Court Delays Verdict On 57 Properties Linked To Malami Till July 15

According to Ireporter Online, the court had been scheduled to deliver its ruling on Friday but the proceedings could not hold after the presiding judge, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, was unavailable to sit. The court subsequently fixed July 15 as the new date for judgment.

Justice Abdulmalik had earlier fixed July 6 for the ruling after counsels representing the EFCC, Malami and other respondents concluded their arguments before the court.

The anti-graft agency is seeking a final forfeiture order transferring ownership of the 57 properties to the Federal Government, alleging that the assets were reasonably suspected to have been acquired through proceeds of unlawful activities.

During previous proceedings, EFCC counsel, Jibrin Okutepa (SAN), urged the court to grant the commission’s application, arguing that the agency’s case was supported by a 47-paragraph affidavit and 46 exhibits contained in three volumes of documents.

Okutepa maintained that the respondents had failed to provide sufficient evidence proving that the properties were acquired through legitimate means, urging the court to permanently vest ownership of the assets in the Federal Government.

However, counsel to Malami and the other respondents, Adedayo Adedeji (SAN), opposed the EFCC’s request, asking the court to dismiss the forfeiture application.

Adedeji argued that the respondents had filed a detailed response, including a 109-paragraph affidavit personally sworn to by Malami, to demonstrate that the properties were not acquired with proceeds of criminal activities.

The lawyer accused the EFCC of relying on suspicion rather than credible evidence, insisting that courts determine cases based on proven facts and not allegations.

He further argued that some of the properties were acquired before Malami assumed office as Attorney-General of the Federation, stressing that the assets were not linked to any criminal proceeds.

Adedeji also challenged the evidence presented by the EFCC, describing some of it as material that would ordinarily require proper examination through a criminal trial process.

He maintained that the court’s refusal to hear oral evidence earlier affected the proper assessment of the allegations against the respondents.

The defence counsel subsequently urged the court to reject the EFCC’s application, set aside the earlier interim forfeiture order and discharge the restrictions placed on the disputed properties.

The parties are expected to return to court on July 15 when Justice Abdulmalik will deliver the much-anticipated judgment on the forfeiture suit.