The Supreme Court upholds the validity of the EFCC Act, dismissing a lawsuit challenging its establishment. This decision reinforces the agency’s legal framework.
The Supreme Court has rejected the lawsuit filed by 16 states against the Attorney-General of the Federation, which questioned the constitutional validity of the Acts that established the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) along with two other anti-corruption agencies.
The remaining agencies are the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU).
The Supreme Court rejected it due to a lack of merit.
In delivering the lead judgment, Justice Uwani Abba-Aji stated that the states were entirely mistaken in claiming that the EFCC, established by an act of the National Assembly, was illegal and unlawful.
Justice Abba-Aji, heading a panel of seven justices, determined that the EFCC Act is a convention rather than a treaty and therefore does not require ratification by the houses of assembly.
The Court had previously rejected all the objections raised by the Federal Government regarding the lawsuit initiated by the states.
Justice Abba-Aji stated that the plaintiffs’ case was directed at the Attorney-General of the Federation rather than any specific agencies mentioned. Consequently, this grants jurisdiction to the Supreme Court to adjudicate on it.
The lawsuit, originally initiated by the attorneys general of 16 states, aimed to dismantle the anti-corruption agency. Although some states later withdrew from the case, others requested to join as co-plaintiffs.
The states that filed the lawsuit are Ondo, Edo, Oyo, Ogun, Nassarawa, Kebbi, Katsina, Sokoto, Jigawa, Enugu, Benue,N Anambra Plateau Cross-River and Niger.
At the resumed hearing on October 22, Imo, Bauchi, and Osun states became co-plaintiffs in the suit, while Anambra, Ebonyi, and Adamawa states announced their decision to withdraw from their suits.
The court therefore dismissed the trio’s lawsuits.
In their argument, the plaintiffs emphasized that the Constitution is the highest law and any legislation conflicting with it holds no validity.
The plaintiffs contended that, in the case of Dr. Joseph Nwobike vs. Federal Republic of Nigeria, the Supreme Court had determined that a UN Convention against corruption was incorporated into the EFCC Establishment Act. They argued further that when this law was enacted in 2004, it did not comply with Section 12 of the amended Nigerian Constitution from 1999.
They contend that Section 12 must be adhered to when incorporating a convention into Nigerian law.
They claimed that, according to the Constitution’s provisions, a majority of state Houses of Assembly needed to consent before convening and passing the EFCC Act and other related legislation; however, this reportedly never occurred.
In their lawsuit, the states contended that under the provisions of the Nigerian constitution, the law as enacted could not be applied to states that never approved it.
Therefore, they contended that any institution established in this manner ought to be considered unlawful.
“Nigeria cannot endure without the EFCC.”
In defense of the EFCC’s existence, Wilson Uwujaren, the agency’s Director of Public Affairs, stated that without this anti-corruption commission, Nigeria would collapse under the weight of corruption.
“We are truly shocked by what is happening,” Uwujaren stated on the October 21 episode of Channels Television’s breakfast show, The Morning Brief.
Nigerians need to recognize this ploy and stand against it, as I can’t envision how our country can endure without the EFCC given our significant corruption issues. Nigeria cannot function effectively without the EFCC.
Uwujaren stated that those responsible for the challenge are “feeling the pressure” from EFCC’s efforts and wish to avoid accountability.
“EFCC is Here to Stay”
Amidst the ongoing controversy regarding the legality of EFFC, human rights lawyer Femi Falana criticized actions taken by certain states. He advocates for strategies to ensure that the commission operates independently from government control.
Falana stated on Channels Television’s Politics Today on October 20 that institutions like the ICPC and EFCC, similar to the Code of Conduct Tribunal, are here to stay. He emphasized that efforts should focus on ensuring these bodies operate autonomously, free from government control.
The Supreme Court has consistently stated that the EFCC and similar entities should not be controlled by the Federal Government.
“They are typical agencies responsible for combating economic crimes, financial offenses, and corruption in our country.”
“Established in violation of the constitution”
Earlier, Olisa Agbakoba, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), had addressed the National Assembly in writing to contend that the establishment of the EFCC was “unconstitutional.”
“I firmly assert that the EFCC is established unconstitutionally. The authority under which it was created surpasses the powers of the National Assembly, making it an unlawful organization,” wrote the renowned lawyer in separate letters to both the Senate and House of Representatives.
I am thrilled to see that numerous states have taken the initiative to question the constitutionality of the EFCC. This action will help resolve concerns about its legitimacy.
