The nomination, appointment and confirmation of the current Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) chair, Olanipekun Olukoyede may be a demonstration of the commitment of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to anti-corruption fight in the country; but to succeed in the campaign, government will need to do a lot more to safeguard the anti-corruption institution. While the Senate’s confirmation of Olukoyede laid to rest initial objections regarding his qualification, it is important that the office of the chair of the EFCC be consciously protected to imbue it with the necessary confidence required to deliver on its mandate, particularly given that corruption fights back against the institution and personnel fighting it. The experience of past chairpersons of the agency is instructive in this regard. It is important for the government to quickly address reservations about the new man in charge so as to remove their potential of constraining his achievement in anti-corruption. Lack of official attention to little details has in the past worked against the fight against corruption.
The EFCC is the foremost anti-corruption body established by the Federal Government to fight the menace. At the time the commission was established in 2002, Nigeria’s extreme corruption profile had become a notorious fact across the globe. Alongside that warped image was the story of debilitating poverty and menacing debts owed to western creditors. That contrasted sharply with the country’s impressive ranking as the number one oil producing country in Africa and sixth in the world. It was inconceivable to the civilised world how the debts, poverty and huge petrol dollar revenues could cohabit in the same space. Rapacious corruption could be the only answer to that contradiction.
It was the push by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) on Money Laundering, also known in French as Groupe D’action financiere (GAFI), a non-governmental agency of the G7, to correct that Nigerian anomaly that catalyzed in the formation of EFCC. At that time, Nigeria was listed among countries that refused to cooperate on global efforts to track and tackle money laundering.
The EFCC, apart from being the brainchild of the West, still enjoys the support of Western countries. The Commission must be seen to be above board by abiding by its original guiding principles and provisions as outlined in its establishment Act. One provision of the EFCC Act citizens have issues with, is the mode of appointment of its executive chairman. The chair is appointed by the president and it is observed that the office is susceptible to interference and outright manipulation by the Presidency. Over the years, suspicion has been rife that successive governments fight corruption selectively against people perceived to be in opposition. Indeed, there were instances where corruption charges appeared to have been dropped when the suspect or the accused declared support for the ruling government.
Whereas Section 3(1) of the EFCC Act allows the chair to hold office for a period of four years and could be reappointed for another term, the fact that only the president and not the Act could guarantee the tenure of a substantive chair weakens the anti-corruption powers of the agency. Nuhu Ribadu, the pioneer chairman, managed to complete his first four years before he was dropped in questionable circumstances. Farida Waziri was sacked before she completed three years in office. Ibrahim Lamorde did not enjoy the support of the then new government of President Muhammadu Buhari to survive beyond 2015, less than four years into his term.
The tenure of Ibrahim Magu was the most controversial. Apart from the refusal of the Senate to clear him because of an intelligence/security report that allegedly rendered him ineligible, Magu remained in office, courtesy of former President Buhari, from 2015 to 2020, when he was arrested and detained for corruption charges.
During those illegal years in office, Magu had running battles with all the security agencies that converged in the Presidency for periodic peer reviews. He shunned all inter-agencies collaborative engagements and was not on the same page with the Attorney General‘s office. At the end of the day, the mandate of EFCC suffered great damage in the hands of an illegitimate chair that enjoyed the backing of his principal.
Meanwhile, AbdulRasheed Bawa who took over from Magu was suspended from office on June 14 and was locked up by the Department of State Services (DSS) for more than four months and without trial for any misdeeds; released only last October 25. There hasn’t been any official explanation for his incarceration.
Clearly, the provision for appointing the EFCC chair in the enabling Act has not allowed the commission to function well. Like the chair of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), leaving the president as sole appointer is potentially injurious to the independence of both commissions, given that public perception may occasion wrong notions. This provision should be reviewed.
The EFCC is the apex body and most sensitive of all agencies that are charged with fighting financial crimes. It deserves government’s staunch support to debunk misguided public perception about the credibility of its head. Government can do without such constraints. The Senate that is vested with the powers of confirmation and oversight functions also have a key role to play in ensuring the smooth running of the EFCC. It can do better than it has done in the recent past.
Meanwhile, the Federal High Court is looking into two separate suits challenging Olukoyede’s appointment for alleged non-compliance with the combined provisions of Sections 1(1), 1(2) and (3), 4 and 15(5) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic as amended and Section 2(1)(a) of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act 2004. As the Judiciary looks into the contention, it is time to get the Commission and other financial crimes agencies working without interference and manipulation, real or imagined, by the Presidency. An independent EFCC will check corruption, both in the executive and the legislature. But an EFCC that is perceived to be unduly beholden to the Presidency and the National Assembly will be hampered in the discharge of its responsibilities. Let this government do things differently to achieve a better result.
END
Be the first to comment