The Federal High Court in Abuja has scheduled January 7 to make a decision on the bail applications submitted by former Attorney-General of the Federation Abubakar Malami, SAN, along with his son, Abubakar Abdulaziz, and his wife, Bashir Asabe.
Justice Emeka Nwite announced the date following the adoption of their processes and arguments by the defense counsel, Joseph Daudu, SAN, and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission’s counsel, Ekele Iheanacho, SAN.
The EFCC, in case number FHC/ABJ/CR/700/2025, charged the former minister, his spouse, and their son as the first, second, and third defendants in a money laundering case.
The anti-corruption agency charged the accused with engaging in multiple dubious transactions and trying to hide the illegal source of billions of naira via bank accounts and property purchases throughout Abuja, Kano, and Kebbi.
The purported crimes occurred between 2015 and 2025, a timeframe that encompasses Malami’s time as AGF during the administration of the late former President Muhammadu Buhari.
The Commission claimed that Malami, his son, and Asabe worked together to conceal the source of funds, obtain property indirectly, and maintain amounts they purportedly knew were the proceeds of illegal activity, contrary to the Money Laundering (Prohibition and Prevention) Acts of 2011 (as amended) and 2022.
The EFCC says that the defendants collaborated on various occasions to conceal, maintain, and disguise the proceeds of illegal activities totaling several billions of naira.
According to the accusation, the alleged offenses extend over several years and involve the use of corporations and bank accounts to launder monies, the retention of cash as collateral for loans, and the acquisition of high-value properties in Abuja, Kano, and other cities.
The panel further claims that some of the crimes were committed while Malami was working as Attorney-General of the Federation, in violation of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2011, as amended, and the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022.
According to a statement signed by Dele Oyewale, Head of Media and Publicity of the EFCC, “The defendants were docked on a 16-count charge bordering on conspiracy, procuring, disguising, concealing, and laundering proceeds of unlawful activities, contrary to the provisions of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.”
At the commencement of proceedings on Tuesday, prosecution counsel, Ekele Iheanacho, SAN, informed the court that the matter was for arraignment of the defendants.
“My Lord, this matter is for the arraignment of the defendants on a 16-count charge dated and filed on December 23, 2025. We humbly pray that the charge be read to the defendants and their pleas taken,” he said.
However, counsel to the defendants, J. B. Daudu, SAN, raised no objection, following which Justice Nwite ordered that the charge be read.
One of the charges, according to the EFCC’s statement, reads, “That you, Abubakar Malami, SAN, and Abubakar Abdulaziz Malami, between July 2022 and June 2025, in Abuja, procured Metropolitan Auto Tech Limited to conceal the unlawful origin of the sum of N1,014,848,500.00 (One Billion, Fourteen Million, Eight Hundred and Forty-Eight Thousand, Five Hundred Naira) in a Sterling Bank Plc account, when they reasonably ought to have known that the sum constituted proceeds of unlawful activities, thereby committing an offense contrary to Section 21(c) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, and punishable under Section 18(3) of the same Act.”
Count five reads, “That you, Abubakar Malami, SAN, Abubakar Abdulaziz Malami, and Hajia Bashir Asabe, an employee of Rahamaniyya Properties Limited, sometime in September 2024, in Abuja, conspired to disguise the unlawful origin of the aggregate sum of N1,049,173,926.13 (One Billion, Forty-Nine Million, One Hundred and Seventy-Three Thousand, Nine Hundred and Twenty-Six Naira, Thirteen Kobo) paid through the Union Bank Plc account of Meethaq Hotels Limited, Jabi, between November 2022 and September 2024, contrary to Section 21 of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, and punishable under Sections 18(2)(a) and 18(3) of the same Act.”
Count six reads, “That you, Abubakar Malami, SAN, and Abubakar Abdulaziz Malami, between November 2022 and October 2025, indirectly took control of the aggregate sum of N1,362,887,872.96 (one billion, three hundred and sixty-two million, eight hundred and eighty-seven thousand, eight hundred and seventy-two naira, ninety-six kobo) paid through the Union Bank Plc savings account of Meethaq Hotels Limited, when they reasonably ought to have known that the funds constituted proceeds of unlawful activities, contrary to Section 18(2)(d) and punishable under Section 18(3) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.
Following the pleas, Iheanacho informed the court that the prosecution was ready for trial and requested a trial date.
He revealed that the prosecution had been served with a bail application by the defense a day earlier and sought time to respond.
In his response, Daudu urged the court to grant bail orally, arguing that the alleged offenses were bailable.
“My Lord, having listened carefully to the 16-count charge, this is a proper case for an oral application for bail,” he said, citing Abiola v. FRN.
“The offenses alleged are bailable, and Section 216 of the ACJA does not mandate that an application for bail must be made in writing,” he said.
However, opposing the application, Iheanacho prayed the court to discountenance the oral bail request.
“My Lord, we oppose the oral application for bail. The case of Abiola v. FRN relied upon by learned silk is inapplicable,” he argued.
He also submitted that the court must be guided by affidavit evidence.
“This is a court of record. Submissions of counsel, no matter how brilliantly presented, do not amount to evidence and cannot replace affidavit evidence,” he said, warning that granting the oral application would amount to ambushing the prosecution.
Speaking on the gravity of the case, Iheanacho emphasized public interest considerations.
“The charge before this honorable court borders on serious economic crimes involving complex financial networks, and public interest must be taken into account,” he submitted, adding that the high office previously held by the first defendant did not entitle him to preferential treatment.
In his ruling, the presiding judge, Justice Nwite, held that the prosecution must be given the opportunity to respond adequately to the bail application.
“Having listened to the submissions of learned counsel, the prosecution must be allowed adequate opportunity to respond,” the judge ruled.
He ordered that Malami, his wife, and his son be remanded at the Kuje Correctional Centre and adjourned the matter to January 2, 2026, for hearing of the bail application.
