Follow Us on Google
Senior lawyers have faulted the reported restriction placed on the Osun State Government’s bank accounts by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), insisting that the anti-graft agency lacks the constitutional and legal authority to freeze a state’s accounts without first obtaining a court order.
The legal experts, including Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs), warned that such action, if carried out without judicial approval, violates due process, undermines Nigeria’s federal structure and could cripple governance by disrupting essential public services.
Constitutional lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Prof. Konyinsola Ajayi, SAN, said the law is clear that bank accounts can only be frozen pursuant to a valid court order.
“It is beyond cavil that this is a bull in the china shop set to break our fragile ware by way of a true federal government being nurtured by the Federal Government,” Ajayi said.
He noted that Nigerian courts have consistently defined the limits of the EFCC’s powers, stressing that the agency can only freeze bank accounts with judicial authorisation.
“The courts have made two things plain: freeze accounts only on court orders. Second, the EFCC has limited powers,” he said.
Ajayi further argued that freezing an entire state’s accounts over allegations involving a few officials would inflict hardship on millions of innocent residents who rely on government services.
Also speaking, human rights lawyer and former Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, Prof. Chidi Anselm Odinkalu, maintained that the EFCC cannot lawfully freeze any account through an administrative directive.
“EFCC needs a court order to do that, sir. It cannot be done lawfully as an administrative act,” Odinkalu stated.
A Lagos-based legal practitioner, Isiaka Olagunju, similarly said anti-corruption investigations must be conducted within the confines of the Constitution, noting that the EFCC should target individuals suspected of financial misconduct rather than impose restrictions capable of paralysing a state government’s finances.
According to him, any action that disrupts the financial operations of a state would ultimately affect innocent citizens who depend on government-funded services.
“The primary objective of government is to seek the welfare and protection of its citizens,” he said.
Meanwhile, the Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA) condemned the EFCC’s action, describing it as one that raises serious constitutional, legal and democratic concerns.
The group said the timing of the reported account restriction, coming during an election campaign and reportedly affecting an account used to pay workers’ salaries, could fuel public suspicion that federal institutions were being deployed in a manner capable of disrupting governance and influencing the electoral process.
In a statement signed by its National Coordinator, Emmanuel Onwubiko, HURIWA warned that democracy could be undermined where institutions with coercive powers are perceived as acting in a politically selective manner.
“It is unacceptable that any action by a federal agency should create the impression that governance in a federating state can be crippled on the eve of an election without the highest standards of transparency, legality and accountability,” the statement read.
The group added that anti-corruption agencies derive their legitimacy from strict adherence to the Constitution and due process, cautioning that the EFCC must remain impartial and avoid actions that could create the perception of political bias.
