By Mardiyyah Abubakar
The Federal High Court in Abuja has once again postponed judgment in the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC)’s bid to secure the final forfeiture of 57 properties linked to former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN).
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik adjourned the matter to July 15, 2026, after the court was unable to sit on Friday due to the judge’s unavailability.
The case had initially been scheduled for judgment on July 6 following the adoption of final written arguments by all parties. Although the matter appeared on the court’s cause list that day, it was adjourned before proceedings commenced and rescheduled to July 10. It has now been shifted for a second time.
The EFCC is seeking a final forfeiture order over 57 properties located in Abuja, Kebbi, Kano and Kaduna states, which it alleges were acquired through proceeds of unlawful activities. The anti-graft agency obtained an interim forfeiture order on January 6 and is asking the court to permanently transfer the assets to the Federal Government.
During the hearing, EFCC counsel, Jibrin Okutepa (SAN), argued that the commission had established its case through a 47-paragraph affidavit supported by 46 documentary exhibits. He maintained that Malami and the other respondents failed to provide credible evidence proving the properties were lawfully acquired.
However, counsel to Malami, Adedayo Adedeji (SAN), urged the court to dismiss the application, arguing that the EFCC’s case was built on suspicion rather than concrete evidence.
He contended that the commission relied heavily on extrajudicial materials more appropriate for a criminal trial and insisted that the issues in dispute required oral testimony.
Adedeji further argued that several of the properties were acquired before Malami assumed office as Attorney General of the Federation and therefore could not be regarded as proceeds of crime.
Lawyers representing other individuals and companies claiming ownership of some of the properties also opposed the EFCC’s application. They asked the court to set aside the interim forfeiture order, maintaining that the respondents had sufficiently demonstrated that the assets were legitimately acquired.
The court is now expected to deliver its much-awaited judgment on July 15, a ruling that could determine the fate of the disputed assets and mark a significant development in one of the EFCC’s high-profile asset recovery cases.
