On Friday, the Supreme Court rejected to rule that the Federal Government’s establishment of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and two other anti-corruption organisations was unlawful.

https://www.instagram.com/godfatheraluminium1/profilecard/?igsh=dWw5YW05djR4MWNl

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61558144097511&mibextid=LQQJ4d

A seven-member panel of the Supreme Court, presided over by Uwani Abba-Aji, unanimously rejected the lawsuit that 19 states had brought to challenge the legality of the procedure that resulted in the creation of the anti-graft agency in 2002.

The court ruled that because the EFCC Establishment Act was a convention rather than a treaty, it did not need to be ratified in any way by the Houses of Assembly of the 36 federation states.

As with the EFCC Establishment Act, a convention would have been adopted by member states and the National Assembly may enact legislation based on it that would apply to all of Nigeria’s states.

The federating units do not have total authority in a nation like Nigeria. Presenting a benchmark rather than controlling the funds is the NFIU’s policy.

“Any legislation created by NASS, such as the NFIU and its guidelines, is legally binding on everyone.” It is impossible to claim that any act that the NASS has competently passed is incongruous.

No state has the authority to pass legislation to compete with the NASS’s many anti-corruption and anti-money laundering regulations. It is impossible to argue that the state assembly’s legislative authority and the EFCC’s investigation authority are at odds.

The Supreme Court also stated, “I must agree with the AGF that the plaintiffs’ argument, namely the Houses of Assembly of the plaintiffs’ states, is not tenable in law.”

As a result, it settled every dispute against the states.

Recall that the EFCC was created on December 12, 2002, by an Act of the National Assembly under the previous President Olusegun Obasanjo’s administration.

Although its Establishment Act was later revised in 2004, the Commission began operations on April 13, 2003, after the Senate confirmed and appointed Mallam Nuhu Ribadu, its first Executive Chairman, and other administrative personnel.

However, the states, via their separate Attorneys General, contended in the action before the supreme court that the EFCC had not started operating in accordance with Section 12 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.

The plaintiffs insisted that only the National Assembly was constitutionally permitted to enact the EFCC Act, arguing that it was a constitutional requirement that the majority of the Houses of Assembly of States vote and approve its adoption.

They informed the Supreme Court that prior to the establishment of the EFCC by the administration of former President Obasanjo, none of the states had been included.

They contended that the Supreme Court had ruled in Dr. Joseph Nwobike vs. Federal Republic of Nigeria that the EFCC Establishment Act was a reduction of a United Nations Convention against corruption and that the 1999 Constitution’s amended Section 12 was not adhered to when this law was passed in 2004.

The plaintiffs argued that the 1999 Constitution, as amended, prohibits the EFCC Establishment Act from being relevant in states that have never ratified it since due process was not followed prior to its enactment.

They maintained that any agency created as a result of the Act should be considered an unlawful establishment.

The states based their argument on the idea that any National Assembly Act that conflicts with the 1999 Constitution should be deemed invalid as it is the ultimate law of the nation, as modified.

The Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) were the other two organisations whose validity the states also contested.

Although Kogi State first filed the lawsuit (SC/CV/178/2023), other states also submitted motions to have their own lawsuit consolidated with the case, and several states were added as co-plaintiffs.

When the parties adopted their argumentative submissions on October 22, the Federal Government petitioned the Supreme Court to dismiss the case for lack of merit.

FG, represented by Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, contested the legal action’s competence, characterising it as a danger to the nation’s continuing battle against financial crimes and corruption.

In contrast to the states’ argument, the AGF insisted that the EFCC was legitimately founded in accordance with Section 15(5) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.

The plaintiffs’ argument that the Act creating the EFCC was a derivative of an international agreement that was improperly domesticated in Nigeria was also denied by Fagbemi, SAN.