As Court Strengthens EFCC, ICPC’s Powers

The judgment of Justice Folasade Olubanjo of the Federal High Court in Asaba dismissing the suit filed by the Delta State Government to stop the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) from probing the state’s spending is a good decision to many Nigerians who want accountability at the state level.

The court gave the judgment in the suit filed by the Attorney General of Delta State challenging the powers of the two anti-corruption agencies to investigate the state government’s finances and invite the state officials for interviews in the course of investigations.

The state government had asked the court to among other things declare that by virtue of the provisions of Section 120, 121, 122, 123 & 125 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), no authority or person other than the state government, the state house of assembly, and the auditor-general of the state has the constitutional mandate to exercise power or control over the funds standing to the credit of Delta State in the Consolidated Revenue Fund or any other state public funds.

But Justice Olubanjo disagreed, upholding the powers of the anti-graft agencies to investigate and prosecute state officials who allegedly engage in corrupt acts. She held that the sister organisations whose core mandates are basically the same do not in any way violate the principle of federalism and separation of powers embodied in the Constitution.

The judge held that Nigeria practices cooperative federalism; and as such the fight against corruption is a function of both the states and the federal government. She further noted that the issues before the court had been settled in a plethora of appellate decisions, among which is the Supreme Court judgment in AG Ondo State vs AG Federation & 36 others.

Many state governors being the emperors that they are, after being accused of corruption, had used their state High Courts to prevent the anti-graft agencies from probing them, thereby crippling their powers.

Even the state Houses of Assembly and the auditors-general which they claimed have the constitutional powers to probe the states are the rubber stamps of these governors. This is why the decision of the Federal High Court is important.