A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the interim forfeiture of 57 landed properties valued at about ₦213.23 billion, which are suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities allegedly linked to a Abubakar Malami, former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, and two of his sons.
The order was made on Tuesday, January 6, 2026, by Emeka Nwite (Justice) following an ex parte application filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
According to a statement by Dele Oyewale, EFCC’s spokesman on Wednesday, the application was argued by the commission’s counsel, Ekele Iheanacho.
Read also: Alleged N8.7bn money laundering: Court grants Malami ex-AGF, son, wife N500m bail each
In his ruling, Nwite directed that the identified properties be temporarily forfeited to the Federal Government of Nigeria, pending the determination of the substantive issues surrounding their ownership and source of acquisition.
“It is hereby ordered that an interim order of this honourable court is hereby made forfeiting to the Federal Government of Nigeria the properties described in Schedule 1 below, which are reasonably suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities,” the judge ruled.
The court further ordered that the interim forfeiture be published in a national daily newspaper, inviting any individual or organisation with an interest in the affected properties to appear before the court within 14 days of the publication to show cause why a final forfeiture order should not be made.
Nwite subsequently adjourned the matter to January 27, 2026, for a report of compliance with the publication directive.
According to the EFCC, the affected assets are spread across Abuja (Federal Capital Territory), Kebbi, Kano and Kaduna states.
The commission described the properties as a vast portfolio of high-value real estate and commercial assets allegedly acquired through funds suspected to be linked to unlawful activities.
The assets listed in the schedule include luxury residential buildings, hotels, schools, commercial plazas, oil and gas filling stations, warehouses, farmlands and other high-end developments.
Among the notable properties affected by the interim forfeiture order are a luxury duplex on Amazon Street in Maitama, Abuja, originally purchased in December 2022 for ₦500 million and later enhanced to an estimated value of ₦5.95 billion; a large two-winged storey building on Onitsha Crescent, Area 11, Garki, formerly known as Harmonia Hotels Limited, reportedly acquired in December 2018 for ₦7 billion; and a five-storey hotel building on Plot 683, Jabi District, now operating as Meethaq Hotels Limited with 53 rooms, with a current estimated value of ₦8.4 billion.
Also listed are properties in Asokoro, Maitama, Wuse II, Gwarimpa and Apo Legislative Quarters in Abuja, including hotels, terraces, shops in malls and markets, warehouses and residential estates.
In Kano, the properties include buildings in Nasarawa GRA and Lamido Crescent, while in Kebbi State, the assets include over 100 hectares of land along the Birnin Kebbi–Jega Road, residential buildings and housing estate developments. Properties in Kaduna State, including a four-bedroom bungalow with boys’ quarters in Abakpa GRA, were also listed.
The EFCC further disclosed that some of the properties were allegedly acquired through entities and initiatives linked to the Malami family, including educational institutions, agro-allied facilities and development initiatives.
The interim forfeiture order comes amid an ongoing criminal trial involving the former Attorney-General, his wife, Bashir Asabe, and one of his sons, Abubakar Abdulaziz Malami, are currently standing trial before Justice Nwite over an alleged ₦8.7 billion money laundering charge.
The EFCC said the interim forfeiture was part of its efforts to recover assets suspected to be proceeds of corruption and economic crimes, in line with its statutory mandate.
The commission reiterated that the interim forfeiture does not amount to a final determination of ownership, stressing that affected parties have the opportunity to contest the action before the court within the time stipulated.
