Former Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, has challenged the actions of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, accusing the agency of deliberately overstating the value of his assets in an ongoing forfeiture case.
The dispute stems from a January 6 ruling by Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court in Abuja, which granted an interim forfeiture order covering 57 properties linked to Malami.
The EFCC had told the court that the assets were worth more than N213 billion and were suspected proceeds of unlawful activities.
In response, Malami filed an affidavit rejecting both the valuation and the legal basis for the forfeiture proceedings.
He argued that the figures submitted by the commission were grossly exaggerated and intentionally inflated to persuade the court to issue the interim order.
As part of his defence, Malami cited a duplex in Maitama, Abuja, which he said was bought for N500 million but was valued by the EFCC at nearly N6 billion.
He also claimed that properties associated with Rayhaan University were similarly overstated by tens of billions of naira.
According to Malami, independent valuations, including assessments by estate firm Jide Taiwo & Co, placed the assets at far lower amounts than those presented by the anti-graft agency.
Beyond the valuation dispute, the former minister said the EFCC had failed to establish any connection between the properties and criminal conduct.
He maintained that all assets were properly declared in filings submitted to the Code of Conduct Bureau during his period in office.
Malami further stated that the properties were acquired through legitimate means, including income from legal practice, business investments, asset sales and gifts.
In his affidavit, he said his businesses generated more than N10 billion between 2015 and 2023, alongside additional earnings from asset disposals, book launches and other lawful sources.
He insisted that all money used to acquire the properties can be traced.
Malami is asking the court to vacate the interim forfeiture order, arguing that it was based on assumptions rather than credible evidence.
Under the earlier ruling, the EFCC was directed to publish notice of the forfeiture and allow interested parties to contest the order before any final decision is reached.
The case remains before the court and is expected to resume, while Malami is also facing separate proceedings at another Federal High Court in Abuja over allegations of money laundering and unlawful possession of firearms.
