CSOs accuse FG of interfering in case filed against EFCC and other establishment

Civil society organizations in Nigeria, including Campaign for Democracy (CD) and Transparency and Accountability Network (TAN), have urged the federal government to respect the Nigerian constitution and the principles of federalism in the legal case filed against the Commission of Economic and Financial Crimes (EFCC) and other anti-crime agencies in the country.

The CSOs claimed in a statement issued on Sunday that the Federal Government was taking steps to frustrate the hearing of the lawsuit filed by 19 state governments challenging the constitutionality of the EFCC and two others, which they said was contrary to to the constitution and the principle of federalism.

In the statement signed on behalf of CSOs by the Chairman of the CD, Mr. Ifeanyi Odili; and his TAN counterpart, Dr. Dapo Oluwole, the groups claimed that what the Federal Government allegedly did was “an indication that the government was aware of the illegality of the anti-corruption agencies and was trying to put pressure on the Supreme Court “.

According to them, although they fully support the fight against corruption, they would not support a situation in which agencies work against the success of the government’s anti-corruption efforts.

They called on the judiciary to resist harassment and intimidation by the executive, particularly at the central level, saying a situation in which successive administrations perceived the EFCC, in particular, as a tool of intimidation, had to stop in the interest of true federalism.

They said: “As a group of civil society organizations across Nigeria, we found it appropriate to also intervene in the current debate and litigation regarding the constitutionality or otherwise of the establishment of the EFCC, the NFIU, ICPC, etc.

“When it comes to constitutional matters, all issues of concern must be properly and thoroughly investigated and resolved by the judiciary, without the federal government attempting to exert its influence. In a federation like ours, the federal government is not superior to the federating units and cannot always take their breath away, especially in matters of competing jurisdiction.

“This does not mean that we are opposed to the creation of anti-corruption agencies. In fact, Nigeria needs effective anti-corruption agencies to curb the dangerous trends of the corruption epidemic in Nigeria’s public and private spaces. Corruption is holding this country back. It is killing us and we must put an end to it or, at least, control it.

“However, you cannot fight a legal battle against an illegal organization. To do so is to subvert the very principle of justice. If it is now found that the establishment of our anti-corruption agencies was outside the constitutional processes stipulated by the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended, then there is an urgent need to address and remedy to this aberration before we go from there. Otherwise, all actions of anti-corruption agencies would end up becoming obsolete in the long run.

“In fact, this will benefit the federal government which can now operationalize the anti-corruption agencies without any restrictions or hindrances. This is why it becomes so strange that the federal government is opposed to a measure from which it should take full advantage.

“We see a deliberate intention by the federal government to impose a fait accompli on the judiciary in this matter, and this is not only unacceptable, but will be resisted by all legal means, including public actions by CSOs. What exactly is the federal government afraid of? Why would you oppose the answers demanded on constitutional questions?

“All the federal government has to do is organize its best lawyers to take this case through the courts to its logical conclusion, without this overly agitated attempt to defeat or derail it.

“The federal government’s preliminary objection is unnecessary, unwarranted and basically gratuitous. A student who has obtained good results should never be afraid of their paper to take the re-examination exam. Many constitutional issues have been resolved by the judiciary and this will continue to happen.

“Why should anyone object to this one? It is corruption to say that constitutional questions surrounding anti-corruption agencies should not be decided by a competent court. It is ridiculous to claim that the highest court in the land does not have jurisdiction over a constitutional question. Which court can then hear it?

“States or organizations or even individuals, as bona fide citizens of this country, have the right to question the legality or constitutionality, as the case may be, of any governmental activity or agency and they have the right to be heard. Stifling this right through legal subterfuge, as the federal government is currently attempting to do, is absolutely reprehensible.
“As civil society organizations, we wish to finally resolve all constitutional issues regarding the establishment and operation of all government agencies, including anti-corruption commissions.

“It should be able to run its course without complications. »