Court Orders Final Forfeiture of 48 Properties Linked to Former AGF Abubakar Malami

The Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the final forfeiture of 48 properties linked to former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN), to the Federal Government after ruling that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) established that the assets were reasonably suspected to have been acquired with proceeds of unlawful activities.

Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, who delivered the judgment on Wednesday, held that the EFCC successfully demonstrated that the properties were not acquired from lawful sources of income.

The court further ruled that Malami, his family members, and other respondents failed to provide sufficient evidence showing the legitimate sources of funds used to acquire the assets.

The judgment marks a significant victory for the EFCC in one of its largest non-conviction-based asset recovery cases in recent years.

Court Rejects Challenge to Forfeiture

The final order followed months of legal proceedings after the EFCC secured an interim forfeiture order from Justice Emeka Nwite on January 6, 2026.

In compliance with the court’s directive, the anti-graft agency published notices in national newspapers, inviting interested parties to show cause why the assets should not be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government.

Malami, alongside 14 family members and associates, challenged the interim order, questioning the jurisdiction of the court and insisting that the assets should not be forfeited.

However, after hearing arguments from both sides, Justice Abdulmalik ruled that the respondents merely claimed ownership of the properties without presenting credible evidence that they were acquired through legitimate means.

The court emphasised that under Nigeria’s non-conviction-based forfeiture framework, respondents bear the responsibility of demonstrating the lawful origin of assets reasonably suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities.

University, Hotels, Radio Station Among Forfeited Assets

The forfeited assets span several states and include residential, commercial, educational and industrial properties.

Among the most prominent assets are Rayhaan University in Kebbi State, including its permanent and temporary campuses, the Vice-Chancellor’s residence and related university facilities.

Also forfeited is Rayhaan Radio in Birnin Kebbi, along with the Rayhaan Agro-Allied Factory, its processing plants, factory buildings, staff quarters and supporting infrastructure.

The court also ordered the forfeiture of luxury hotels, including Meethaq Hotels in Maitama and Jabi, Abuja, as well as the 131-room Zeennoor Hotel in Kano.

Other properties covered by the order include residential estates, luxury duplexes, commercial plazas, shopping complexes, warehouses, filling stations, agricultural land, hotels, office buildings and several undeveloped plots located across Abuja, Kebbi, Kano and Kaduna States.

Among the assets are Azbir Arena, hotel and commercial facilities in Kebbi State, shopping units in Wuse Market and Vegas Mall, Gwarimpa residential properties, and extensive parcels of land along the Birnin Kebbi–Jega Road.

One of EFCC’s Largest Asset Recoveries

The forfeiture represents one of the most extensive asset recovery exercises undertaken by the EFCC, involving dozens of high-value properties spread across multiple sectors, including education, hospitality, agriculture, energy, real estate and broadcasting.

The anti-graft agency argued that the assets were proceeds of unlawful activities and sought their permanent transfer to the Federal Government under Nigeria’s civil forfeiture laws.

Civil Forfeiture Different from Criminal Conviction

Legal experts note that the judgment relates to civil asset forfeiture proceedings, which differ from criminal prosecution.

Under Nigerian law, a court may order the forfeiture of assets reasonably suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities if respondents fail to establish their lawful origin. Such proceedings do not, on their own, amount to a criminal conviction.

The court stressed that ownership alone is insufficient to defeat a forfeiture application where the lawful source of funds used to acquire the assets cannot be satisfactorily explained.

The EFCC has consistently maintained that non-conviction-based forfeiture remains a vital tool in Nigeria’s fight against corruption, allowing the recovery of assets believed to have been acquired through illicit means while separate criminal proceedings, where applicable, continue before the courts.