Tag: Malami

The Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday adjourned thr judgment in the forfeiture suit filed by the EFCC against 57 properties linked to former Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami, SAN, until July 10.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Justice Joyce Abdulmalik had, on May 26, fixed today for the delivery of the judgment.

Judge Abdulmalik fixed the date after EFCC’s lawyer, Jibrin Okutepa, SAN, and counsel to Malami and other respondents, Adedayo Adedeji, SAN, adopted their processes and presented their arguments for and against the case.

The case, listed as number four on Monday’s cause list, however, could not proceed.

Although no reason was adduced for the shift in the date, three other cases on the cause list were also given new dates out of the 13 matters before the court.

NAN reports that the anti-graft agency had, in the suit, sought the final forfeiture of the properties for reasonably suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities.

Moving the motion on the last adjourned date, Okutepa told the court that the motion, filed in February, was supported by a 47-paragraph affidavit with 46 exhibits.

The lawyer, who said the motion was in “three volumes,” prayed the court to grant the application.

Relying on the processes, he urged the court to hold that Malami and other respondents had “woefully failed to show cause” that the properties “were acquired legitimately.”

He urged the court to order the forfeiture of the properties permanently to the Federal Government.

Responding, Adedeji said the application, filed on 27 Feb. 27 and supported by a 109-paragraph affidavit, was deposed to by Malami himself.

He said the affidavit was filed to show cause why the final forfeiture order should not be granted.

Adedeji urged the court not only to set aside the earlier interim order, but also to hold that the respondents had demonstrated that the properties “were not acquired from proceeds of crime.”

He argued that the EFCC merely relied on suspicion to allege that the properties were acquired with proceeds of crime.

“The court deals with evidence, not suspicion,” he said.

He urged the court to discountenance the submission of EFCC’s lawyer.

Adedeji further argued that the prosecution relied on “extra judicial evidence” ordinarily meant for cross examination during criminal trial proceedings as evidence in the current case.

He said there was no way the court could properly determine the matter without oral evidence, which the court had earlier refused.

He maintained that the properties, including some acquired before Malami assumed office, “were not proceeds of crime.”

Adedeji also moved other separate counter affidavits and further affidavits on behalf of some other respondents and companies listed in the matter.

He urged the court to refuse the forfeiture request.

Besides, other lawyers, who equally appeared for individuals and some companies seeking to show cause, urged the court to dismiss the final forfeiture application in the interest of justice.

Justice Abdulmalik consequently adjourned the matter until July 6 for judgment.

The absence of Mr Joseph Daudu, SAN, counsel to Abubakar Malami, in court on Friday stalled the ongoing trial on alleged money laundering offences to the tune of N8.7 billion.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Malami, the former Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, is being prosecuted alongside his wife, Hajia Asabe Bashir, and son, Abdulaziz, by the EFCC.

The matter, which was fixed for continuation of trial before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court in Abuja, could not proceed because Daudu was not in court.

Although the EFCC’s lawyer, Jibrin Okutepa, SAN, was in court, including the defendants, their lawyer was conspicuously absent.

It was, however, learnt that Daudu had earlier written to the court seeking an adjournment of the case.

In view of the development, Justice Abdulmalik adjourned the matter until June 23 for continuation of trial.

NAN reports that two prosecution witnesses had, on March 16, told the court how millions of Naira were paid into companies’ accounts linked to Malami, Asabe and Abdulaziz.

The trio are standing trial on a 16-count money laundering charges involving N8. 7 billion.

The anti-graft agency had, on March 6, opened its case against the defendants by calling its 1st prosecution witness (PW-1), David Ajoma, a compliance officer with Sterling Bank.

Malami, his wife and son were re-arraigned on Feb. 27 over alleged money laundering charge but pleaded not guilty.

They were, thereafter, remanded in Kuje and Suleja Correctional Centres before their bail application was heard.

Justice Abdulmalik, on March 6, admitted them to a N200 million bail each with two sureties each in like sum.

The judge ordered that one of the sureties shall deposit his or her title deeds of a landed property located at Maitama or Asokoro, Abuja, to the registrar of the court.

The judge, who ordered the defendants to also deposit their international passports with the court, had since perfected their bail conditions.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), on Friday, opened its case against Mr Abubakar Malami, SAN, former Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice; his wife, Asabe Bashir, and son, Abdulaziz, in the alleged money laundering trial to the tune of N8.7 billion.

Justice Abdulmalik directed the EFCC to call its first witness, upon resumes hearing in the matter.

Although Joseph Daudu, SAN, who appeared for the defendants, attempted to draw the court’s attention to his clients’ pending bail application, the judge declined the lawyer’s request.

Justice Abdulmalik reminded Daudu that on the last adjourned date, she made an order to the effect.

Justice Abdulmalik held that the bail application and other motions would be taken after the EFCC’s 1st prosecution witness (PW-1) had given his evidence-in-chief.

Following the directive, the EFCC lawyer, Jibrin Okutepa, SAN, called their (PW-1), David Ajoma, a banker.

Giving his evidence, Ajoma told the court that he works as a compliance officer with Sterling Bank in Abuja.

He said he had worked with the bank for three years and handles compliance requests from law enforcement agencies.

The PW-1 testified that on Dec. 2, 2025, Sterling Bank received a request from the EFCC seeking details of loan facilities granted to Rayham Hotel Limited.

According to him, the bank subsequently forwarded the requested documents, including the account opening package, loan account statements, and other supporting records.

The witness, who was led in evidence-in-chief by Okutepa, further told the court that the loan facility granted to Rayham Hotel Limited was backed by a cash collateral from Metropolitan Autotech.

He explained that both Metropolitan Autotech and Rayham Hotel Limited maintain separate accounts with Sterling Bank.

He said the signatory to the Metropolitan Autotech account is one Hassan Aliyu.

Under cross-examination by Daudu, Ajoma admitted that he was not the relationship manager for either Rayham Hotel Limited or Metropolitan Autotech accounts and was therefore not privy to the specific details or purposes of inflows into the accounts.

He also confirmed that the name of the former AGF, Malami, did not appear on the loan application documents presented to the court.

According to the witness, the only name appearing on the loan application was Abdulaziz Malami, who signed as the Managing Director of Rayham Hotel Limited.

Ajoma further told the court that none of the transactions reviewed by the bank originated from any government account, the Federal Ministry of Justice or from Malami personally.

The witness also stated that from the documents available before the court, he could not identify any suspicious transaction linked to the accounts under review.

He added that no transaction was found to be in breach of regulations issued by the Central Bank of Nigeria.

After the witness concluded his testimony, Daudu moved the bail application for Malami, his wife and their son.

Although Okutepa told the court that the commission would not be opposing, he urged the judge to impose conditions that would guarantee the defendants’ availability for trial.

Justice Abdulmalik granted the bail application following no objection by the anti-graft agency.

The judge admitted Malami, his wife and son to a N200 million bail each with two sureties each in like sum.

Justice Abdulmalik ordered that one of the sureties shall deposit his or her title deeds of a landed property located at Maitama or Asokoro, Abuja, to the registrar of the court.

The judge, who ordered the defendants to also deposit their international passports with the court, held that the trio would be remanded in Kuje and Suleja Correctional Centres pending the perfection of their bail terms.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Malami, Asabe and Abdulaziz are being prosecuted on a 16-count charge bordering on alleged money laundering to the tune of N8. 7 billion.

NAN reports the Justice Abdulmalik had, on Feb. 27, admitted Malami and Abdulaziz to a N200 million bail with two sureties in like sum in another charge earlier filed by the Department of State Services (DSS) over alleged terrorism and illegal possession of firearms.

The case had, since, been taken over by the office of the current AGF, Mr Lateef Fagbemi, SAN.

Justice Obiora Egwuatu, on Thursday, recused (withdrew) himself from the two cases filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) against Mr Abubakar Malami, former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice.

Justice Egwuatu, who was recently re-assigned the case by the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice John Tsoho, said he decided to withdraw from the two cases for personal reasons and for better interest of justice.

The development occured shortly after the civil suit for forfeiture of 57 property allegedly linked to Malami was called for mention.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the cases were formerly before Justice Emeka Nwite, who sat as vacation judge during the Christmas break.

The Federal High Court in Abuja, on Wednesday, admitted Mr Abubakar Malami, SAN, former Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF); his son, Abubakar Abdulaziz and wife, Hajia Bashir Asabe, to a N500 million bail each with two sureties each in the like sum.

Justice Emeka Nwite, in a ruling, held that the reasons adduced by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for opposing the defendants’ bail application were not concrete enough to deny them the request.

According to Justice Nwite, it tilts towards speculations.

The judge, therefore, granted them bail in the sum of N500 million each with two sureties who must be property owners in Asokoro, Maitama or Gwarimpa within the Federal Capital Territory.

He said that the documents of the landed property must be verified by the deputy registrar, Litigation, of the court.

He said that the defendants must deposit all their international passports to the deputy registrar, Litigation, of the court and they must not travel outside the country without the court permission.

Justice Nwite also ordered that the defendants and their sureties must deposit two passport photographs each to the court registrar.

Besides, the judge ordered that the residents of the sureties must be verified by the court registrar.

Justice Nwite, who ordered that the defendants must remain in Kuje and Suleja Correctional Centres pending the perfection of their bail conditions, adjourned the matter until Jan. 17 for commencement of trial.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the EFCC had, in the charge marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/700/2025, named the ex-minister, Hajia Bashir Asabe, his wife and an employee of a firm linked to the former minister, Rahamaniyya Properties Ltd, and his son as 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants respectively.

The anti-graft agency, in the 16 counts, accused the defendants of carrying out various suspicious transactions and attempting to conceal the unlawful origin of billions of naira through bank accounts and property acquisitions across Abuja, Kano and Kebbi.

They allegedly committed the offences between 2015 and 2025, a period that includes the eight years Malami served as the AGF during the late former President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration.

The commission alleged that Malami, his son, and Asabe conspired to disguise the origin of funds, acquire property indirectly, and retain sums they allegedly knew were proceeds of unlawful activity, in violation of the Money Laundering (Prohibition and Prevention) Acts of 2011 (as amended) and 2022.

In count one, the EFCC alleged that between July 2022 and June 2025, Malami and his son directed Metropolitan Auto Tech Limited to conceal over N1 billion (N1,014,848,500) in a Sterling Bank account, knowing the funds were proceeds of unlawful activity.

Count two alleged that between Sept. 2020 and Feb. 2021, the duo allegedly concealed more than N600 million (N600,013,460.40) through the same company.

In count three, the commission alleged that in March 2021, Malami and his son retained N600 million as cash collateral for a N500 million Sterling Bank loan to Rayhaan Hotels Ltd, despite knowing the funds were illicit.

Count four alleged that in Nov. 2022, Mr Malami, his son, and Asabe disguised N500 million used to purchase a luxury duplex in Maitama, Abuja.

In count five, the EFCC claimed that between Nov. 2022 and Sept. 2024, the trio conspired to conceal N1,049,173,926.13 paid through Meethaq Hotels Ltd’s Union Bank account.

Count six accused them that between Nov. 2022 and Oct. 2025, Malami and his son allegedly took control of N1,362,887,872.96 from the same account, knowing it was illicit.

Count seven alleged that in Nov. to Dec. 2018, Malami and Asabe concealed N700 million used to purchase No. 3 Onitsha Crescent, Garki, Abuja (Hamonia Hotels Ltd).

In count eight, between Sept. and Dec. 2020, the duo and Asabe allegedly concealed N850 million to buy a property in Jabi District, Abuja (Meethaq Hotels Ltd).

Count nine stated that in Feb. 2018, Malami and Hajia Bashir acquired No. 3 Rhine Street, Maitama, Abuja, for N430 million, allegedly from unlawful sources.

In count 10, the pair allegedly concealed N210 million in Feb. 2018 to purchase a property in Asokoro District, Abuja.

Count 11 alleged that between March and June 2021, they concealed N325 million used to acquire No. 1241B Asokoro District, Abuja.

In count 12, the EFCC alleged that between Nov. 2015 and Jan. 2016, the duo concealed N120 million used to purchase No. 27 Efab Estate, Gwarimpa, Abuja.

Count 13 alleged that in Nov. 2022, tye ex-AGF, his son, and Asabe conspired to hide funds used to acquire a luxury duplex at Amazon Street, Maitama, Abuja.

In count 14, between Dec. 2016 and April 2022, Malami, Asabe, and others allegedly “conspired to acquire additional properties” for Malami with proceeds of unlawful activity.

Count 15 alleged that between June 2023 and Jan. 2023, Malami allegedly concealed “N537 million used to purchase multiple properties across Abuja, Kebbi, and Kano.”

In count 16, the EFCC alleged that between Oct. 2018 and Dec. 2021, Malami concealed “N415 million used to acquire several properties in Abuja, Kebbi, and Kano.”

The EFCC said it planned o call several witnesses, including commission staff, bank representatives, Bureau de Change operators and other financial experts.

Key witnesses include Folarin Dare, Chinedu Eneanya, Sani Lukeman, Abdulrahman Musa Basheer, Jamilu Mohammed, and representatives of Zenith Bank Plc and Sterling Bank Plc.

Folarin Dare, Chinedu Eneanya, and Sani Lukeman are expected to testify on how the EFCC received intelligence and petitions of alleged monumental corruption against the former minister.

Abdulrahman Musa Basheer is to provide evidence on Rahamaniyya Properties Ltd’s role in allegedly purchasing property for Malami.(

The Federal High Court in Abuja, on Tuesday, ordered the remand of Mr Abubakar Malami, SAN, former Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), and his son, Abubakar Abdulaziz Malami, in Kuje Correctional Centre pending the hearing of their bail application.

Justice Emeka Nwite, in a ruling on the oral bail application made by their lawyer, Joseph Daudu, SAN, also ordered that Hajia Bashir Asabe, an employee of a property firm, should be remanded in Suleja Correctional Centre.

Justice Nwite held that it would be in the interest of justice and fair hearing to allow the prosecution counsel, Ekele Iheanacho, SAN, respond to the earlier bail application filed by the defence.

“I have listened to the submissions of the learner counsel of both divide and also gone through the relevant laws.

“It is not in dispute that an application for bail has been filed by the defendants.

“It is also not in dispute that the bail application has been served on the prosecution.

“It is not in dispute that, that application cannot be withdrawn by the defendants,” he said.

Justice Nwite said that though the court could exercise its discretionary power by granting a bail, he said such had to be made after the prosecution had responded to the bail application earlier filed.

According to the judge, it will amount to an ambush against the prosecution for the court to grant the oral bail application while the prosecution has not responded to the bail application earlier filed by the defendants.

“This will breach the right to fair hearing against the prosecution

“I am of the view that the interest of justice will be met by allowing the prosecution to respond to the bail application filed,” he said.

Justice Nwite, who ordered that Malami and his son be remanded in Kuje Correctional Centre, ordered Asabe to be remanded in Suleja facility pending the hearing of their bail application.

The judge then adjourned the matter until Jan. 2, 2026 for hearing of the bail application.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the EFCC had, in the charge marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/700/2025, named the ex-minister, Hajia Bashir Asabe and Abubakar Abdulaziz Malami as 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants respectively in the money laundering case.

The anti-graft agency accused the defendants of carrying out various suspicious transactions and attempting to conceal the unlawful origin of billions of naira through bank accounts and property acquisitions across Abuja, Kano and Kebbi.

They allegedly committed the offences between 2015 and 2025, a period that includes the eight years Malami served as the AGF during the late former President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration.

The commission alleged that Malami, his son, and Asabe conspired to disguise the origin of funds, acquire property indirectly, and retain sums they allegedly knew were proceeds of unlawful activity, in violation of the Money Laundering (Prohibition and Prevention) Acts of 2011 (as amended) and 2022.

Earlier when the matter was called, EFCC’s lawyer, Iheanacho, informed the court that the matter was scheduled for the defendants to take their plea and that he was ready to proceed.

The defence counsel, Daudu, did not oppose the charge being read to the defendants.

The defendants, however, pleaded not guilty to the 16 counts after they were ready to them.

Iheanacho then sought a trial date to present their evidence against the suspects.

“In view of the non-guilty plea of the defendants, may we apply for a trial date for the defendants.

“I know we received an application for bail and we will be seeking your lordship indulgence for a date to respond.

“We got the application yesterday around 3pm. We will be asking for a date to respond,” the EFCC lawyer had said.

But Daudu submitted that though a formal application for bail had been filed, he could equally make an orally application, citing a 1995 case involving Abiola Vs. Federal Republic of Nigeria.

“Having listened to the 16 counts and having read laws on subject of bail, especially matter of Abiola against FRN, 1995, I think it is a proper application to make orally not withstanding the application filed,” he said.

Daudu, while arguing his case, gave details of why the defendants could be admitted on bail through oral submission.

The senior lawyer argued that a written application would only be compulsory where the offence with which they are being charged is a capital offence.

Besides, he said the defendants would need a written application where they would be relying on matters extraneous to the charge filed by the prosecution.

“But where we are relying strictly on the contents and materials filed by the prosecution, then, we can make an oral application,” he said.

Daudu further argued that the offences with which they were being charged are bailable ones.

Citing Section 36(5) of the 1999 Constitution, the lawyer said that the defendants are innocent until proven guilty.

He stated that the defendants, before and during the investigation, did not abscond and that they equally enjoyed administrative bail while under investigation.

“My lord will take note of the fact that the defendants are family unit, headed by a former high ranking officer of the country for eight years,” he said.

Daudu told the court that the ex-minister had been in detention since Dec. 8, Asabe had been in detention since Dec. 22 while Malami’s son had been in detention since Dec. 23.

“The prosecution has this on their record whether I am correct or wrong.

“I think they should be granted bail on liberal terms my lord so that we can concentrate on their trial and expeditiously too as well,” he said.

He said the defendants should be afforded adequate time and facility and that this could not be achieved while in detention.

Daudu reminded that those in office today may not be in office tomorrow, hence, the need to give them the opportunity to defend themselves.

“This is my humble application and I urge my lord to exercise your discretion based on Section 162 of ACJA (Administration of Criminal Justice Act), 2015,” he said.

But Iheanacho vehemently opposed Daudu’s oral application for bail.

The EFCC’s lawyer submitted that the case of Abiola and FRN cited earlier by Daudu was not applicable in the instant case.

“We have provision of Section 162 of ACJA, 2015 my lord which provides for and regulates bail during trial.

“And that provision lists out circumstances which the court shall take into account in exercise of its discretion on whether to grant bail or not my lord,” he said.

According to Iheanacho, those factors can only come into the court through affidavit evidence my lord.

“And to determine whether to grant the application or not to grant, both prosecution and defendant will be given opportunity to state their facts and these facts belong to the witnesses.

“They do not belong to counsel,” he argued.

The lawyer argued that submission of counsel is not an evidence and cannot replace an evidence.

“My lord, this is a court of record and that informed the reason the defendant filed their motion for bail with the expectation that the prosecution will be given the opportunity to respond to same.

“So it will amount to a serious ambush against the prosecution and a kind of springing surprise to the prosecution which this court cannot condone,” he said.

Iheanacho said though the prosecution conceded that the defendants enjoy the presumption of innocent until proven guilty, he, however, argued that presumption alone does not guarantee automatic bail my lord.

“That presumption must be balanced against the interest of justice,” he said.

He added that on the issue that the defendants would not abscond, was an issue of facts that could be properly said via affidavit evidence and not by counsel’s submission no matter how brilliantly presented.

“I concede that the 1st defendant (Malami) held a very high position in this country my lord and as a result, he is expected to live above board my lord.

“But incidentally, that is not any of the factors in granting bail my lord,” he said.

The lawyer argued that the charge before the court bordered on alleged serious economic crime, involving complex financial network.

“And it is a serious matter in this country because it shows Nigeria’s commitment in the fight against corruption.

“Therefore, public interest has to be taken into account so that this court will not be seen as indulging the 1st defendant because of his status and given him a preferential treatment my lord.

“So there is need to balance interst of justice with public interest in a matter of this nature my lord,” he said.

According to Iheanacho, the position held by the 1st defendant rather aggravated the situation rather than mitigating it.

“So we are praying for a short time to respond.

“We are not saying that the defendant will not have their days in court. That is our submission my lord,” he argued.

After listening to the submissions of both lawyers, Justice Nwite stood down the matter for a ruling on the oral bail application.

The Federal High Court in Abuja, on Tuesday, ordered the remand of Mr Abubakar Malami, SAN, former Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF); his son and co-defendant in Kuje Correctional Centre pending the hearing of their bail application.

Justice Emeka Nwite, in a ruling on the oral bail application made by their lawyer, Joseph Daudu, SAN, held that it would be in the interest of justice and fair hearing to allow the prosecution respond to the earlier bail application filed by the defence.

“I have listened to the submissions of the learner counsel of both divide and also gone through the relevant laws.

“It is not in dispute that an application for bail has been filed by the defendants.

“It is also not in dispute that the bail application has beenserved on the prosecution.

“It is not in dispute that, that application cannot be withdrawn by the defendants,” he said.

Justice Nwite said that though the court could exercise its power by granting a bail, he said such had to be made after the prosecution had responded to the bail application earlier filed.

According to the judge, it will amount to an ambush for the court to grant the bail application while the prosecution has not responded.

“This will breach the right to fair hearing against the prosecution

“I am of the view that the interest of justice will be met by allowing the prosecution to respond to the bail application filed,” he said.

Justice Nwite, who ordered that the defendants be remanded in Kuje Correctional Centre pending the hearing of their bail applications, adjourned the matter until Jan. 2 for hearing.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the EFCC had, in the charge marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/700/2025, named the ex-minister, Hajia Bashir Asabe and Abubakar Abdulaziz Malami as 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants respectively in the money laundering case.

Details later