Interim Forfeiture Of 57 Properties: Fmr. AGF Malami Seeks Vacation Of Court Order

By Suleiman Anyalewechi

Former Attorney General and Minister former Justice Abubakar Malami on Monday February 2,2026 asked a Federal High Court Abuja to vacate the interim order  granted against  57 property listed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission EFFC for forfeiture to the Federal Government of Nigeria.

The Source reports that an Abuja Federal High Court, presided over by vacation Judge, Justice Emeka Nwite had, on January 6,2026, while ruling on an ex-parte motion brought before it  by the EFCC ordered the interim forfeiture of 57 Properties valued at about N213 billion, and  allegedly linked  to Malami, his wife and son.

Consequently, Justice Nwite directed the publication of the interim order in a national daily calling for interested persons to show cause, within 14 days why the said properties should not be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government of Nigeria.

The 57 choice properties which  according to the anti-corruption agency are scattered across three States of Kano, Kaduna, Kebbi and the Federal Capital Territory FCT Abuja are suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities.

But in a counter motion on notice filed on his behalf by Joseph Daudu, SAN, the immediate past Attorney General and Minister of Justice ,argued that the interim order of forfeiture was wrongly obtained, as the prosecution did not avail the court all the necessary facts needed by the court before exercising its discretion.

He, therefore, prayed the court to vacate the order, insisting that the proceedings leading to the interim forfeiture order amount to an assault on his fundamental right to own property, his presumption of innocence until find guilty and his right to live in peace with his family.

In the motion on notice filed on January 27, 2026, Malami is seeking among others “an order of the Honourable Court vacating , setting aside and or discharging the interim order(s) of the Honourable Court made on the 6th of January ,2026 against the respondent/applicant’s ( Malami’s) properties listed as Nos 9,18,and 48 in the schedule of properties attached to the interim order of forfeiture of 6th January 2026 ,the said properties having been duly declared in the respondent’s asset declaration forms throughout his tenure as a public officer ,and No 48 is held in trust for the Estate of Late Khadi Malami Nasarawa.

” An order of this Honourable Court restraining the EFCC’ ,acting by itself or through its servants, agents, and proxies from interfering with the respondent/applicant’s ( Malami’s ) properties in issue or disturbing the respondent/applicant’s ownership, possession and control thereof in the course of purportedly giving effect to the order of this Honourable Court made on the 6th of January 2026.

Specifically, Malami in his application, argued that three  assets listed as Nos 9 and 18 ,and in the schedule for the interim forfeiture of 57 Properties are not linked to prima facie evidence of unlawful activities having been declared in his asset declaration forms filed with the Code of Conduct Bureau CCB in 2019 and 2023.

Malami also contended that property 48, as listed in the schedule of forfeiture is presently being held in trust for the estate of his late father, Kadi Malami.

The former AGF, therefore, submitted that the Honourable Court erred in granting the order of interim forfeiture, which were lawfully acquired before appointment into public office, and were duly declared with the Code of Conduct Bureau as legitimate assets.

“The interim order of forfeiture was obtained by manifest exaggeration, malicious inflation of the value of the assets, and unreasonable and incompetent valuation deliberately manipulated to mislead the Court, negatively affecting its discretion in granting an order based on manipulated facts and conclusions deliberately cooked up by the applicant/respondent (EFCC).

“That there is no prima facie evidence placed before the Honourable Court by the applicant/respondent ( EFCC) to warrant the properties linked the defendant ( Malami) to be liable for forfeiture to the Federal Government of Nigeria”, the former AGF contended .