Abuja Network News (Editorial)
A second judicial exit in a matter of weeks has plunged the high-profile prosecution of Abubakar Malami SAN into fresh uncertainty and raised urgent questions about transparency, the rule of law, and whether justice is being pursued without political interference.
On Thursday, February 12, 2026, Obiora Egwuatu of the Federal High Court, Abuja, formally recused himself from two matters brought by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) against Malami — a money-laundering prosecution and a civil forfeiture action over 57 properties. The judge told the court he was stepping aside for “personal reasons and in the interest of justice.”
This comes after Emeka Nwite — who earlier issued an interim forfeiture order for the same 57 properties on January 6, 2026 — returned the file to the Chief Judge for reassignment when normal sittings resumed, a procedural move that already delayed the matter.
Two exits. Two reassignments. One politically explosive case.
The immediate facts
The EFCC is prosecuting Malami on a 16-count charge bordering on alleged money laundering and has obtained an interim forfeiture order over 57 properties said to be linked to him, reportedly valued at over N200 billion.
Malami was granted bail in early January. Yet, in a development that has sparked controversy, he was reportedly taken into custody by the Department of State Services (DSS) immediately after his release from the Kuje Correctional Centre. His camp has described the move as deeply troubling, questioning both timing and legality.
The government insists due process is being followed. But Nigerians are asking: what exactly is due process here?
Why the exits matter
Judges do not casually step away from high-profile matters. The phrase “personal reasons” may be legally sufficient, but politically and socially, it is not enough.
Two successive judicial withdrawals in a case involving a former Attorney-General of the Federation — once Nigeria’s chief law officer — inevitably provoke suspicion.
Was there pressure?
Was there conflict?
Was there apprehension about the political weight of the case?
The public deserves answers.
Justice must not only be done; it must be seen to be done. And at the moment, what is being seen is instability in judicial handling.
The EFCC and the burden of transparency
The EFCC carries the heavy mandate of leading Nigeria’s anti-corruption war. But that mandate also demands exceptional transparency, especially in politically sensitive prosecutions.
Critics have long accused the agency — fairly or unfairly — of selective prosecution and media trials. High-profile arrests are often accompanied by dramatic press releases. Asset seizures are announced with fanfare. Headlines precede hearings.
Yet trials must be anchored in evidence tested in court, not in press conferences.
When cases stall because judges step aside — twice — the EFCC must confront a difficult reality: public confidence erodes when procedure appears chaotic.
The DSS question
Perhaps the most troubling dimension is Malami’s reported immediate transfer to DSS custody after being released from Kuje Correctional Centre.
If the state can detain a former Attorney-General under opaque circumstances, what guarantees exist for the ordinary citizen?
Security agencies must not operate in shadows. Especially not in a democracy.
Justice without compromise
Let us be clear: demanding transparency is not defending Malami. If he is guilty, the law must take its full course. If he is innocent, he must be acquitted honorably.
But justice cannot be compromised by politics. Nor should anti-corruption prosecutions become symbolic theatre designed to dominate news cycles.
Nigeria’s institutions must resist the temptation of spectacle.
What must happen now
1. The Chief Judge of the Federal High Court must urgently assign the matter to a judge who will see it through without interruption.
2. The EFCC must ensure proceedings are conducted strictly within the bounds of the law — not public relations strategy.
3. The DSS must publicly clarify the legal basis of Malami’s continued detention.
4. All court processes should be transparent and accessible to avoid speculation.
Anything less will fuel the perception that Nigeria’s justice system bends under political gravity.
A defining moment
The prosecution of a former Attorney-General is not routine. It is a stress test for institutions.
Can Nigeria prosecute a powerful political figure without chaos?
Can the anti-graft war operate free from political calculations?
Can the judiciary withstand pressure and maintain continuity?
The second judicial withdrawal has turned this case into more than a trial of one man. It is now a test of the system itself.
Justice delayed is dangerous. Justice obscured is worse.
Nigeria must choose clarity over confusion — and law over spectacle.
Abuja Network News
Tags
Editorial