A Federal High Court sitting in Ibadan has restrained the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission from proceeding with its planned investigation into the finances of the Oyo State Government, ruling that the anti-graft agency’s proposed probe amounted to a “fishing expedition” unsupported by any specific allegation of wrongdoing.
Justice Nkeonye Maha, who delivered the judgment on Wednesday in Suit No. FHC/IB/CS/61/2025, held that while the EFCC possesses statutory powers to investigate financial crimes, such powers must be exercised in line with the Constitution and the rule of law.
The judge ruled that the commission’s June 2, 2025 letter to the Oyo State Government, requesting extensive financial records, was speculative and lacked the legal basis required for such an investigation.
According to the court, the EFCC’s requests were not tied to any identifiable offence or specific allegation of corruption.
“The EFCC’s proposed investigation into Oyo State’s finances, particularly the demands contained in its letter of June 2, 2025, was speculative and amounted to a fishing expedition,” Justice Maha held.
The court further ruled that the constitutional rights of the plaintiffs to fair hearing could not be infringed under the guise of an investigation.
The dispute arose after the EFCC wrote to the Oyo State Accountant-General, demanding copies of all contracts executed by the state government as well as details of payments made to contractors from 2021 up to June 2025.
The Oyo State Government said it responded by requesting the commission to identify the specific contractors, companies or transactions under investigation to enable it provide relevant documents.
However, according to the state, the EFCC did not clarify the scope of its investigation, prompting Governor Seyi Makinde, the Attorney-General of the state and the Accountant-General to institute legal proceedings challenging the commission’s request.
Through their counsel, led by the Oyo State Attorney-General, Abiodun Aikomo, the plaintiffs argued that the commission’s demand for virtually all contract documents spanning several years was excessive, unreasonable and not supported by any concrete allegation of criminal conduct.
They maintained that although the EFCC has powers under its Establishment Act to investigate financial crimes, such authority is subject to constitutional safeguards and cannot be deployed for broad, indiscriminate searches aimed at uncovering possible infractions.
The plaintiffs contended that investigations must be based on credible evidence and clearly identified offences rather than speculative inquiries.
In response, counsel to the EFCC, I.G. Ojibor, assisted by S. Adamu, relied on Section 38 of the EFCC (Establishment) Act, 2004, arguing that the provision empowers the commission to demand information from individuals, government institutions and corporate bodies in the course of investigations.
The commission urged the court to uphold its authority to seek the requested documents as part of its statutory mandate to investigate financial crimes.
However, Justice Maha rejected the argument, holding that the powers conferred by Section 38 of the EFCC Act are not limitless.
The judge held that requests for information must be reasonable and directly connected to specific allegations of offences under the Act.
“Section 38 of the EFCC Act empowers the Commission to demand information only for the investigation of offences under the Act, not for speculative or roving inquiries,” the court ruled.
Consequently, the court set aside the EFCC’s June 2, 2025 letter and restrained the anti-graft agency from proceeding with the proposed investigation based on the disputed request.
The judgment reaffirmed that while the EFCC retains broad investigative powers, such powers must be exercised within constitutional limits and cannot be used to embark on indiscriminate investigations without identifiable allegations of wrongdoing.
FOLLOW US
