BETWEEN EFCC AND THE OPPOSITION

The fight against corruption should be done wholesale, without discrimination

As the 2027 general election closes in, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has been accused of being “weaponised” to deliberately weaken rival parties for the benefit of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). Expectedly, the commission has dismissed these allegations as a deliberate attempt by some political actors to shield themselves from corruption investigations. “Where is persecution in asking a suspect of corrupt practice to account for his sleaze?” the EFCC’ asked while claiming that the accusations amount to a misrepresentation of its statutory responsibilities and a distraction from its core mandate of tackling economic and financial crimes.

The EFCC has also argued that records of arrests and prosecutions over the last two years contradict allegations of selectivity, and that prominent figures from both the ruling party and opposition parties have been subjected to investigation and prosecution. Likewise, the presidency has rejected the allegation of “weaponisation” as a distraction from politicians they describe as running short of campaign issues to challenge President Bola Tinubu and the APC at the 2027 general election. “No one is above the law,” declared presidential spokesman, Bayo Onanuga. “Everyone must be accountable for their actions, both in and out of the office. Political affiliation should not be a shield against EFCC statutory work.”

In principle, we subscribe to the notion that political affiliation should not be a shield for anybody in a country where impunity reigns. Therefore, whatever may be the modus operandi of the EFCC, they are not entirely to blame. There has been massive institutional steeple chase to all honest efforts in a country where the political system continues to recompense rather than reprimand corruption. For instance, the judiciary has to a large extent been a stumbling block to the efforts in fighting graft. Several cases against prominent political figures have been held up in courts for years with the connivance of senior members of the bar. The country’s feeble and overstrained judiciary offers infinite openings for many of these experienced defence lawyers to secure never-ending and sometimes dizzy delays as well as dubious perpetual injunctions against criminal prosecutions.

Given the foregoing, the fight against corruption seems designed to give only the appearance of dealing with a problem. To compound the problem, the scourge of corruption has grown in monstrosity because every administration has failed to speak with precision and clarity about the problem when politics is involved. As it was with previous administrations, it is also common knowledge that cases of some highly placed politicians hauled before the commission for corrupt practices almost always fizzle out, especially after switching political camps to join the ruling party.

The situation is not helped by the way presidential pardons are granted to prominent politically exposed persons. Even in cases where the EFCC may have succeeded in securing convictions, hardly do these people serve their complete jail term before being released and pardoned. A few of them go on to contest elections and return to public offices which makes a total mockery of all the anticorruption efforts. While we cannot blame the commission for those political decisions, they nonetheless impact their work and effectiveness. But we must make it clear that all public officials should always be ready to account for their stewardship.

The mandate of the EFCC is clear: to investigate and prosecute economic and financial crimes without regard to political affiliation, ethnicity, religion or status, except where constitutional immunity applies to serving political office holders. While we subscribe to the notion that the law should be no respecter of persons, it is also important that the EFCC be sensitive in their operations to avoid being seen as partisan. They must also not be seen to cuddle members of the ruling party when they are charged with corrupt practices. But we also understand that the fight against graft is a collective responsibility essential to restoring national dignity.

For the EFCC and other anti-corruption agencies to be seen as credible by the public they serve, attempts to intimidate or blackmail individuals and groups because of their political persuasions should be avoided.