Court stops EFCC's investigation into Oyo State finances

The Federal High Court in Ibadan has stopped the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) from continuing its planned investigation into the finances of Oyo State. The court ruled that the EFCC’s request was more of a speculative "fishing expedition" than a proper investigation with specific allegations.

Justice Nkeonye Maha delivered the judgment on Wednesday in a case filed by the Oyo State Government. The case number is FHC/IB/CS/61/2025. The judge stated that while the EFCC has the power to investigate financial crimes, it must do so within the law and the Constitution.

The court also canceled the EFCC's letter sent to the state Accountant General on June 2, 2025. This letter asked for extensive financial records from Oyo State. Justice Maha said any request for information must be reasonable and linked to clear allegations of wrongdoing.

Ms Maha pointed out that Section 38 of the EFCC Act allows the commission to gather information only for investigating specific offences. She noted that it does not allow for broad or speculative inquiries into government finances.

According to the judgment, the EFCC’s request was too wide and did not have the specifics needed to justify such a large demand for official records. The judge said the EFCC's proposed investigation into Oyo State's finances was a fishing expedition.

"His Lordship noted that the constitutional rights of the plaintiffs to fair hearing could not be trampled upon under the guise of investigation," said Sulaimon Olarewaju, the Special Adviser on Media to Oyo State Governor Makinde.

The Oyo State Government filed the suit after receiving the EFCC’s letter to the state Accountant General on June 2, 2025. The letter demanded copies of all contracts involving the state and details of all payments made to contractors from 2021 to that date.

The plaintiffs included the Governor of Oyo State, the Attorney General, and the Accountant General. They argued that the EFCC’s request was oppressive, unreasonable, and too broad, considering the number of government contracts during that time.

Abiodun Aikomo, the Attorney General, represented the state and argued that the EFCC has investigative powers, but those powers must respect constitutional rights. He said anti-corruption investigations should be based on evidence and not on broad requests covering many years of transactions.

Court documents showed that before going to court, the state government wrote to the EFCC. They asked the EFCC to identify the contractors or companies it was investigating so that relevant documents could be given.

"The government subsequently wrote to the EFCC, requesting the commission to specify the contractors or companies under investigation so that appropriate documents could be provided. When the EFCC failed to respond, the state filed the suit," the statement said.

In its defense, the EFCC pointed to Section 38 of the EFCC Act. They argued that this provision allows the commission to demand information from anyone, including public authorities.

EFCC’s lawyer, I.G. Ojibor, said the provision lets the commission obtain the documents it requested as part of its investigation. But Ms Maha disagreed with this view, stating that the EFCC's powers are not unlimited and must follow constitutional limits.

The judge also said that the right to fair hearing cannot be compromised under the guise of investigation. Law enforcement agencies must show a legitimate reason before they can demand documents.

In conclusion, Justice Maha ruled in favor of Oyo State and set aside the EFCC’s letter from June 2, 2025. She declared that any request from the EFCC must be reasonable and linked to specific allegations.

This ruling comes despite no known past charges or court findings against the Oyo State Government for financial misappropriation. While the EFCC sought access to the state’s contract and payment records from 2021, it did not point out any specific contractor or alleged offense under investigation, which was a key factor in the court's decision.

Recently, the Makinde administration faced political accusations about its handling of public funds from opposition figures and pressure groups. Some civic organizations have also criticized the state's transparency in finances and public access to financial records.

The state government has consistently denied any allegations of financial misconduct and stated that it publishes its audited financial statements and other reports as required by law.