Last year, during a road walk held in commemoration of the 2023 International Anti-Corruption Day, the new Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Ola Olukoyede, vowed to tackle looters of public funds, drainers of resources and other corrupt elements in Nigeria for the sake of encouraging growth and development in the country through the facilitation of a healthy economic environment.
The EFCC has been widely praised for its achievements in securing convictions and recovering billions of naira from corrupt public officials and private citizens, both within and outside Nigeria. According to the EFCC, it secured 978 convictions and recovered over N1.5 trillion in 2020 alone, despite the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. The EFCC also claims to have secured over 3,500 convictions and recovered over N6 trillion since its inception.
In spite of this, the EFCC has also faced criticism and controversy for its perceived selective and politicized approach to fighting corruption, as well as its failure to address the root causes of kleptocracy and looting of public funds by powerful elites. Some of the experts and stakeholders who have made their assessments on the EFCC’s performance have alluded to the fact that the organization lacks independence, and is subject to political interference and bias.
As Nigeria’s leading anti-corruption agency, established in 2003 to combat economic and financial crimes, such as money laundering, fraud, embezzlement, bribery, and tax evasion, the EFCC has the mandate to investigate, prosecute, and recover assets from individuals and organisations involved in such crimes, as well as to prevent and deter future offences.
However, the agency appears not to be an independent body, but a creation of the executive arm of government, subject to its control and influence. This lack of independence is a major flaw of the body for most scholars.
“The EFCC’s dependence on the executive branch has left it vulnerable to political interference and manipulation,” according to Human Rights Watch.
This dependency on the executive has been believed to compromise the body’s impartiality and effectiveness, since the chairman is appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate, and can be removed by the president at any time.
In a recent article published in BusinessDay newspaper, Olu Fasan expressed scepticism on the capacity of the EFCC to stem the inexorable rise of corruption in the country. He noted that “the agency is so bedevilled that it has become part of the problem, not part of the solution”.
Also, the executive chairman of the Centre for Anti-Corruption and Open Leadership, Debo Adeniran, stated last year that the EFCC “had become a toothless bulldog running after the so-called ‘Yahoo boys’ and ignoring those who have committed monumental economic sabotage”.
In view of these assessments, it is fair to say that there is little to no faith in the agency, despite its supposed dedication to stifling crime and corruption in the country. But are these criticisms justified?
In January 2021, the EFCC intensified its crackdown on cybercriminals, arresting and prosecuting hundreds of suspects across the country. The agency arrested 24 suspected trainee internet fraudsters in Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, following a tip-off from a concerned citizen. The suspects, aged between 19 and 35, were allegedly undergoing training on how to carry out cybercrime operations. The EFCC recovered several laptops, phones, documents, and other items from the suspects, and arraigned them before a federal high court.
While these types of cases lend a bit of credence to the commitment of the EFCC towards minimizing corruption, most scholars often question the adequacy and reliability of the agency in identifying and apprehending cybercriminals, as its approach often leads to the arrest and harassment of innocent and law-abiding citizens, especially young and tech-savvy Nigerians, who are often erroneously profiled as “Yahoo Boys”. This approach to combating cybercrime is, therefore, sometimes perceived by citizens as ineffective, indiscriminate, or abusive. Amnesty International reported in 2016 that “the EFCC routinely fails to respect human rights in the course of its investigations and detentions”.
Furthermore, allegations that the agency is being used as a tool of the Tinubu government to witch-hunt and intimidate the opposition and dissenting voices have become more prevalent. In his article, Olu Fasan noted the selective prosecution, and harassment of former ministers, governors, and lawmakers from the previous administration by the body, while ignoring or shielding corrupt politicians from the current government.
He wrote, “The Tinubu government lacks credibility on the anti-graft front. Last week, Tinubu told a delegation of the Christian Association of Nigeria, CAN: ‘We’ll continue to fight corruption’. But how credible is that commitment when his government is littered with people with unexplained and inexplicable wealth? The truth is, fighting corruption in the Tinubu government must start from within the government itself, and that must go beyond scapegoating small fries like Betta Edu. It requires a surgical operation to drain the swamp.”
There have also been concerns about the disparity and inconsistency in the way the EFCC handles corrupt politicians on the one hand, and “Yahoo Boys” on the other. The EFCC has been very active and aggressive in arresting and prosecuting Yahoo Boys, especially in the satellite towns of Abuja, where they are known to operate. The EFCC has also launched several public awareness and sensitization campaigns to educate and warn the public about the dangers and consequences of internet fraud.
However, some observers have argued that the EFCC is neglecting or overlooking the bigger and more powerful corrupt politicians, who are responsible for looting and mismanaging the public funds and resources of the country. Some have also suggested that the EFCC is using the Yahoo Boys as scapegoats and distractions, to divert attention from the real and systemic corruption in the government and society.
Ultimately, the EFCC under Tinubu’s government has shown some signs of commitment and determination to fight corruption, but it has also faced some serious allegations and obstacles that undermine its credibility and effectiveness. It is imperative that the agency’s attitude towards all cases of corruption is consistent, to enforce the fact that there is no sacred egg. This could go a long way in changing the narrative and controlling the conflicting opinions among the public. For the sake of regaining the trust and confidence of the citizens, as well as fulfilling its anti-graft mandate, the necessity of addressing these concerns by the EFCC cannot be overstated.
