Chapter 9 of the Salami Report and the EFCC Chairman’s Personal Vendetta Against Abubakar Malami, SAN: Why Recusal Is Mandatory Under the Law
Press Release
Office of the Former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice
Abubakar Malami, SANThe Office of Abubakar Malami, SAN, issues this follow-up statement to explain, with clarity and restraint, why the continued involvement of the Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in matters relating to Abubakar Malami, SAN, is legally untenable, morally indefensible, and constitutionally impermissible.
This statement is focused squarely on Chapter 9 of the Justice Ayo Salami Judicial Commission of Inquiry Report and how the unresolved implications of that chapter have now crystallised into what can only be described as a personal vendetta masquerading as law enforcement.
Chapter 9 of the Salami Report: The Root of the Conflict
While serving as Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, SAN, supervised the establishment of the Justice Ayo Salami Judicial Commission of Inquiry to investigate allegations of corruption and abuse of office within the EFCC.
At the material time, the current EFCC Chairman served as Secretary to the Commission.
Chapter 9 of the Salami Report addressed the conduct and responsibilities of senior EFCC officials, particularly those occupying key administrative and decision-making positions within the Commission. The chapter speaks directly to institutional accountability and created personal and professional exposure for certain individuals who are today exercising prosecutorial power over the very Attorney-General to whom the report was submitted.
Viewed against this background, the present actions of the EFCC cannot reasonably be interpreted as neutral law enforcement. They amount to retaliatory persecution driven by historical animosity and personal vendetta.
Why the EFCC Chairman Must Recuse Himself
The law on recusal is settled.
No person is permitted to sit in judgment over a matter in which they have a personal interest or prior exposure. The applicable test is the reasonable apprehension of bias, not proof of actual malice. Where such apprehension exists, recusal is mandatory, not optional.
Any reasonable observer, properly apprised of the facts surrounding Chapter 9 of the Salami Report, would conclude that Abubakar Malami, SAN, cannot receive an impartial investigation or prosecution under the present leadership of the EFCC.
Human Rights Abuses and Trial by Media
The continued handling of this matter has resulted in grave violations, including:
• The violation of the right to personal liberty guaranteed under Section 35 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria;
• The violation of the right to fair hearing under Section 36 of the Constitution;
• A sustained trial by media through selective leaks and public commentary designed to secure public condemnation before judicial determination.This approach undermines not only the constitutional rights of Abubakar Malami, SAN, but also the credibility and integrity of Nigeria’s anti-corruption institutions.
From Institutional Scrutiny to Personal Vendetta
The present actions of the EFCC under its current leadership exhibit a troubling and consistent pattern:
• Persistent media trials and selective disclosures without due process;
• Restrictions on liberty and harassment without timely arraignment before a court of competent jurisdiction;
• A deliberate attempt to criminalise lawful policy decisions taken in office, rather than identify any clear criminal offence known to law.Such conduct confirms a shift from institutional accountability to the settlement of personal scores and grievances under the guise of law enforcement.
Our Position Remains Clear
Abubakar Malami, SAN:
• Is ready and willing to submit himself to a neutral and independent investigative process;
• Insists on being tried only before a court of competent jurisdiction;
• Rejects political settlements, intimidation, or compromise.Our Demands
Accordingly, we reiterate our demand for:
1. The immediate recusal of the EFCC Chairman from all matters relating to Abubakar Malami, SAN;
2. The intervention of the Attorney-General of the Federation to ensure that this matter is transferred to a neutral and independent investigative authority;
3. The prompt institution of charges, if any, before a competent court of law, where evidence — not vendetta — will prevail.Conclusion
This is not a personal dispute; it is a constitutional issue.
If the EFCC is allowed to function as an instrument for the settlement of personal scores and grievances, then the rule of law itself is imperilled. Abubakar Malami, SAN, will continue to insist on justice according to law and due process, not persecution by power.
Signed:
Mohammed Bello Doka
Special Assistant on Media to
Abubakar Malami, SAN
