Malami Reveals N958m in Gifts and N374m Salary to Court

A former Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, has initiated legal action contesting the interim forfeiture of several of his assets, which were confiscated by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

On January 6, federal high court judge Emema Nwite ruled in favor of the EFCC, granting a temporary forfeiture of 57 properties believed to be acquired through illicit means.

The properties in question are reportedly connected to Malami and his two sons, Abdulaziz Malami and Abiru Rahman Malami.

In his ruling on an ex parte motion from the anti-graft agency, Judge Nwite indicated that the assets were sufficiently suspected of being obtained with proceeds of illegal activities and ordered their interim forfeiture to the federal government.

Additionally, the judge instructed the EFCC to announce the interim forfeiture order in a national newspaper, allowing any interested parties a 14-day window to contest the order.

However, in a motion filed later, Malami, represented by his attorney Joseph Daudu, claimed the EFCC secured the interim order by concealing crucial information and presenting falsehoods.

Malami urged the court to reject the lawsuit to avoid “conflicting outcomes and duplicative litigation,” arguing that the proceedings infringe on his property rights, presumption of innocence, and family life.

The application, identified as FHC/ABJ/CS/20/2026 and lodged on January 27, specifically disputes the confiscation of three properties referenced in the EFCC’s motion, labeled as numbers 9, 18, and 48.

The contested assets include Plot 157, Lamido Crescent, located in Nasarawa GRA, Kano, which Malami purchased on July 31, 2019; a duplex at No. 12, Yalinga Street in Wuse II, Abuja, bought in October 2018 for N150 million; and the ADC Kadi Malami Foundation Building, acquired for N56 million.

Malami is requesting that the court annul the interim forfeiture order concerning these three properties and restrain the EFCC from interfering with their ownership, possession, and control.

He contends that one of the properties is held in trust for his late father’s estate, Kadi Malami.

In a comprehensive argument of 14 points, Daudu stated that the properties lacked any prima facie evidence linking them to unlawful activities or specific crimes.

He noted that Malami reported the assets identified as numbers 9 and 18 on his asset declaration forms submitted to the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) in 2019 and 2023 respectively, while the third property is held in trust for his deceased father’s estate.

“These properties, their values, and their origins have been distinctly outlined and substantiated in various asset declaration forms stretching from 2019 to 2023,” Daudu asserted.

The senior legal practitioner further detailed Malami’s sources of income, which encompass salaries, allowances, board memberships, asset sales, business turnovers, loans given to businesses, and traditional gifts from acquaintances, alongside proceeds from a book he authored.

He pointed out that Malami declared his income to the CCB as follows: “N374,630,900 from salaries, estacodes, severance allowances, and more; N574,073,000 from asset disposals; N10,017,382,684 from business turnover; N2,522,000,000 from business loans; N958,000,000 as traditional gifts from friends.”

Additionally, a total of N509,880,000 was garnered from the launch and public presentation of Malami’s book titled ‘Contemporary Issues on Nigerian Law and Practice, Thorny Terrains in Traversing the Nigerian Justice Sector: My Travails and Triumphs.’

“These income streams and the ongoing profits from businesses over the years clearly illustrate that the forfeited properties were legally and legitimately obtained as shown in the asset declaration forms,” he explained.

“The interim order was secured ex parte through the suppression of crucial facts and misrepresentations. No prima facie evidence has been submitted to this honorable court by the applicant/respondent (EFCC) to justify the properties attached to the respondent/applicant (Malami) for forfeiture to the Federal Government of Nigeria.”

Nevertheless, the hearing could not proceed as it was not on the day's cause list. The case had been addressed during the court’s recess, and after concluding all vacation-related matters, the presiding judge returned the case file to the Chief Judge for reassignment.

It was noted that numerous lawyers attended court on January 27, having filed processes on behalf of their clients aiming to obstruct the proceedings for final asset forfeiture.

Malami, who faces a money laundering accusation from the EFCC, is also currently detained at the Department of State Services (DSS) facility regarding a separate terrorism financing allegation.

Lawyers have clarified that public servants should not accept gifts or favors while in office.

Obioma Ezenwobodo Esq, a former chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Garki Branch, stated, “Laws prohibit public officials from receiving gifts to provide favors, which could lead to conflicts of interest.”

He indicated that if the prosecutor proves the allegations against Malami, it would be difficult for him to mount a defense.

The laws rendering it unlawful for public officials in Nigeria to accept gifts (especially those that may influence official responsibilities or suggest corruption) are encapsulated in several principal statutes.

Furthermore, Nnamdi Ahaaiwe Esq stated that per the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), Fifth Schedule, Part I – Code of Conduct for Public Officers, paragraph 6 states:

“A public officer shall not solicit or receive any property or benefits for himself or any other individual regarding actions undertaken or omitted as part of his duties.”

“Receiving gifts or perks from businesses or individuals who hold government contracts is presumed to be a violation of this mandate unless otherwise proven.”

He further elucidated that there are limited exceptions. “A public officer may accept personal gifts from family or close friends within recognized customs.” Gifts in public or ceremonial contexts are considered gifts to the institution represented by the officer (not a personal violation). Violations are managed by the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal.

The Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000 (ICPC Act) criminalizes corrupt acceptance of gifts or benefits (defined broadly to encompass money, gifts, loans, rewards, assets, or advantages intended to influence duties). Critical sections include:

“Section 8: Prohibits a public officer from corruptly soliciting, receiving, or acquiring any benefit (including gifts) as compensation or reward for official acts or omissions or favoritism/disfavoritism. Penalty: up to seven years imprisonment.

“Section 18: Addresses bribery of public officials, including accepting gratification as an inducement for voting, conducting official acts, awarding contracts, or favoring/disfavoring parties. Penalty: five years in prison with hard labor.

“Section 19: A public officer who leverages their position to grant any corrupt or unfair advantage to themselves, relatives, associates, or others commits an offense (punishable by five years in prison without fine options). The Act explicitly categorizes ‘gratification’ to encompass gifts and donations intended to influence performance or non-performance of duties.”

The Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC) has called for regulations on the cap amount a public servant can accept while in service.

Commenting on Malami’s assertions, CISLAC’s executive director, Auwal Rafsanjani, noted that gifts and benefits during public service work are an act of corruption.

“There should be a limit on the gifts a public servant can accept as it could be deemed corrupt; as a nation, we must take a firm stand on this,” he remarked.

Kano-based civil society activist, Comrade Akibu Hamisu, criticized Malami’s claims as an attempt to legitimize alleged illicit gains.

Hamisu, who leads the Resource Management for Accountability and Development Centre, reacted to Malami's testimony in court where he allegedly claimed to have received gifts worth about N1 billion and earned around N300 million monthly while in his position.

Hamisu asserted that such claims, if accurately reported, raise significant concerns regarding accountability and adherence to Nigeria’s anti-corruption statutes.

“It is shocking and troubling for a former Attorney General to present such claims in court,” he stated. “Claiming to earn approximately N300 million monthly demands scrutiny, as there is no recognized salary structure that supports such figures for public officials.”

He emphasized that even with allowances considered, these figures do not conform with the formal remuneration designated for political office holders in Nigeria, reinforcing that “it is doubtful that even the President earns such a monthly sum.”

Hamisu also criticized the justification of substantial amounts as “gifts,” stressing that anti-corruption legislation categorically records gifts received by public officials during their tenure as potential corruption acts.

“Every form of gift or incentive granted to a public officer during their service is prohibited under prevailing anti-corruption laws,” he added. “Consequently, the pertinent question is: who offered these gifts, on what grounds, and why were such gifts not provided prior to entering public service?”

He concluded by highlighting that these claims could further cast doubt on the former minister's integrity and his commitment to public service principles, urging the court and relevant anti-corruption organizations to meticulously investigate the issues raised, stressing that transparency and accountability are vital for regaining public trust in governance.

The Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC), which determines the incomes for Nigerian ministers, cites their annual earnings at N7.8 million, amounting to N650,000 per month for 2023 and 2024, juxtaposed with basic pay of N2,026 million and additional allowances (housing, furniture, vehicles, etc.).