Nigeria’s long-touted anti-corruption credentials under former President Muhammadu Buhari have come under renewed scrutiny following a sweeping court order targeting assets allegedly linked to one of the most powerful figures of his administration.
The Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the interim forfeiture of 57 properties suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities and allegedly connected to Abubakar Malami, SAN, who served as Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice throughout Buhari’s eight-year tenure.
Justice Emeka Nwite granted the order after hearing an ex parte application filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and argued by senior advocate Ekele Iheanacho, SAN. The properties are to be temporarily forfeited to the Federal Government pending further proceedings.
According to court documents sighted on Wednesday, the assets—worth tens of billions of naira—are spread across Abuja, Kebbi, Kano and Kaduna states, and include luxury hotels, sprawling residential estates, commercial plazas and vast parcels of land.
In his ruling, Justice Nwite held that the properties were “reasonably suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities,” ordering that they be forfeited on an interim basis. He further directed that the forfeiture notice be published in a national daily, giving any interested parties 14 days to show cause why the assets should not be permanently forfeited.
The case has been adjourned to January 27 for a report on compliance.
Among the properties listed are some of the most expensive real estate in the nation’s capital and beyond:
A luxury duplex in Maitama reportedly acquired for ₦500 million in 2022, now valued at nearly ₦6 billion after enhancements.
A massive former hotel complex in Garki, Abuja, purchased in 2018 for ₦7 billion.
A five-storey hotel in Jabi, now operating as Meethaq Hotels, allegedly valued at over ₦8.4 billion after completion.
Multiple high-end hotel properties in Maitama and Asokoro, some now valued at over ₦12 billion.
Commercial plazas, warehouses and shopping units in Abuja, Kano and Birnin Kebbi.
More than 100 hectares of land along the Birnin Kebbi–Jega Road, as well as residential estates and bungalows acquired between 2016 and 2023.
Also listed are properties reportedly acquired through organisations linked to Malami, including residential units and land in Kebbi State.
Anti-Corruption Rhetoric vs. Reality
The development has reignited a familiar national debate: how corruption appeared to flourish within the corridors of power during an era publicly defined by anti-corruption rhetoric.
President Buhari rode to power in 2015 on a promise to “kill corruption before corruption kills Nigeria.” Yet Malami, as the country’s chief law officer and a central figure in Buhari’s inner circle, served uninterrupted for eight years—years now increasingly marked by revelations of unexplained wealth, selective prosecutions and institutional contradictions.
Critics argue that the unfolding forfeiture case underscores what many Nigerians experienced during the Buhari years: an administration that spoke loudly against corruption while allegedly tolerating—or failing to check—excesses within its own ranks.
While the interim forfeiture does not amount to a conviction, legal analysts note that the scale, spread and timing of the acquisitions raise serious questions about oversight, transparency and accountability at the highest levels of government during the period in question.
For now, the properties remain under interim forfeiture, with the EFCC expected to press for a final order if no compelling objections are raised. The outcome could become one of the most consequential post-Buhari accountability tests, not just for Abubakar Malami, but for the credibility of Nigeria’s anti-corruption war as waged between 2015 and 2023.
As the court process unfolds, many Nigerians are left asking a pointed question: if this much wealth could accumulate to one man under the watch of an administration that claimed moral authority over corruption, what truly thrived during those eight years—integrity, or impunity?
