By Miriam Humbe
The Arewa Youth Progressive Alliance (AYPA) has accused the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and sections of the media of promoting a one-sided narrative in the ongoing trial of former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, SAN, while suppressing critical facts that emerged during court proceedings.
The group expressed concern over what it described as an orchestrated attempt to influence the mind of the Court and condemn Malami in the court of public opinion through sensational headlines and selective reporting rather than through evidence tendered and tested before the court of law in the open proceedings.
In a statement issued on Wednesday by its Spokesperson, Adam Umar Adam, the AYPA noted that following the testimony of the fifth prosecution witness, a compliance officer with Jaiz Bank, several media organisations and social media platforms amplified claims of multi-million naira transactions allegedly linked to Alkausar Farms, creating the impression that fresh incriminating evidence had been established against Malami and his co-defendants.
“Curiously, the same reports deliberately ignored the most important revelations that emerged during cross-examination,” the group said.
AYPA pointed out that under cross-examination by defence counsel, the witness admitted that she was not the account officer responsible for the account in question.
The witness also confirmed before the court that none of the defendants, including Abubakar Malami, SAN, his wife, or his son, was a signatory to the Alkausar Farms account tendered in evidence in apparent design to establish money laundering.
Even more significantly, the witness testified that none of the inflows and outflows reflected in the account records originated from the Federal Ministry of Justice and that no payments were made from the Ministry to the account or from the account to the Ministry.
“These are not minor details. They are central facts that go to the heart of the public narrative being promoted around this case. Yet many reports chose to highlight deposits and transfers while ignoring the witness’s clear admission that none of the defendants was a signatory to the account being discussed,” AYPA stated.
The group further observed that despite the extensive publicity surrounding the testimony, the witness did not establish that the funds in question belonged to Malami, that he controlled the account, or that the transactions is connected to him and represented proceeds of unlawful activity.
AYPA also drew attention to publicly available records showing that Alkausar Farms was established in 2008, approximately seven years before Malami became Attorney-General of the Federation and not even at that, established by him
“It is therefore misleading for sections of the media to repeatedly create the impression that the existence of transactions in an account automatically translates into wrongdoing by Malami without first establishing ownership, signatory authority, beneficial interest, or any nexus to criminal conduct,” the statement added.
The Alliance further noted that after the testimony of five prosecution witnesses, the court is yet to hear evidence linking any transactions in the Alkausar Farms account to the Federal Ministry of Justice.
According to AYPA, responsible journalism requires that reports of court proceedings reflect both examination-in-chief and cross-examination, particularly where admissions made under cross-examination substantially alter the public understanding of the evidence.
“We are not asking for special treatment for Malami or any other defendant. We are demanding fairness, balance and respect for the principle that every citizen remains innocent until proven guilty by a competent court of law.
“What Nigerians are witnessing in some sections of the media is not objective court reporting but an attempt to manufacture public guilt through carefully curated narratives that omit facts unfavourable to the prosecution.”
The group warned that continued selective reporting of judicial proceedings could undermine public confidence in both the media and the justice system. Preempting a court by way of pre-emptive misleading conclusion is not only unfortunate but legally unjustified
AYPA therefore called on the EFCC to exercise greater restraint and professionalism in its public communications regarding ongoing trials and urged media organisations to uphold the ethics of balanced reporting rather than serving as vehicles for media prosecution.
“The courtroom remains the only place where guilt or innocence can be determined. No Nigerian should be convicted by headlines, social media posts or selective storytelling before a court reaches its verdict.”
