By Moses Chukwudi Agu

INTRODUCTION

The focus of this work will be limited to the prosecutorial and investigative powers of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission. The article will commence with a brief facts of the EFCC against Yahaya Bello, and gradually moves to ascertaining the powers of the Commission in the fight against corruption in Nigeria; and conclude with suggestions how the commission can improve.

The story between EFCC and Yahaya Bello has dragged-on for the past five months, and seems not be ending anytime soon.

To begin with, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission had declared that Bello as soon as he left office, had questions to answer for the offences relating to economic and financial crimes. Sometime in April 2024, EFCC declared Yahaya Bello wanted by the Commission in connection with the alleged case of Money Laundering to the tune of over 80 billion naira. In fact, The EFCC boss Olukoyede vowed that he will would throw in the towel (resign) if Bello is not prosecuted. According to the Commission’s chair, he disclosed that the embattled former governor withdrew $720,000 from the government account to a Bureau de Change to pay for his child’s school fees in advance. At a later point, Alhaji Yahaya Bello was declared wanted and placed in a red list.

What Powers Does EFCC Possess in view of the Above?

The EFCC Establishment Act 2004 enables the commission to prevent, investigate, prosecute and penalize economic and financial crimes.

Pursuant to section 6 of the Act, the functions of the commission include inter alia the investigation of all financial crimes including advance fee fraud, money laundering, counterfeiting, illegal charge transfers etc. The co-ordination and enforcement of all economic and financial crimes laws, adoption of measures to eradicate the commission of economic and financial crimes. The examination and investigation of all reported cases of economic and financial crimes with a view to identifying individuals, corporate bodies or groups involved.

By section 7 of the EFCC Act 2004, the Commission has power to cause investigations to be conducted as to whether any person, corporate body or organization has committed any offence under this Act or other law relating to economic and financial crimes.

Assuming without conceding that the allegations against Yahaya Bello are true to the extent that EFCC believes, the EFCC Act endows the Commission with wide powers over all forms of corrupt malpractices. The provisions of sections 6, 7, 14-18 of the Act particularly Sections 6(b), 7(1)(a), 7(2)(f), and section 13(2) gives the EFCC powers to investigate and prosecute offenders in so far as the offence relates to the commission of economic and financial crimes.

The powers of investigation in section 7 of the Act is further widened by Section 46 of the Act which defines economic and financial crimes thus:

“…the non-violent criminal and illegal activity committed with the objectives of earning wealth illegally or in a group or organized manner thereby violating existing legislation governing the economic activities of government and its administration and includes any form of fraud, narcotic drug trafficking, money laundering, embezzlement, bribery, looting and any form of corrupt malpractices, illegal arms dealing, smuggling, human trafficking and child labour, illegal oil bunkering and illegal mining, tax evasion, foreign exchange malpractice including counterfeiting of currency, theft of intellectual property, and piracy, open market abuse, dumping of toxic waste and prohibited goods, etc.”

These powers of investigation and prosecution economic and financial crimes in all parts of the federation has been settled by the court in Dariye v FRN (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1467) 325 at 353-354, Paras E-F, Nyame v FRN (2010) 17 NWLR (Pt.1193) 344 at 403 Paras 11-G, put the issue to rest when it held inter alia:

“…It is not a defence known to law that an accused person cannot be prosecuted by the authority with prosecutorial powers on the ground that prosecutor is not the owner of the stolen items. A prosecutor need not have an interest in the subject matter of compliant before he can prosecute an accused person. He is protecting the state and its citizens…”

It is the submission of the writer that it is within the purview of the EFCC to cause to invite anyone to come answer any allegations of financial crimes with which the person is accused of. Runing away or declining such invitations is an indication and admission of guilt. Even if guilty, an accused is presumed innocent until the guilt is established, section 36(5) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).

EFCC AND Yahaya Bello Jamboree

The imbroglio, fiasco and debacle between the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission and Yahaya Bello a private citizen, is an eye sore and insult to the senility of Nigerians. As it is seen in the public domain, that in the past five months, Mr Yahaya Bello has evaded arrests, disobeyed court orders mandating that he present himself for trail. This is sharply contrasted with the energetic nature the Commission uses in the arrest of yahoo boys, harassment of undergraduate students, and intimidation of Nigerians without godfathers somewhere.

Many wonders why the powers of EFCC to arrest and prosecute Mr Yahaya Bello has been ineffective for the past five months? The writer posits that ‘if Yahaya Bello is not arrested and prosecuted in the following weeks, that the Commission has no justification to continue the harassment of Nigerians in the name of internet fraud.

Recommendations and Conclusion

It is in this regards, that the writer recommends that the provisions of the EFCC Act should be followed to the latter without an exception to anyone.

EFCC should be more professional in their dealings with Nigerians, media parade of suspects should be put to stop until court of competent jurisdiction pronounces judgement.

To ensure that they (EFCC) will not lose their cases, the Commission should have probable cause for prosecution and backed up with cogent evidence(s) to proof their cases.

Finally, the sources of law in Nigeria has been stated to be the 1999 Constitution, Legislation, Judicial Precedents among others. However, Yahaya Bello has been treated with kind gloves for the past months. The writer wonders if ‘Orders from Above’ is truly above the 1999 Constitution and EFCC Act (legislation) in the other of sources of law in Nigeria.

Again, if the EFFC cannot use the instrumentality of the law available to them to arrest Mr Bello, the chair should honour his promise to Nigerians, and kindly resign.

By: Moses Chukwudi Agu [email protected]