Connect with us

Crime

Finance Investigation: Anambra State High Court Dismisses State Govt’s Suit Challenging Powers Of EFCC

Published

on

51 Views

A Federal High Court sitting in Awka, Anambra State, has dismissed a suit filed by the Anambra State Government challenging the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission’s power to investigate its finances, describing it as factually and forensically lacking in merit.

In a statement by the EFCC on Wednesday, the court held that the Commission is well in the rights of its powers under the law to carry out such investigations.

The State government had approached the court presided over by Justice Nnamdi Dimgba to determine whether under the Federal System of Government, with the constitutional doctrine of Separation of Powers, “the appropriation, disbursement and or administration of funds belonging to a State Government is subject to investigation by the EFCC being an agency of the Federal Government”.

In a suit number FHC/ AWK/ CS/ 22/ 2022 filed by Government of Anambra State (1st Plaintiff) and Attorney- General of Anambra State( 2nd Plaintiff) against the EFCC( 1st Defendant) and Attorney – General of the Federation( 2nd Defendant), the Plaintiffs sought resolutions of the following eight questions:

1. Whether under the Federal System of Government established by Section 2 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), and the doctrine of Separation of Powers established and provided by Sections 4, 5 and 6 thereof, the appropriation, disbursement and or administration of funds belonging to the Government of a State is subject to investigation by the 1st Defendant as an agency of the Federal Government.

2. Whether the power of the 1st Defendant, as an agency of the Federal Government, is not restricted to the matters set out in the Exclusive Legislative List contained in Part I of the Second Schedule to the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).

3. Whether the appropriation, disbursement and or administration of funds belonging to the Government of a State are not matters within the Concurrent Legislative List contained in Part II of the Second Schedule to the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).

4. Whether from a community reading of Sections 80, 120, 121, 125, 126, 128 and 129 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) the power and function to conduct investigation into the appropriation, disbursement and or administration of the public funds/accounts of the Government of a State is not reserved for the House of Assembly of the State.

5. Whether from a community reading of Sections 80, 120, 121, 125, 126, 128 and 129 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), the 1st Defendant can usurp the constitutional powers and functions of the House of Assembly of a State to conduct investigation into the appropriation, disbursement and or administration/management of the funds of a State Government, including the public funds/accounts of the Government of the State which have been appropriated by the State House of Assembly in exercise of its constitutional mandate.

6. Whether from a community reading of Sections 80, 120, 121, 125, 126, 128 and 129 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), the 2nd Defendant can usurp the constitutional power and function of the House of Assembly of a State to conduct investigation into the appropriation, disbursement and or administration/management of the public funds/accounts of the Government of the State.

7. Whether from a community reading of Sections 80, 120, 121, 125, 126, 128 and 129 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), the 1st Defendant can purport to investigate the appropriation, disbursement and or administration of the public funds/accounts of the Government of a State without any report or input from the House of Assembly of the State.

8. Whether the 1st Defendant acting by itself, its officers, agents, privies or otherwise howsoever can legitimately conduct and or continue with investigation into the public funds of the Anambra State which have been lawfully appropriated by the Anambra State House of Assembly without any report and investigation by the Anambra State House of Assembly.

The suit was a precipitate response to series of letters of invitation by the Commission sent to the Secretary to the State Government (SSG) and the State Attorney- General seeking the release of officials of the state government to offer explanations in an alleged case of fraudulent misappropriation of funds in respect of data collection exercise for the administration of subsidy to smallholder farmers and alleged case of Abuse of Office and Misappropriation of Funds.

In his judgment, Justice Dimgba stated that the EFCC has constitutional powers to investigate any act of economic and financial crime in any part of the country, stressing that neither the authorities of a State’s House of Assembly nor Auditor- General of a State preclude the Commission from performing its mandate as contained in the Constitution.

“In my view, the questions posed is at large… Is the EFCC a federal agency exclusively for all purposes, or is it both a federal agency and a state agency for some other purposes? It all depends on the context to which the question has been posed.

“In the context of the case at hand, which is whether it is legitimate for the EFCC to commence investigative activities against the named officials of Anambra State Government as contained in Exhibit 1 concerning the manner of the management and utilization of the public funds of Anambra State, the question posed must be answered against the Plaintiffs and the corresponding reliefs sought denied”.

” …… binding judicial precedent existing is to the effect that the EFCC is an agency both for the federal government and for state governments as far as the combating of corruption and other economic crimes in Nigeria is concerned”
While agreeing with an earlier judgment that Nigeria practices co-operative federalism, Justice Dimgba said “In the co-operative federalism practiced in Nigeria, the EFCC is a common agency empowered to investigate and prosecute offenders for both the Federal and state economic and financial crimes, and as such it qualifies as ‘any other authority or person’ empowered by Section 211(1)(b) of the Constitution to institute or initiate criminal proceedings”.

The Judge further added that “EFCC is the coordinating agency for the enforcement of the provisions of any other law or regulation on economic and financial crimes, including the Criminal Code and Penal Code. The Commission has powers under Section 13(2) of the EFCC Act to prosecute offences so long as they are financial crimes.”

Continuing, he said, “I have reflected on the Judgments of this Court issued by the Port Harcourt division of this Court in AG Rivers State v EFCC & 3 Ors in Suit No: FHC/PH/CS/78/07, delivered on 20/03/2007, and that by the Ekiti Division of this Court in Suit No: FHC/AD/CS/32/2016; A.G of Ekiti State v. EFCC & 17 Ors both of which have been brought to my attention. Both judgments hold that following the principles of federalism and separation of powers, only a State House of Assembly can investigate the financial administration of a State and that the 1st Defendant, the EFCC, lacks the powers to investigate a state finances”.

“With the greatest deference to my brothers who hold such views, I take a different view, and for the reasons already explained above, I am of the view that it is not a proposition that is borne out from a proper construction of Sections 125 to 129 of the Constitution juxtaposed with the powers of the 1st Defendant under the EFCC Act”.

“Quite apart from the fact that my learned brothers might have arrived at their conclusions in the light of the factual circumstances that they had to confront with and which are different from the facts and circumstances of the present case, there are dangers in holding the general view that for all circumstances only a State House of Assembly, to the exclusion of any other body, including the 1st Defendant (EFCC), can investigate and detect corrupt practices in the financial affairs of a State.

“This Court notes the collaborative and harmonious relationship that exists in most states of the federation between the executive organ who manage the state finances and the legislative organ who are mandated to check them with a view to exposing corruption. This collaborative and harmonious relationship is not always a positive thing but can also be very negative, especially in circumstances where the leadership of the executive organ is very overbearing, or the leadership of both houses are manned or dominated by political allies.

“In that sort of situation, no real independence of the legislature exists and the idea that the state legislature really possesses and can exercise the ability to detect financial crimes in the management of the state resources by the executive government is really more theoretical and academic rather than real.

“For all you know, the legislature may well be deeply involved with the executive in the very ills which they are supposed to be detecting and exposing. It is exactly that state of affairs, a matter of our present reality that makes the existence and intervention of an external force outside of the framework of a state’s governance system, not only inevitable, but also very desirable and necessary.

While dismissing the action, the judge further said, “ I have also noted, and thus hold, that all the addressees of the EFCC letters (Exhibit 1) as fully described above, including all those which the EFCC by the letters referenced, demand that they should be released for interview for the purposes of obtaining the clarification needed for the Commission to establish if the offences which the Commission said it was investigating such as fraudulent misappropriation of funds and the like have been committed, all qualify as “persons” or , “authority” from whom by law, the Commission is entitled to receive information from.

“They are indeed, all subjects of the EFCC’s exercise of its powers under the law”.

Crime

Chinese national apprehended in Anambra for involvement in illegal mining.

Published

on

27 Views

A 45-year-old Chinese national, Mr. Mu Hua Qiang, has been arrested in Aguleri, Anambra State, for alleged involvement in illegal mining. He was apprehended by operatives of the Operation Clean and Healthy Anambra (OCHA) Brigade during a surveillance operation and handed over to the State Criminal Investigation Department (SCID), Awka.

Police spokesperson Tochukwu Ikenga confirmed the arrest, stating that the suspect’s statement was taken and he is in custody pending further investigation. Authorities say illegal mining remains a serious concern in Anambra due to its environmental and security risks.

Continue Reading

Crime

Female Corps Member Recalls Harrowing Assault by Anambra Security Forces

Published

on

47 Views

A National Youth Service Corps member, Jennifer Elohor, who was brutalised by Anambra security operatives, otherwise known as  “Agunechemba”, at a corpers lodge in Oba, Idemili Local Government Area of the state, has recounted her harrowing experience.

In a video that went viral on Tuesday, the operatives armed with guns stormed the corps members’ lodge, accused them of being Internet fraudsters, although they knew they were corps members. They were seen beating the female corps member despite her cries for help.

The incident has continued to generate widespread reactions across the state, with stakeholders, civil society organisations, human rights groups, and lawmakers condemning the action of the vigilante group, with many demanding justice for the victim and calling for sanctions against the vigilante team.

Elohor, who narrated her ordeal in an interview with a media personality, Aprokoking, shared online on Wednesday, said the Anambra State operatives broke into her residence, assaulted her, and forcefully took her and some of her colleagues away.

This is just as the Anambra State Government has tendered a public apology to the victim and anyone who had suffered abuse or harassment in the hands of Agunechemba personnel.

The corps member said the incident occurred on July 13, around 5pm, at the lodge where she and other corps members were residing.

She said she and her colleagues were indoors when suddenly they heard a violent knock on their door.

She said, “At first, we thought it was our neighbours’ door because it’s a three-storey building with several flats. But the knock became louder and more aggressive, so I decided to check. Before I could reach the door, it was kicked open.

“A masked man armed with a gun stormed into the room without any form of identification or uniform.

“At first, I thought it was an armed robber until he ordered all of us to come outside. I tried to explain that we were corps members and even suggested showing our NYSC identity cards. My colleagues also presented theirs, but the men ignored us. The intruders ransacked our room, seized our phones and laptops, and became violent.

“They pushed us downstairs, almost shoving me down the staircase. They kept asking what gave me the right, as a woman, to challenge them. It was when we got outside that we saw their vehicle and discovered they were from the Anambra Vigilante Group.”

She further claimed that when they requested to call their lodge proprietor or NYSC officials to notify them of where they were being taken to, the vigilante members became more brutal and violent.

“They beat me, tore my clothes, and even hit one of my colleagues with an iron rod for pleading on my behalf. They forced me into their vehicle, pressing my neck, slapping me, and threatening to smash our phones if we contacted anyone,” she added.

Following the outrage, the Anambra State Government, through the Special Adviser to the state governor on Community Security and leader of Agunechemba, Ken Emeakayi, while speaking to journalists on Thursday, restated that the eight personnel responsible have been identified, sacked, arrested and detained.

Continue Reading

Crime

Owo Bombing: Court Approves Protection for Witnesses

Published

on

58 Views

……As court sets September 10 for bail ruling.

Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court in Abuja has approved protection measures for witnesses expected to testify in the trial of five suspects linked to the June 5, 2022 bombing at St. Francis Catholic Church in Owo, Ondo State.

The ruling followed an ex parte application by the prosecution, led by Calistus Eze, under the Terrorism Prevention Act 2022.

The accused—Idris Abdulmalik Omeiza, Al Qasim Idris, Jamiu Abdulmalik, Abdulhaleem Idris, and Momoh Otuho Abubakar—face a nine-count terrorism charge related to their alleged ties to the East African terrorist group Al-Shabab. The attack resulted in over 40 deaths.

Prosecutor Eze emphasized the severity of the charges in support of witness protection. The defendants’ counsel, Abdullahi Muhammad, raised no objections.

Separately, Abdullahi Muhammad filed bail applications for the suspects, which the prosecution opposed. Eze argued that due to the suspects’ suspected foreign terrorist links, there was a high risk they might abscond if granted bail. He also cited concerns about potential threats to the six witnesses and doubts over the reliability of any sureties.

The prosecutor informed the court that the Department of State Services (DSS) has approved visitation rights for the suspects’ families while in custody.

During the hearing, Eze also notified the court of the Attorney General’s appointment of Senior Advocate of Nigeria Ayodeji Adedipe as the new lead prosecutor. The case file transfer is ongoing.

Justice Nwite adjourned the matter until September 10 for a ruling on the bail application.

Continue Reading

Trending