The Federal High Court in Abuja has reassigned the alleged N8.7 billion money laundering case involving former Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami (SAN), along with two others, as well as a related asset forfeiture suit, to a new judge.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had filed the money laundering charges against Malami, his son Abdulaziz Malami, and Hajia Bashir Asabe, an employee of Rahamaniyya Properties Limited, a company reportedly linked to the former minister.
In a separate proceeding, the EFCC is seeking the interim forfeiture of 57 properties alleged to have been unlawfully acquired by Malami.
The defendants were originally arraigned on 30 December before Justice Emeka Nwite, who also granted an ex parte application on 6 January for the interim forfeiture of the properties. Following the conclusion of the court’s vacation, the cases were returned to the Chief Judge for reassignment in accordance with court procedures.
Both matters have now been assigned to Justice Obiora Egwuatu, who has scheduled 12 February for the forfeiture case hearing and 16 February for the arraignment in the alleged money laundering charge.
According to the EFCC, the defendants conspired to disguise the origin of approximately N8.7 billion, indirectly acquire properties, and retain funds suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activity, in violation of the Money Laundering (Prohibition and Prevention) Acts of 2011 (as amended) and 2022.
Malami, however, has challenged the interim forfeiture order, seeking the release of three properties located in Kano and Abuja. Through his counsel, Joseph Daudu (SAN), the former AGF argued that the properties were lawfully acquired and duly declared in his asset declaration forms submitted to the Code of Conduct Bureau in 2019 and 2023.
He maintained that the assets were not linked to any unlawful activity and claimed that the interim forfeiture order was obtained through misrepresentation and suppression of material facts.
Malami also contended that the proceedings violated his constitutional rights to property and the presumption of innocence.
The court is expected to consider these arguments when the proceedings resume later in February.
About the Author
