More applicants have approached the Federal High Court in Abuja, asking it to set aside the interim forfeiture order placed on properties allegedly linked to former Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami.
The applicants said the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) failed to establish any clear link between their properties and illegal activities.
They argued that this violates the law and the rules of evidence.
In separate applications, businessman Alhaji Muktaka Usman Junju and Rayhaan Bustan and Agro Allied Ltd urged the court to cancel the interim order granted on January 6 by Justice Emeka Nwite.
Junju, through his lawyer, Kalu Kalu Agu, asked the court to remove a property listed as No. 40 by the EFCC from the forfeiture list, saying the property belongs to him and has nothing to do with Malami.
Rayhaan Bustan and Agro Allied Ltd, represented by Joseph Daudu, SAN, also asked the court to exclude six properties listed as Nos. 1, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32.
The company said all the properties are legally owned and were not acquired through any illegal means.
Both applicants asked the court to order the immediate return of their properties, saying the forfeiture had denied them possession, control and use of their assets.
According to court records, Justice Nwite had earlier ordered the interim forfeiture of 57 properties suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities linked to Malami.
The properties, worth several billions of naira, are located in Abuja, Kebbi, Kano and Kaduna states.
The judge also directed that the forfeiture order be published in a national newspaper, inviting anyone with an interest in the properties to show cause within 14 days why a final forfeiture should not be made.
In his application, Junju insisted that the property listed as No. 40 belongs to him and was lawfully acquired. His lawyer said the EFCC did not provide details of any crime linked to the property.
“The commission has not established that the property is proceeds of unlawful activity,” Agu told the court.
He added that the EFCC failed to disclose key facts about ownership and did not follow due process before obtaining the interim order.
Similarly, Daudu told the court that Rayhaan Bustan and Agro Allied Ltd is a legally registered company that can own property anywhere in Nigeria.
“Rayhaan is a limited liability company duly registered with the Corporate Affairs Commission,” he said.
Daudu explained that some of the properties were acquired through bank loans from NEXIM Bank, the Bank of Industry and Access Bank.
He said the interim forfeiture order had already affected the company’s finances.
“The NEXIM Bank loan has now been called in because of the interim forfeiture order,” he said, adding that Zenith Bank had also withdrawn its loan guarantee.
Both lawyers accused the EFCC of failing to prove that the listed properties were linked to any specific crime and said the interim order amounted to a denial of fair hearing.
Malami himself has also filed an application asking the court to vacate the interim forfeiture order on properties linked to him.
The case, now before Justice Obiora Egwuatu, has been adjourned to February 12 for hearing.
