously with documentary backing.
Not Witch-Hunt: Evidence, Not Rhetoric
Some political voices have tried to frame Malami’s detention as persecution by rivals. But several facts weaken that narrative:
Many of the allegations predate the current administration and were raised while Malami was still in power.
The issues involve bank accounts, transaction records, and financial documentation, not just political gossip.
Similar investigations have been opened against officials across different political camps.
Globally, former justice ministers and attorneys-general have been investigated and, in some cases, prosecuted—Brazil, South Africa, and France offer notable examples. The principle is simple: the higher the office, the higher the standard of accountability.
Investigating a former Attorney-General, therefore, is not automatically a witch-hunt. It can just as easily be a sign that a country is finally willing to hold its legal elite to the same standards it claims to apply to everyone else.
Malami’s Choices: Cooperation, Remorse and the Rule of Law
Legal experts told Headlinenews.news that in complex financial crime cases, cooperation with investigators, voluntary disclosure, and restitution where applicable often play an important role in how matters are resolved.
For a former AGF—someone who once stood as the public face of the rule of law—this is not just a legal test but a moral one:
Does he cooperate fully and allow the facts to speak?
Does he continue to insist that all scrutiny is persecution?
Is there any acknowledgement of errors, if evidence confirms misconduct?
The answers will shape not only Malami’s legacy but also public confidence in Nigeria’s justice system.
Allegations Require Answers, Not Emotion
Abubakar Malami remains innocent until proven guilty, and no serious observer is calling for conviction by media trial. But innocence does not mean immunity from investigation.
The EFCC is acting under its statutory powers. The allegations—especially those involving the use of numerous bank accounts and unexplained financial flows—are serious enough to demand full, professional investigation.
If Malami is clean, a transparent process will clear him.
If he is not, the law must apply without fear or favour.
For once, Nigerians must resist the temptation to view every high-profile case only through partisan lenses. Sometimes, an investigation is not a witch-hunt. Sometimes, it is simply the law finally doing what it should have done long ago.
National Patriots’ Excerpt
National Patriots affirms that the ongoing investigation involving a former Attorney-General of the Federation is not a witch-hunt but a lawful inquiry into alleged financial crimes supported by documentary and forensic evidence. In a constitutional democracy, no individual—regardless of rank, title, or past office—is immune from investigation when credible evidence exists. Nigerians are urged to seek facts and verified information before drawing conclusions or framing accountability processes as political persecution. The fight against corruption requires moral reform, institutional discipline, and respect for due process. While allegations alone are not proof of guilt, incontrovertible financial evidence is sufficient to warrant investigation under the law. Where evidence exists, justice must be allowed to run its course; where it does not, cases should fail on their merits. This is how a society committed to integrity and the rule of law must function.
Headlinenews.news Special Investigative Report
