The Court of Appeal in Abuja on Thursday reserved ruling in an application filed by former Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami (SAN), seeking leave to appeal a ruling of the Federal High Court over the forfeiture of properties linked to him.
Papers News reports that a three-member panel of the appellate court, led by Justice Abba Mohammed, did not fix a date for the ruling but said parties would be notified when it was ready.
Malami, through his counsel, Joseph Daudu (SAN), is challenging a ruling delivered by Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court in proceedings relating to the forfeiture of 57 properties allegedly traced to unlawful activities.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had earlier secured an interim forfeiture order against the properties.
Arguing the application on Thursday, Daudu told the appellate court that the motion sought an extension of time to seek leave to appeal, leave to appeal, and an extension of time within which to file the appeal.
He said the application arose from the ruling delivered by Justice Abdulmalik in the forfeiture proceedings initiated by the EFCC.
According to him, the application was supported by a four-paragraph affidavit and copies of the ruling being challenged.
Daudu urged the court to grant the application, arguing that the delay in filing the appeal was valid and largely caused by the time taken to obtain the certified ruling of the lower court.
‘Delay Not Applicant’s Fault’
The senior advocate argued that the respondents’ objection, based on an earlier Supreme Court decision, no longer reflected the current legal position.
He said, “The rules of court now require that the ruling sought to be appealed against must be attached to an interlocutory appeal.”
Daudu added that filing such an application without attaching the ruling would make the process incompetent.
He maintained that the delay complained of was caused by the court process itself and not by negligence on the part of the applicant.
The lawyer also faulted the EFCC’s reliance on the Court of Appeal fast-track practice direction on corruption-related matters.
According to him, the anti-graft agency did not raise the issue in its counter-affidavit and could not validly introduce it during oral argument.
Daudu argued that there was nothing unlawful about filing interlocutory appeals, especially where issues of jurisdiction were involved.
EFCC Opposes Application
Counsel for the EFCC, Jibrin Okutepa (SAN), opposed the application and urged the court to dismiss it.
Okutepa described the application as unnecessary, saying the matter fell under the fast-track practice direction applicable to corruption and financial crime cases.
He told the court that the properties in dispute were allegedly acquired fraudulently while Malami served as Attorney-General of the Federation.
“This has to do with property fraudulently acquired while Malami was AGF,” Okutepa submitted.
He argued that interlocutory appeals in such matters were discouraged because issues intended to be raised could be addressed during the final determination of the substantive case.
Okutepa also argued that Malami failed to show any substantial reason for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time.
He referred to the reassignment of the case at the Federal High Court, noting that the EFCC’s initial ex parte application was heard by Justice Emeka Nwite before the ruling being challenged was later delivered by Justice Abdulmalik after the matter changed hands.
According to him, Malami’s position was that the proceedings should begin afresh because the earlier ex parte order made by Justice Nwite had elapsed.
The EFCC lawyer urged the appellate court to reject the application and allow the substantive forfeiture proceedings to continue without delay.
After listening to both parties, the appellate court reserved ruling.
Case Linked To 57 Properties
The forfeiture case stems from an order granted by Justice Nwite of the Federal High Court in Abuja on January 6, directing the interim forfeiture of 57 properties suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities.
The order followed an ex parte application filed by the EFCC.
The court also directed the commission to publish the interim forfeiture order in a national newspaper to allow any interested person to show cause within 14 days why the properties should not be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government.
Following the court’s vacation, the matter was reassigned to Justice Obiora Egwuatu.
Justice Egwuatu later recused himself from the case, citing personal reasons and the interest of justice, after which the matter was reassigned to Justice Abdulmalik.
