In a press release issued on Wednesday and signed by Mohammed Bello Doka, Special Assistant on Media to Malami, the office said EFCC’s action occurred “immediately after the release of our statement addressing Chapter 9 of the Salami Report.”
The former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, SAN, has alleged that operatives of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) carried out coordinated raids on his offices and private residences shortly after his camp publicly referenced Chapter 9 of the Justice Ayo Salami Judicial Commission of Inquiry Report.
In a press release issued on Wednesday and signed by Mohammed Bello Doka, Special Assistant on Media to Malami, the office said EFCC’s action occurred “immediately after the release of our statement addressing Chapter 9 of the Salami Report.”
According to the statement, EFCC operatives “carried out coordinated raids on our offices and on the private residences of Mr. Abubakar Malami, SAN, in Abuja and Kebbi State.”
The office alleged that the raids were conducted “without prior notice” and were “expressly directed at searching for documents allegedly connected to Chapter 9 of the Salami Report.”
Malami’s camp described the development as “deeply alarming,” noting that it followed closely after “a public call for the EFCC Chairman’s recusal on grounds of bias arising from Chapter 9.”
“This development,” the statement said, “raise[s] grave concerns about intimidation, retaliation, and the safety of our staff and of Abubakar Malami, SAN.”
The office further claimed that it was placing “Nigerians and the international community on notice,” warning that “any harm to our personnel or to Abubakar Malami, SAN, will be solely attributable to this pattern of conduct.”
In the statement, Malami’s office urged Nigerians, particularly journalists, to interrogate the timing and legality of the EFCC’s actions, calling on the media to ask “vital and germane questions.”
Among the questions raised were: “Why did these raids occur immediately after public reference to Chapter 9?” and “What specific authority justified searches focused on Chapter 9 of the Salami Report?”
The statement also questioned the conduct of the EFCC, asking: “If the process is impartial, why resort to force and secrecy rather than due process?” and “Why has Chapter 9 remained a matter of contention years after the report’s submission?”
Malami’s camp further appealed to civil society organisations, professional bodies and human rights groups to intervene, urging them to “urgently pressure the Federal Government, the Federal Ministry of Justice, and the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation to release the Justice Ayo Salami Judicial Commission of Inquiry Report, particularly Chapter 9.”
According to the statement, such a release is necessary “in the interest of transparency, accountability, and public confidence.”
Despite the allegations against the EFCC, the former AGF’s team maintained that Malami “remains committed to submitting himself to a neutral and lawful process before a court of competent jurisdiction.”
“Intimidation, raids, and media trials cannot substitute for due process,” the statement added.
In a statement earlier released, Malami’s office expanded on its position, arguing that the controversy surrounding Chapter 9 of the Salami Report lies at the heart of the dispute between the former Attorney-General and the EFCC leadership.
The office said the statement was intended to explain “with clarity and restraint” why the continued involvement of the EFCC Chairman in matters concerning Malami was “legally untenable, morally indefensible, and constitutionally impermissible.”
It described the situation as one in which “the unresolved implications of that chapter have now crystallised into what can only be described as a personal vendetta masquerading as law enforcement.”
The statement recalled that while Malami served as Attorney-General, he supervised the establishment of the Justice Ayo Salami Judicial Commission of Inquiry to investigate “allegations of corruption and abuse of office within the EFCC,” noting that the current EFCC Chairman served as “Secretary to the Commission.”
According to Malami’s camp, Chapter 9 of the report “addressed the conduct and responsibilities of senior EFCC officials” and “speaks directly to institutional accountability.”
It argued that, viewed against this background, “the present actions of the EFCC cannot reasonably be interpreted as neutral law enforcement.”
The office insisted that the applicable legal standard was “the reasonable apprehension of bias, not proof of actual malice,” stressing that where such apprehension exists, “recusal is mandatory, not optional.”
Reiterating its position, the office said Malami “is ready and willing to submit himself to a neutral and independent investigative process” and “insists on being tried only before a court of competent jurisdiction.”
“This is not a personal dispute; it is a constitutional issue,” the statement concluded.
As of the time of filing this report, the EFCC had not issued any public response to the allegations.