The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, has rebuffed claims questioning its constitutionality, asserting that the ongoing suit filed by 16 state attorneys-general is an attempt to undermine its anti-corruption efforts.
The states argue that the National Assembly did not comply with Section 12 of the 1999 Constitution regarding the incorporation of international treaties into domestic law when establishing the EFCC.
In an interview on Channels Television’s Morning Show, EFCC Director of Public Affairs, Wilson Uwujaren, expressed alarm at the lawsuit’s timing, particularly given Nigeria’s ongoing struggles with corruption.
He emphasized that the commission was established through proper legislative procedures and remains dedicated to combating corruption, recovering billions in stolen funds, and prosecuting high-profile offenders.
Uwujaren stated: “It is troubling that at such a critical time, some individuals would challenge the EFCC’s legitimacy. This suit reflects the fears of those feeling the pressure of our anti-graft efforts, viewing the commission as a threat to their interests.”
While some civil society organizations and human rights lawyer Femi Falana have criticized the legal challenge, former Nigerian Bar Association President Olisa Agbakoba has expressed support for the suit, claiming that the EFCC was not established constitutionally.
READ ALSO : Supreme Court fixes date to hear suit challenging legality of EFCC
Credible News recalls that the Supreme Court, fixed Oct. 22 for the hearing of a suit filed by 16 state governments challenging the constitutionality of the laws establishing the EFCC, and two others.
A seven-member panel of justices, led by Justice Uwani Abba-Aji, fixed the date after the states were joined as co-plaintiffs and leave granted for consolidation of the case in the suit originally filed by the Kogi Government through its Attorney General.
The states that joined in the suit marked: SC/CV/178/2023 include Ondo, Edo, Oyo, Ogun, Nassarawa, Kebbi, Katsina, Sokoto, Jigawa, Enugu, Benue, Anambra, Plateau, Cross-River and Niger all relying on the fact that the constitution is the supreme law and any law that is inconsistent with it is a nullity.
The plaintiffs argued that the Supreme Court, in Dr. Joseph Nwobike Vs Federal Republic of Nigeria, had held that it was a UN Convention against corruption that was reduced into the EFCC Establishment Act and that in enacting this law in 2004, the provision of Section 12 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, was not followed.
They argued that, in bringing a convention into the Nigerian law, the provision of Section 12 must be complied with.
According to them, the provision of the Constitution necessitated the majority of the states’ Houses of Assembly agreeing to bringing the convention in before passing the EFCC Act and others, which was allegedly never done.
Credible News.ng
