The Department of State Services (DSS) on Tuesday arraigned former Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami (SAN), and his son, Abdulaziz Abubakar Malami, before the Federal High Court in Abuja over allegations of terrorism financing and unlawful possession of firearms.
The defendants were arraigned before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, facing a five-count charge bordering on terrorism financing, aiding and abetting terrorism, and violations of the Firearms Act.
Malami was charged solely under Count One, which accuses him of knowingly abetting terrorism financing by allegedly refusing to prosecute suspected terrorism financiers whose case files were submitted to his office during his tenure as AGF.
According to the charge, the alleged offence was committed in November 2022 at the Federal Ministry of Justice, Maitama, Abuja, contrary to Section 26(2) of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.
Malami and his son were jointly charged in Counts Two to Five, which relate to the alleged unlawful possession of firearms and ammunition. The DSS alleged that in December 2025, at their residence in Gesse Phase II, Birnin Kebbi Local Government Area of Kebbi State, the defendants were found in possession of:
One Sturm Magnum 17-0101 firearm
Sixteen (16) live Redstar AAA 5.20 cartridges
Twenty-seven (27) expended Redstar AAA 5.20 cartridges
The prosecution further alleged that the possession of the firearm and ammunition was without a valid licence, constituting offences under Sections 29 of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, as well as Sections 3 and 8(1) of the Firearms Act, 2004, punishable under Section 27(1) of the same Act.
Both defendants pleaded not guilty to all five counts.
Following their plea, the prosecuting counsel, Dr. C. S. Eze, applied for the defendants to be remanded in DSS custody pending the commencement of trial.
However, lead defence counsel, S. A. Alua, SAN, made an oral application for bail, which was opposed by the court. Justice Abdulmalik ruled that as a court of record, the Federal High Court could only entertain a formal written bail application.
The matter was subsequently adjourned to February 20 for hearing of the bail application and possible commencement of trial.
