The Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Emeka Nwite, has adjourned its ruling on the bail applications filed by former Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami, SAN; his son, Abubakar Abdulaziz Malami, SAN; and his wife, Hajia Bashir Asabe, to January 7, 2026. The three defendants, who pleaded not guilty to the charges on December 29, 2025, remain remanded at the Kuje Correctional Centre pending the court's decision.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has filed a 16-count charge against the trio, alleging various money laundering offences amounting to ₦8,713,923,759.49. The charges, marked FHC/ABJ/CR/700/2025, border on conspiracy, procuring, disguising, concealing, and laundering proceeds of unlawful activities. The anti-graft agency accuses the defendants of carrying out suspicious transactions and attempting to conceal the unlawful origin of billions of naira through bank accounts and property acquisitions across Abuja, Kano, and Kebbi. These alleged offences are said to have occurred between 2015 and 2025, largely within the Federal Capital Territory, a period that encompasses Malami's eight-year tenure as AGF during the administration of the late former President Muhammadu Buhari.

Specific allegations by the EFCC include Malami and his son, Abdulaziz Malami, using a company identified as Metropolitan Auto Tech Limited, to conceal ₦1.014 billion in a Sterling Bank account between July 2022 and June 2025. Furthermore, they are accused of depositing an additional ₦600.01 million into the same account between September 2020 and February 2021. The prosecution also detailed the alleged use of illicit funds for the acquisition of several high-value properties. These properties include a luxury duplex on Amazon Street, Maitama, purchased for ₦500 million; a property on Onitsha Crescent, Garki, bought for ₦700 million; and another property in Jabi District acquired for ₦850 million. Other listed properties comprise real estate on Rhine Street, Maitama, valued at ₦430 million; properties in Asokoro District purchased for ₦210 million and ₦325 million; and a property at Efab Estate, Gwarimpa, acquired for ₦120 million. The EFCC further alleged that Malami utilized unlawful proceeds totaling ₦952 million to acquire multiple properties in Abuja, Kano, and Birnin Kebbi between 2018 and 2023, reportedly through proxies and corporate entities to obscure ownership.

During the resumed hearing, an exchange ensued between the prosecution counsel, Ekele Iheanacho, SAN, and the defence counsel, Joseph Daudu, SAN, regarding the timely service of documents. Daudu highlighted that the prosecution had only just served them with a counter-affidavit, necessitating time for review and response, prompting the defence to file further affidavits. Iheanacho, in turn, requested more time to study the newly served further affidavits and a reply on points of law, consisting of about 28 to 30 paragraphs each. Daudu objected to the delay, arguing that there was no justification for prolonging the defendants' detention given the prior adjournment and insisting the prosecution had no right to reply again. Despite the initial contention, the court struck out one application and granted another at the instance of the defence after both sides had made their points, indicating a degree of professional courtesy prevailed.

Moving the bail applications, Joseph Daudu, SAN, urged the court to grant bail to all three defendants. He specifically prayed that the first defendant, Abubakar Malami, be admitted to bail on self-recognisance, while his son and wife be granted bail on liberal terms. Daudu supported Malami’s application with a 36-paragraph affidavit deposed to by his son, Nuzain Malami, along with six annexures. The application for Bashir Asabe was backed by a 28-paragraph affidavit from her daughter, Farida Abdullahi Usman, with exhibits, while Abubakar Abdulaziz Malami’s application was supported by a 39-paragraph affidavit from his brother. Daudu argued that the alleged offences are bailable, and the defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty. He dismissed claims by the prosecution about interference with witnesses as purely speculative, noting that the EFCC had previously granted the defendants administrative bail, which he described as contradictory to their current stance.

Conversely, Ekele Iheanacho, SAN, representing the EFCC, opposed the bail applications. He informed the court that the commission had filed three separate counter-affidavits on January 2, 2026, deposed to by Adebayo Daniel, an EFCC operative. Iheanacho contended that the averments in the counter-affidavits, particularly those concerning the suborning of witnesses and interference with evidence by the first and second defendants, had not been controverted by the defence. Citing judicial authorities, he argued that undisputed facts are deemed admitted and that interference with witnesses fundamentally undermines a fair trial. He urged the court to apply relevant provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) in refusing bail, further differentiating administrative bail granted during investigation from bail sought after formal charges have been filed. Iheanacho stressed that the presumption of innocence does not automatically entitle a defendant to bail.

Justice Nwite concluded the proceedings by acknowledging the heavy workload faced by the court during the vacation period, which includes several high-profile cases. However, he reassured all parties that justice would be served promptly, promising a decision in the shortest possible time. The anticipation for the January 7, 2026, ruling remains high, as it will determine the immediate fate of the former AGF and his family members in this significant money laundering trial.