EFCC Acted Lawfully in Freezing Osun Account – Falana

Human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Femi Falana

EFCC Acted Lawfully in Freezing Osun Account – Falana

Senior Advocate of Nigeria and human rights lawyer, Femi Falana, has declared that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) did not act illegally by restricting the Osun State Government’s statutory allocation account. He cited landmark court judgments that affirm the anti-graft agency’s powers to investigate state finances, while also faulting President Bola Tinubu’s intervention on procedural grounds.

The controversy surrounding the EFCC’s decision to place a Post-No-Debit restriction on an Osun State Government account domiciled with First Bank has sparked intense debate across the country. The commission disclosed that the action was part of an ongoing investigation into the alleged fraudulent handling of approximately ₦11 billion in Ecology Funds, Intervention Funds, and Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC) allocations . According to the EFCC, investigators detected what it described as “precipitate and unwarranted movement of funds” from the account to various corporate entities beginning on August 2, 2026, prompting the need for swift intervention to prevent further diversion of public resources . The commission clarified that the restriction applied to only one account and was not a blanket freeze on all state government finances, a distinction that has been largely overlooked in public discourse surrounding the matter . The EFCC’s Director of Public Affairs, Wilson Uwujaren, defended the action, stating that the commission derived its powers from Section 34 of the EFCC Act and Section 7(6) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022 .

Falana made his declaration on Friday during an appearance on Channels Television’s Politics Today, wading into the controversy with a clear legal opinion that sought to clarify the legal basis for the EFCC’s action. The senior lawyer stated categorically that “as far as the law is concerned, the EFCC has not acted illegally” . He explained that under Nigerian law, the commission possesses the legal authority to freeze accounts belonging to the federal government, state governments, and local governments, provided it complies with the statutory requirement to obtain a court order within the prescribed period . According to Falana, the EFCC can impose a temporary restriction on an account for up to 72 hours without judicial authorisation, after which it must secure a court order to maintain the freeze . He maintained that the commission followed this legal framework in the Osun case, noting that the EFCC had indeed approached the Federal High Court, which “intervened based on information provided by the EFCC” . This judicial intervention, he argued, validated the EFCC’s actions under the existing legal framework, and the Osun State Government had appropriately challenged the legality and validity of the court order, rather than merely questioning the timing of the action .

READ ALSO:

The legal history of the EFCC’s powers provides important context for understanding the current controversy, and Falana traced this history to demonstrate that the commission’s authority had been repeatedly affirmed by superior courts. He recalled that in 2019, the Federal High Court in Benue State had ruled that the commission lacked the authority to freeze the state government’s account and awarded N50 million in damages against the agency . However, he said the EFCC successfully appealed that decision, and in September 2022, the Court of Appeal overturned the lower court’s ruling, affirming the commission’s power to impose a Post-No-Debit restriction on a government account for up to 72 hours before obtaining a court order . “That remains the law in Nigeria today,” Falana said, emphasising that the Court of Appeal’s decision had not been overturned by any higher court and therefore remained binding on all lower courts and government agencies .

Beyond the Court of Appeal decision, Falana also referenced a 2024 Supreme Court judgment that further solidified the EFCC’s authority to investigate state finances. This judgment arose from a suit instituted by the Kogi State Government and joined by several other states, which challenged the authority of federal anti-corruption agencies to investigate state government finances . Falana stated that the apex court examined all relevant constitutional and statutory provisions and concluded that agencies including the EFCC, the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), and the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU) have the power to probe accounts at the federal, state, and local government levels . He added that anyone dissatisfied with the existing legal framework should seek an amendment through the National Assembly rather than questioning the EFCC’s statutory mandate . “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, making it clear that the legal question had been definitively settled .

The political dimension of the controversy emerged when President Bola Tinubu directed the EFCC to approach the court to vacate the order and discontinue the restriction, citing concerns about the timing so close to the August 15 Osun State governorship election . Tinubu stated that he was “deeply embarrassed” by the timing of the action, although he acknowledged the commission acted within its statutory powers by obtaining the court order . He said preserving public confidence in the integrity and credibility of the election informed his decision, a position that drew both support and criticism from various quarters . The President’s intervention raised questions about the appropriate limits of executive authority in relation to independent anti-corruption agencies, and whether such intervention could set a dangerous precedent for future investigations .

Falana, however, faulted President Tinubu’s intervention, arguing that the President ought to have respected the statutory independence of the EFCC and acted through the Attorney-General under Section 174 of the Constitution . He stated, “In intervening in the Osun State crisis, President Tinubu ought to have respected the independent status of the EFCC and the due process of law. As far as the law is concerned, the EFCC chairman is not at the beck and call of the President” . Falana noted that the Osun State Government had already taken legal steps to challenge the freezing order before Tinubu intervened, meaning the matter should have been resolved through the judicial process rather than through a direct presidential instruction to the anti-graft agency . He suggested that Tinubu could have directed the Attorney-General to take over the case under Section 174, with a view to withdrawing the case or not opposing the motion filed by the Osun State Government to vacate the ex parte order . Despite faulting the procedure, Falana appeared to welcome the eventual move towards restoring access to the state government’s funds, quoting William Shakespeare: “All is well that ends well” , indicating his pragmatic acceptance of the resolution while still criticising the process .

Looking beyond the immediate controversy, Falana also warned against establishing a precedent under which anti-corruption agencies would be expected to suspend investigations merely because an election is approaching . He argued that such an approach could provide governments with a window to move public funds without scrutiny during election periods, warning that “we must 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” . This warning reflects broader concerns about the integrity of electoral processes and the need for continued oversight of public finances, particularly during periods when governments may be tempted to use state resources for political purposes . Falana’s comments underscore the delicate balance between ensuring free and fair elections and maintaining robust anti-corruption enforcement, a balance that Nigerian authorities continue to navigate in practice .

EFCC Acted Lawfully in Freezing Osun Account – Falana