Elder statesman and Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Robert Clarke, has criticized governors and former governors challenging the authority of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
Speaking on Channels Television’s Politics Today program on Wednesday, Clarke stated that they are not standing on solid legal ground.
He explained that these officials cannot legally challenge the Federal Government or any of its agencies for enforcing existing laws, including those concerning criminal investigations by the EFCC.
Sixteen states, led by the Kogi State Government, have taken the EFCC and the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU) to the Supreme Court, questioning the constitutionality of the laws that established both agencies. A seven-member panel, headed by Justice Uwani Abba-Aji, is set to hear the case on October 22, 2024.
Clarke acknowledged that governors have the right to challenge laws they believe to be unconstitutional but expressed skepticism about the grounds of the current lawsuit.
“Governors have the right to contest laws that are repugnant to the Constitution. However, I doubt the validity of their claims in this case,” he said.
Clarke noted that the EFCC has historically prosecuted numerous sitting and former governors for corruption-related offenses, which may explain their concern.
However, he emphasized that the laws being challenged were established at the inception of Nigeria’s legal framework and questioned whether the governors’ arguments hold legal merit.
“If there’s a constitutional conflict, they should identify it. But if not, I believe they are on shaky ground,” Clarke added.
The former governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello, is currently facing charges of alleged N80.2 billion money laundering, with his successor, Usman Ododo, accused of obstructing the EFCC’s efforts to arrest Bello.
Clarke further cautioned the judiciary against conflicting rulings in electoral matters, warning that such inconsistencies could undermine the credibility of the courts.
“We risk turning our courts into Kangaroo courts if judgments continue to vary across jurisdictions,” he warned.
