Human rights activist and lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) has recently expressed his opposition to the assertion made by former Nigerian Bar Association president Dr. Olisa Agbakoba (SAN) regarding the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) being an “unlawful organization.” In his letter dated October 17, 2024, addressed to both Senate President Godswill Akpabio and House of Representatives Speaker Tajudeen Abbas, Falana refutes Agbakoba’s claim that the EFCC was established beyond the scope of the National Assembly’s powers. He points to Agbakoba’s letter dated October 14, 2024, which challenges the constitutional basis of the EFCC, and expresses satisfaction that various states are questioning its legitimacy.
Falana’s disagreement centers around Agbakoba’s belief that the EFCC’s establishment violates federalism. He emphasizes that Agbakoba did not provide any legal precedent or case to support his assertions that the Supreme Court criticized the EFCC’s operations. Falana counters this by stating that the Supreme Court has, in fact, supported the efforts of Ibrahim Lamorde and the EFCC in mitigating corrupt practices. Specifically, he references the landmark case of Attorney-General of Ondo State v Attorney-General of the Federation & Ors (2022), wherein it was established that the National Assembly holds constitutional authority to create and regulate government agencies focused on combating corruption in Nigeria.
The crux of Falana’s argument is that if any breach of federalism principles exists, it is rooted in the Constitution itself and does not imply the illegality of the EFCC. He cites section 15(5) of the 1999 Constitution, which imposes a duty on the government to eradicate corruption. He asserts that the EFCC Act and its constitutional support cannot simply be deemed unconstitutional without risking broader implications for legislative power. Moreover, he highlights that Agbakoba’s fears concerning the federalism principles lack solid legal backing, as courts have consistently upheld EFCC’s actions against corruption.
Referencing the ongoing case of Attorney-General of Abia State v Attorney-General of the Federation, Falana explains that the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the EFCC’s capacity to investigate and prosecute offenses, distinguishing it as an independent entity and not under the direct control of the Attorney-General. This reinforces the legality of the EFCC’s operations and challenges Agbakoba’s stance on its legitimacy. Falana points out that no state has successfully contested the constitutionality of the EFCC in a competent court as suggested, even though former governors have attempted to question its authority on various occasions.
In defending the EFCC’s role, Falana notes significant Supreme Court rulings that affirm the agency’s jurisdiction over both federal and state economic and financial crimes. He refers to several cases, including Shema v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2018), where the EFCC was recognized as a legal authority mandated to investigate financial misconduct across various levels of government. Falana argues that the EFCC serves as an essential regulator in Nigeria’s fight against corruption, and highlights the need for steadfast support from state governments, rather than attempts to obstruct its operations.
In conclusion, Falana urges members of the National Assembly to utilize the current constitutional amendment processes to formally enshrine the EFCC and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) within the Constitution. He believes that emphasizing their constitutional legitimacy will empower these agencies and affirm their roles in fighting corruption and financial crimes. He expresses concern that ongoing debates about the legality of the EFCC distract from efforts to tackle the pervasive corruption plaguing various sectors in Nigeria, ultimately advocating for stronger institutional frameworks to solidify anti-corruption initiatives across the nation.
