Former Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, has launched a strong legal pushback against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) over the interim forfeiture of multiple properties, rejecting claims that the assets are proceeds of crime.
In an affidavit before the Federal High Court of Nigeria in Abuja and sighted by our correspondent on Monday, Malami maintained that all properties listed in the January 2026 forfeiture order were legitimately acquired through years of legal practice, business ventures, and declared income.
The EFCC had secured the interim forfeiture order on suspicion that the assets were linked to illicit funds. However, Malami argued that the agency failed to provide prima facie evidence tying any of the properties to criminal activity, describing the allegations as speculative.
“There is no document before the court showing these properties were acquired with proceeds of crime,” he stated.
A key element of Malami’s defence is his claim that the EFCC inflated the value of the assets to strengthen its case. He alleged that properties purchased for hundreds of millions of naira were presented as worth billions.
According to him, independent valuers have placed significantly lower and more accurate figures on the assets.
Malami attributed his wealth to multiple sources, including, over three decades of legal practice, investments in hospitality, agriculture, and education.
“Loans from commercial banks
asset sales and other investments.
Gifts and proceeds from book launches”
He added that all earnings were duly declared to the Code of Conduct Bureau in compliance with the law.
Beyond the financial dispute, the former AGF accused the EFCC of overstepping its powers. He alleged that operatives seized properties without a final forfeiture order, evicted family members from residences, and confiscated documents.
He described the actions as “extrajudicial” and a breach of due process.
The case, which is also connected to an ongoing criminal charge against Malami, is shaping up as a significant test of the EFCC’s asset forfeiture powers and adherence to due process.
Malami is urging the court to set aside the interim forfeiture order, insisting the properties are legitimate and unconnected to any unlawful activity.
The court is expected to decide whether the assets will be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government or returned to their owner
