Former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN), has taken legal steps to stop the final forfeiture of more than 50 properties linked to him, his family, and several companies, filing a detailed 40-page affidavit before the Federal High Court.
The development follows an earlier interim order granted by Justice Emeka Nwite on January 6, 2026, which placed houses, hotels, schools, factories, and landed properties in Abuja, Kano, and Kebbi under the control of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
The EFCC had alleged that the assets were suspected proceeds of unlawful activities and sought their final forfeiture to the federal government.
However, Malami, in his response, denied any wrongdoing, insisting there was no evidence linking the properties to illicit funds. He maintained that all assets were acquired through legitimate income and properly declared to the Code of Conduct Bureau before the EFCC’s action.
He presented a breakdown of what he described as lawful earnings between 2015 and 2023, including salary and allowances, business income, loans, and other sources such as gifts and book launch proceeds. He also listed several companies tied to his investments, including hospitality, agro-allied, and educational ventures.
Malami further argued that the EFCC inflated the value of some properties, claiming that a duplex in Maitama and a university project were wrongly overestimated compared to purchase records and independent valuations submitted to the court.
He supported his defence with asset declaration documents filed with the Code of Conduct Bureau over different years, insisting that several of the disputed properties were declared long before the current proceedings.
The former minister also stated that some assets listed by the EFCC were acquired before his appointment into public office, while others belonged to family estates or long-standing business arrangements.
In his affidavit, Malami also alleged that EFCC operatives carried out enforcement actions affecting his family residences before a final court decision, an action he described as improper while proceedings were still ongoing.
He further claimed that financial institutions had begun reacting to the interim forfeiture order by adjusting loan conditions tied to some of his businesses.
The case also touches on related criminal proceedings in which Malami has pleaded not guilty, with his legal team arguing that the allegations remain unproven and subject to trial.
The Federal High Court is expected to schedule a hearing to determine whether the interim forfeiture should be lifted or made permanent, while the EFCC has yet to publicly respond to the latest filings.
