Followeing the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) response to his criticism of their meddlesomeness in state finances, the former President of the Nigerian Bar Association, Olisa Agbakoba (SAN), has decided to head to the courts to resove the matter.
Said the senior lawyer in a statement on Tuesday, “The EFCC issued a response stating that I was wrong to take the view that it sometimes acts outside the scope of its powers vested by the EFCC Act,” he said.
“The EFCC referred to some cases, but I would say that in a very recent decision, DR. Joseph Nwobike SAN v The Federal Republic of Nigeria FRN SC/CR/161/2020, the supreme court drastically limited the scope of powers of the EFCC, as it recognised that the EFCC being very powerful could not be allowed to run amok.
“I am not a court. Neither is the EFCC. I will proceed to the court for a declaration on the exact scope of powers of the EFCC, especially in relation to states of the federation.
“A declaration by a judicial authority is the most valid process to authenticate if am right or wrong with respect to my position that the EFCC often acts contrary to the law.
“I am not in any way against the EFCC on the fight against corruption. As admitted by the EFCC, I have always supported the fight against corruption.
“My concern is that the EFCC, in its undoubted statutory powers to stamp out corruption in Nigeria, must strictly conform to the prescriptions of the law. EFCC must not in the fight against corruption undermine the rule of law. So to the courts, I go.”
He had criticised the EFCC over what he described as an unwarranted media trial of the Kogi State Government concerning the fresh case against a nephew of the state governor and the previous N20bn bail-out controversy.
Speaking at a press conference tagged “The Rule of Law in Nigeria Today” on Sunday in Lagos, Agbakoba frowned at the manner in which the commission dabbles into issues of how state governments manage their finances.
Recall that a nephew of Kogi State governor, Mr Yahaya Bello, and one Dauda Sulaiman, were last Thursday arraigned before a High Court in Abuja over alleged N10bn money laundering and fraud by the EFCC.
“Like the current trending case where the EFCC arrested some people in Kogi State on allegations of money laundering, I believe that case should not be the business of the EFCC, at all. Is it their business how Kogi spends their money? Even if it is their business, is it their lawful business to make that enquiry?
“The Supreme Court has recently said in one of its judgments that the EFCC cannot be a jack of all trades and that they should concentrate on what the law empowers them to do under Section 46 of their Act.
“It is not the duty of the EFCC to be chasing the Kogi State Government and threatening to storm the State House to seize documents or harass the Accountant-General of the state.
“What the EFCC is currently doing is turning itself into a one-man Robin Hood riot gang. That must not be allowed and that is the impunity that I refer to.”
He pointed to Section 46 of the EFCC Act that narrowed down its functions and in a case where it wants to expand its functions; it must go to the National Assembly to do so.
“If I were the lawyer to the Kogi State Government, what I would do is to go to court and tell the court that as a result of the Supreme Court judgment, the EFCC does not have the power to demand that we should provide documents or give them our accounting books.
“If we have lost money, we are the ones to complain and if we are not complaining or we are complicit in any fraud, then the appropriate agency to handle it is the ICPC or the state House of Assembly.
“So the candidate (2023 election candidates) must tell us what they are going to do with all these agencies because we need to know if they are going to allow the EFCC to continue to engage in media trials and carry on as the attack dog of the Federal Government against other arms and levels of governments.”
On Monday, the EFCC had issued a statement berating Agbakoba and telling the world that he goofed in his Sunday comments.
The statement reads in full: The attention of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, been drawn to comments credited to Olisa Agbokoba, SAN, in media reports of Monday, December 19, 2022, wherein he cast aspersion on the Commission’s commitment to rule of law and its investigation of the finances of the Kogi State Government. According to Agbakoba, EFCC not only disregards the rule of law, but has no business inquiring into how the Kogi State Government spends its funds.
The Commission takes great exception at the indecorous and utterly irresponsible attempt by Agbakoba to dress it in the borrowed garb of a lawless entity and a meddlesome interloper, who has no business probing the stealing of Kogi State resources. In all his tirades, no evidence was presented to support his claim that the EFCC has been lawless, nor did he mention any law which the Commission’s investigation of the finances of the Kogi State Government violated.
Instead, his refrain was to a non-extent decision of the Supreme Court which he also failed to electorate upon. But it is important to state that contrary to the views of Agbakoba, the Supreme Court at no time delivered any judgement which forbids the EFCC from investigating fraud cases involving a state government. The Learned counsel ought to have known that the Apex Court of the Land as far back as 2010 in JOLLY TEVORU NYAME V FRN (2010) 11 NWLR (PT.1193)344 held that the “claim that the money belongs to Taraba State and that the state has exclusive claim on it to the exclusion of any other authority by virtue of section 120 of the 1999 constitution cannot stand.”
Furthermore, Agbakobas erroneous views ought to be tempered by the decision of the Supreme Court in A.G ONDO STATE v. A.G., FEDERATION (2002) 9 NWLR [pt.772] page 222 at page 308 where the Honourable Court held: “It has been pointed out that the provisions of the Act impinge on the cardinal principle of federalism, namely, the requirement of equality and autonomy of the State Government and non-interference with the functions of State Government. This is true, but as seen above, both the Federal and State Government share the power to legislate in order to abolish corruption and abuse of office. If this is a breach of the principle of Federalism, then, I am afraid, it is the Constitution that makes the provisions that have facilitated the breach of the principle. As far as the aberration is supported by the provision of the Constitution, I think it cannot rightly be argued that an illegality has occurred by the failure of the Constitution to adhere to the cardinal principles which are at best ideals to follow or guidance for an ideal situation.”
Lastly, the learned Silk should also know that his views are totally unsupported by the facts, circumstances of Kogi’s case and the decision of the Court of Appeal in KALU V FRN & (2012) LPELR- 9287 (CA) which decision knocked the bottom out of the contention of Agbakoba.
From the decisions of the Appellate Court it is clear that whilst the State Assemblies can investigate finances of their states, they are not empowered to investigate and prosecute fraud cases; that responsibility lies with agencies such as the EFCC.
It is therefore morally reprehensible for a learned Silk of Agbakoba’s calibre to promote the view that state governments cannot be questioned on how they use the resources of their states, and that law enforcement organizations cannot investigate cases of alleged wanton theft of Kogi State’s resources particularly where the alleged thieves do not report themselves! Had this view been promoted by any other lawyer than Agbakoba who rose to national prominence as advocate of civil liberties and anti-corruption, it would have been pardonable.
When men who are seen as conscience of the nation begin to approbate and reprobate on an issue, it is almost certain they are driven by motives which could be far from altruistic.
The manner in which Agbakoba delivered his message in the so-called media briefing, he sounded more like a spokesperson of the Kogi State Government than an advocate of the rule of law. By his demeanor, any citizen who thought the briefing was only a smokescreen to vilify the EFCC at the pleasure of the Kogi State Government, would be forgiven.
But Agbakoba is not counsel to the Kogi State government, at least not publicly. But even Kogi state lawyers whom he offered his free counsel on how to handle the EFCC at the briefing would not have put up a better performance. Despite not being counsel to the Kogi State Government, Agbakoba had no scruples using the media to pontificate on a matter that is currently before a court of competent justification. This, to him, does not amount to a media trial of the EFCC!
In his game of ostrich, Agbakoba continually harped on Section 46 of the EFCC Act but ignores the provisions of Section 7 of the same Act and various provisions of the
of the Money Laundering Prevention and Prohibition Act, the Advance Fee Fraud Other Fraud Related Offences Act, etc., which gives the Commission power to investigate all fraud cases.
Why is Agbakoba so jittery about the robust response of the EFCC to corruption that he would openly incite the next administration against the Commission? That essentially was the agenda when he said: “So the candidate (2023 election candidates) must tell us what they are going to do with all these agencies because we need to know if they are going to allow the EFCC to continue to engage in media trials and carry on as the attack dog of the Federal Government against other arms and levels of governments.”
Is the Federal Government of President Muhammadu Buhari against Yahaya Bello Administration of Kogi State? Where does Agbakoba get his logic of attack dogs? What is a media trial, when a case has been filed in court and the defendants have taken their pleas? Should Nigerians have been kept in the dark that a certain nephew of Yahaya Bello is facing a N10billion fraud trial?
EFCC is not averse to criticisms but it will not ignore jaundiced views masked as advocacy for rule of law. No amount of intimidation and sponsored attacks will deter the Commission from investigating cases of corruption in any level of government, or involving any individual however well placed, until we rid our nation of this monster.
