Human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Femi Falana, has said the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission did not act illegally when it restricted the Osun State Government’s account.
Falana said the anti-graft agency had the legal power to freeze the account of a state government, provided it obtained a court order within the period allowed by law.
The senior lawyer made the clarification on Friday while speaking on Channels Television’s *Politics Today*, amid growing controversy over the EFCC’s restriction of one of Osun State’s accounts.
His comments came after the Osun State Government challenged the legality of the EFCC’s action, while President Bola Tinubu also directed the commission to return to court to seek the vacation of the order.
Falana said the legal position on the powers of the EFCC had already been settled by the courts, pointing to judgments of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.
He explained that the EFCC could place a “Post No Debit” restriction on an account for up to 72 hours before obtaining a court order to continue the restriction.
“Well, as far as the law is concerned, the EFCC has not acted illegally. As a matter of fact, that came out in the statement of the President: ‘We are… I’m not questioning your mandate and the exercise of your power. However, I’m embarrassed,’” Falana said.
He added, “Under the law, the EFCC has the power to freeze the account of the federal government or of any state or local government in Nigeria.”
The dispute followed the EFCC’s restriction of an Osun State statutory allocation account as part of an investigation into the alleged fraudulent handling of about N11 billion in Ecology Funds, Intervention Funds and allocations from the Federation Account Allocation Committee.
The commission said its action followed suspicious movement of funds linked to the money under investigation.
According to the EFCC, the restriction was temporary and affected only one account. It said the action was taken under the provisions of the EFCC Act and the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.
The development generated a strong reaction from the Osun State Government, which accused the anti-graft agency of taking a step capable of affecting the operations of the state government.
The state’s Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Oluwole Jimi-Bada, had said the government was prepared to challenge the EFCC’s action in court.
He said the governor, Ademola Adeleke, had given him the mandate to approach the Federal High Court over the matter.
Falana, however, said the legal question was different from the issue of whether the timing of the EFCC’s action was appropriate.
He recalled that the issue of the commission’s powers had previously gone before the courts in a case involving the Benue State Government.
According to him, the Federal High Court in Benue State ruled in 2019 that the EFCC did not have the power to freeze the state government’s account and awarded N50 million in damages against the commission.
Falana said the Court of Appeal, in a judgment delivered in September 2022, overturned the position and held that the commission had the power to freeze the account.
He said the appellate court also recognised the power of the EFCC to place a Post No Debit restriction on an account for no more than 72 hours before obtaining a court order.
“That remains the law in Nigeria today,” Falana said.
The senior lawyer also referred to a 2024 Supreme Court judgment arising from a case involving the Kogi State Government and other states.
He said the states had challenged the authority of anti-corruption agencies, including the EFCC, Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission and Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit, to investigate state government accounts.
Falana said the Supreme Court examined the relevant laws and ruled that the agencies had the power to investigate the accounts of organisations at the federal, state and local government levels.
“In 2024, the Kogi State government, joined by many state governments, challenged the investigation—probing of state accounts by EFCC, ICPC, or NFIU. And in a historic judgment, the Supreme Court examined all the relevant laws and came to the conclusion that these agencies have the power to probe the accounts of any organization, either at the federal, state, or local government [level]. That remains the law in Nigeria,” he said.
He therefore advised those who were opposed to the existing legal framework to seek an amendment through the National Assembly.
“If Nigerians—those who are concerned—want the law changed, they can go to the National Assembly. But for now, as of today, EFCC has the power to freeze the account of any state and, in not more than 72 hours, has to go to court,” he said.
On the Osun case specifically, Falana said the EFCC had followed the required legal process by going to court.
“In this instance, the EFCC went to court, and the Federal High Court intervened based on information provided by the EFCC,” he said.
The controversy was heightened by the timing of the EFCC’s action, with the August 15 governorship election in Osun State approaching.
President Tinubu subsequently directed the EFCC to approach the court to vacate the order and discontinue the action.
The President cited the timing of the EFCC action, coming shortly before the governorship election, as a concern.
The directive generated debate over whether anti-corruption agencies should continue investigations and enforcement actions involving public officials or government funds during an election period.
Falana said the Osun State Government had challenged the legality and validity of the court order, rather than its timing.
“The President referred to the order obtained by the EFCC. And as should be done, the Osun State government has challenged the legality, the validity of the order, not the timing,” he said.
The senior lawyer also warned against creating a situation where anti-corruption agencies would be expected to suspend investigations whenever elections were approaching.
He said doing so could create a dangerous precedent, particularly where large sums of public money were involved.
Falana argued that the proximity of an election should not automatically prevent agencies responsible for fighting corruption from investigating suspicious financial transactions.
“Because we must also be very careful that we don’t give a dangerous impression that when elections are 10 days away, 20 days away, 30 days away, the anti-graft agencies must turn the other eye,” he said.
He added that it would be wrong to tell anti-corruption agencies not to examine the movement of billions of naira simply because an election was approaching.
According to him, such a situation could weaken the fight against corruption and create room for the misuse of public funds during election periods.
The Osun controversy has therefore raised broader questions about the balance between the independence of anti-corruption agencies, the rights of elected governments to access public funds and the need to protect public money from abuse.
It has also brought renewed attention to the legal powers of the EFCC to investigate financial activities involving state and local governments.
Falana’s position is that, under the current legal framework and the decisions of the courts, the EFCC has the authority to investigate state accounts and impose temporary restrictions where necessary, but must obtain judicial approval to continue a restriction beyond the period allowed by law.