Photo: Justice Kudirat Keke-Ekun, Chief Justice of Nigeria
On Friday, the Supreme Court of Nigeria delivered a landmark ruling, rejecting a legal challenge brought by 19 states against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), as well as two other anti-corruption agencies.
The states had questioned the legality of the process through which these bodies were established, but the Court dismissed the suit, upholding the constitutional validity of the EFCC and its associated institutions.
The seven-member panel of the Court, headed by Justice Uwani Abba-Aji, unanimously ruled against the states, affirming that the EFCC’s creation did not require ratification by the Houses of Assembly of Nigeria’s 36 states.
The plaintiffs had argued that, under Section 12 of the 1999 Constitution, the establishment of the EFCC required the approval of a majority of state legislatures.
However, the Supreme Court held that the EFCC Establishment Act, which was enacted by the National Assembly in 2002, did not fall under the category of a treaty or convention that would necessitate such approval.
In its judgment, the Court clarified that while a “convention” would typically require ratification by member states before it could be enforced, the EFCC Act was a law passed by the National Assembly, which binds all states within the federation.
The Court further emphasized that the National Assembly’s legislative powers extend to matters such as corruption, financial crimes, and money laundering, which fall within its constitutional purview. As such, any state law that sought to contradict or undermine these national laws would be considered inconsistent and invalid.
Justice Abba-Aji’s ruling underscored that the creation of the EFCC and its powers were not in conflict with the legislative authority of state assemblies.
The Court rejected the states’ contention that the EFCC, along with the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU), were unconstitutional and illegal because they had not received the requisite approval from the state legislatures.
The EFCC was established under the administration of then-President Olusegun Obasanjo in December 2002, with the EFCC Establishment Act coming into effect in early 2003.
The Act was later amended in 2004 to enhance the Commission’s capacity to combat corruption. The states’ suit, however, rested on the assertion that the constitutional requirements for the EFCC’s establishment were not followed.
Specifically, the states argued that Section 12 of the 1999 Constitution mandated that the EFCC Act be approved by a majority of state legislatures, as the Act was derived from Nigeria’s commitment to international conventions against corruption.
The plaintiffs further contended that since the EFCC was formed based on an international convention—the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC)—which they argued was not properly domesticated in Nigeria, the EFCC’s creation was legally flawed. They also invoked previous case law, including the Dr. Joseph Nwobike v. Federal Republic of Nigeria case, to support their claims.
However, the Federal Government, represented by the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, countered the states’ arguments. The AGF contended that the EFCC was lawfully established under Section 15(5) of the 1999 Constitution, which mandates that the state shall abolish corruption in all its forms.
Fagbemi further argued that the EFCC’s role as a national anti-corruption body was consistent with Nigeria’s international obligations and that the states’ challenge was detrimental to the ongoing fight against corruption.
This decision has significant implications for Nigeria’s anti-corruption framework.
The ruling reaffirms the constitutional authority of the National Assembly in legislating on matters of national interest, particularly in relation to combating financial crimes.
It also reinforces the idea that the creation of federal institutions such as the EFCC does not require the approval of individual state assemblies, thereby strengthening the central government’s role in the fight against corruption.
In summary, the Supreme Court’s decision reinforces the legal and constitutional foundation of the EFCC and its sister agencies, ensuring that they continue to operate within their statutory remit without interference from state governments.
Legal experts describe the ruling is a significant victory for Nigeria’s anti-corruption efforts, as it provides clarity on the legal status of federal agencies charged with tackling corruption and financial crimes.
