Judge steps down from Malami’s ₦213bn forfeiture case

 

Justice Obiora Egwatu, on Thursday, stepped aside from presiding over the Federal High Court’s asset forfeiture suit involving a former Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, SAN, and two others, citing personal reasons.

Egwatu told the court he could no longer continue with the matter shortly after counsel for the parties announced their appearances.

“Ladies and gentlemen, for personal reasons, and for the better interest of justice, I will recuse myself from this case,” he said.

The judge directed that the case file be sent to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court for reassignment.

“The instant charge CR/700/2025 filed FRN vs Abubakar Malami (SAN) and two others, shall be filed back to the Chief Judge for further directives,” Justice Egwuatu told the court.

The recusal comes amid a high-stakes legal battle over 57 properties valued at about ₦213.2bn, which Justice Emeka Nwite had ordered to be temporarily forfeited to the Federal Government last month.

The interim forfeiture, granted on January 6, followed an ex parte application by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, which insists the assets are suspected proceeds of unlawful activity linked to Malami and his sons.

The portfolio includes university buildings, hotels, plazas, filling stations, residential estates and large tracts of land in Abuja, Kebbi, Kano and Kaduna states, all of which the EFCC says are reasonably suspected to have been illicitly acquired.

Justice Nwite’s interim order also directed the EFCC to publish the notice in a national newspaper and invite any interested parties to show cause within 14 days why the properties should not be permanently forfeited.

Malami had, however, challenged the forfeiture order, insisting that his wealth was legitimately acquired and fully declared to the appropriate authorities.

The former AGF urged the court to dismiss the proceedings, warning against what he described as “conflicting outcomes” and “duplicative litigation,” while arguing that the action violated his rights to property, presumption of innocence and family life.

He further asked the court to restrain the EFCC from interfering with his ownership, possession and control of three properties numbered 9, 18 and 48 in the EFCC’s application, maintaining that one of the properties is held in trust for the estate of his late father, Kadi Malami.