Former Attorney General of the Federation, Malami has challenged the seizure of his properties in court, arguing they were legally obtained and accusing investigators of relying on assumptions instead of proof. Through an affidavit submitted at the Federal High Court in Abuja, Malami insisted that the properties listed under an interim forfeiture order were products […]
Former Attorney General of the Federation, Malami has challenged the seizure of his properties in court, arguing they were legally obtained and accusing investigators of relying on assumptions instead of proof.
Through an affidavit submitted at the Federal High Court in Abuja, Malami insisted that the properties listed under an interim forfeiture order were products of legitimate earnings accumulated over many years.
He argued that the anti corruption agency did not present sufficient evidence to prove that the assets were proceeds of unlawful activity, describing the claims as speculative.
The former minister also alleged that authorities deliberately inflated the value of his properties in a bid to strengthen their case, noting that actual valuations by professionals differ significantly.
Malami attributed his financial standing to years of legal work, investments across different sectors, and financial support from legitimate sources, including loans and business income.
He further stated that all assets had been declared appropriately to the relevant authorities, stressing that he complied fully with existing laws governing public office holders.
In addition, he accused enforcement officials of taking actions beyond their powers, including entering properties and removing occupants without a final court ruling.
He maintained that such steps undermine the rule of law and could set a dangerous precedent if left unchecked.
The ongoing legal battle is expected to test the boundaries of asset forfeiture laws, as the court weighs whether the properties should remain under government control or be released.