By Nkechi Eze
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has firmly rejected allegations by the Bauchi State Governor, Senator Bala Mohammed, that the anti-graft agency is being used by political opponents to persecute him and some officials of his administration, describing the claims as unfounded, mischievous and deliberately misleading.
In an official statement signed by the Commission’s spokesperson, Dele Oyewale, the EFCC expressed “great displeasure” over the governor’s assertions, particularly his claim that the Commission’s actions were being influenced by the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike. According to the EFCC, such allegations are “as wild as they are far-fetched” and undermine the integrity of an institution established by law to combat economic and financial crimes without fear or favour.
The Commission stressed that it is an independent and non-partisan agency that discharges its statutory mandate without affection or ill will, noting that any attempt to portray it as a pliable tool in the hands of political actors is both condemnable and misleading. It described as derogatory the suggestion that its investigative activities in Bauchi State could be dictated by the influence of any political office holder, insisting that no individual, regardless of status, is in a position to interfere with its operations.
Addressing the governor directly, the EFCC stated that a more honest account would have included the fact that Bala Mohammed was standing trial for alleged money laundering at the time he won election as governor of Bauchi State. The Commission noted that the case was only placed in abeyance due to the constitutional immunity attached to his current office, raising the question of who influenced the Commission to investigate and charge him in court as far back as 2016.
On the ongoing matters involving officials of the Bauchi State Government, the EFCC clarified that the facts of the case have already been placed before a court of competent jurisdiction. It explained that members of the public are free to access the charge sheets and independently determine whether the case is driven by vendetta or by the outcome of painstaking investigations carried out by the Commission. The EFCC added that this transparency would also make clear why Governor Mohammed, as the approving authority in the state, is mentioned in the charges.
The Commission further dismissed claims linking its actions to issues of terrorism financing, describing such narratives as “crying wolf” and an attempt to clutch at straws. It emphasized that it did not invent the law and that where offences are clearly defined and punishable under existing statutes, the EFCC would be failing in its responsibility if it chose to look the other way.
Reinforcing its stance on accountability, the EFCC argued that public accountability should be the priority of politicians across all political divides. It described as hypocritical the tendency of some opposition figures to cry persecution whenever one of their own is called to account, while remaining silent when members of the ruling party face similar legal scrutiny. The Commission cited a recent instance in which a ranking member of the ruling party was arraigned for alleged corruption, noting that no accusations of persecution followed.
The EFCC concluded by urging Governor Mohammed to concentrate on the business of governing Bauchi State, while allowing the Commission to continue its work of sanitising Nigeria’s financial space in line with its constitutional and statutory mandate.
