Follow Us on Google
The Centre for Public Accountability, Rule of Law and Transparency Initiative, under the leadership of Dr. Raymond Chukwuebuka Ndukwe, firmly backs the recent action of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in placing a restriction on an account belonging to the Osun State Government.
The group also faulted the Presidential directive ordering the EFCC to lift the court order on the Osun State Government.
While the President stated that the EFCC has the right to exercise its mandate as backed by the court order, he claimed the timing was wrong.
“It is imperative that the President be reminded that there is no such thing as a good or bad time for the EFCC to carry out its constitutional duties.
“The optics may be unfavourable for the President, but the EFCC must discharge its mandate regardless.
“There have been four documented instances in which the Commission has placed restrictions on State Government accounts: Benue State (2018), Kogi State (during the second tenure of former Governor Yahaya Bello), Edo State (2025), and, most recently, Osun State (2026).
“Osun is therefore not the first state whose account the Commission has frozen on suspicion of fraud and corruption,” it said.
“The 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) and the enabling statutes of the EFCC clearly empower the Commission to investigate, prevent, and combat economic and financial crimes, including the misappropriation of public funds, without fear or favour and without prejudice to the status of any individual or institution.
“This constitutional and statutory mandate is not subject to political convenience. It is deeply disappointing that sections of the populace, and especially politicians, repeatedly politicise the operations of the EFCC.
“Every decisive action taken by agencies charged with fighting corruption is almost immediately labelled a political witch-hunt or given a partisan undertone.
“This pattern of politicisation must be frustrating for institutions whose sole duty is to protect the public treasury.
“With respect to Osun State, according to available information before us, the Commission had already commenced investigations into matters relating to the State Government prior to the account restriction.
“The decision to place a restriction on the account was informed by intelligence and preliminary findings indicating that substantial sums of money were withdrawn from the State Government’s accounts between 3rd and 4th August 2026, with significant transfers reportedly made to private companies.
“The scale, timing, and destination of these transactions heightened legitimate concerns regarding the potential dissipation of public funds. Consequently, the Commission imposed the restriction as a preservative measure to safeguard the funds and preserve the integrity of ongoing investigations, pending the determination of the relevant issues.
“Regardless of the timing, which many have alleged to be inconvenient because of the impending governorship election in the State, the Commission cannot, and must not, watch idly while a State Government’s account is being pillaged.
“The Commission has a clear responsibility to act in defence of the sanctity of public funds. It would be uncharitable, and indeed dereliction of duty, for the Commission to fold its arms and abandon its legally assigned functions merely because an election is approaching.
“We therefore call on all relevant stakeholders, politicians, political parties, civil society, and the general public to desist from politicising the operations of security and anti-corruption agencies, particularly the EFCC.
“Such politicisation only serves to undermine the fight against corruption and erode public confidence in the institutions established to protect the commonwealth.
“Regardless of timing or political calendar, the Commission must be allowed to carry out its duties without interference, intimidation, or prejudice. The defence of public funds is not a partisan project; it is a constitutional imperative.
“The Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, expressly provides the legal framework for such interim restrictions. Section 7(6) states:
“Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (5), the Unit or the Commission or the authorised representatives shall place a stop order not exceeding 72 hours, on any account or transaction if it is discovered that such account or transaction is suspected to be involved in any unlawful act.
“Section 7(7) further provides that where the stop notice has expired and the order contemplated under subsection (8) has not reached the financial institution, it may carry out the transaction.
“Section 7(8) empowers the Federal High Court, upon the request of the Unit or the Commission, to order that the funds, accounts or securities be blocked where the origin of the funds cannot be ascertained within the period of the stoppage.
“These provisions have received judicial affirmation. In EFCC v. A-G Benue State & Ors (2022) LPELR-58696(CA), the Court of Appeal held that the EFCC has the power to place a stop order or freeze an account suspected to be involved in financial crime for 72 hours without a court order.
“Upon expiration of the 72 hours, where the EFCC has not concluded its activities, a court order must be obtained to extend the restriction; otherwise the stop order lapses and the financial institution is obliged to unfreeze the account.
“The Court expressly held that a State Government account falls within the class of accounts capable of being frozen by the EFCC in accordance with due process of law:
“…that a State Government Account and in the instant suit, the Account of Benue State Government, maintained with any bank or financial institution in Nigeria, fall within the class of bank accounts capable of or liable to be frozen by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in accordance with due process of law.
“Similarly, in NPG Properties & Construction Works Ltd v. Zenith Bank Plc (2023) 15 NWLR (Pt. 1908) 423, the Court of Appeal recognised that, under the applicable money-laundering legislation, the EFCC is empowered to place a stop order not exceeding 72 hours on an account or transaction suspected to be involved in crime.
“It is therefore settled that the EFCC has the statutory and judicially affirmed powers to investigate, probe, and, where necessary, freeze accounts belonging to the Federal Government, State Governments, and Local Governments.
“This power is not limited by the status of the account holder. A clear illustration is the action taken in the Beta Edu matter, in which the EFCC froze accounts of certain Federal Government agencies under the Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs.
“The Centre for Public Accountability, Rule of Law and Transparency Initiative therefore reiterates its full support for the EFCC’s discharge of its constitutional and statutory duties and calls on all stakeholders to allow the Commission to perform its functions without politicisation or undue interference,” the group added.
