Baatunji Wusu –
- The Supreme Court reserved judgment in a case challenging the constitutionality of the EFCC Act.
- Anambra, Adamawa, and Ebonyi states withdrew from the suit, which was supported by unanimous court approval.
- Kogi State’s counsel argued the EFCC Act was flawed and called for its abolition, while the Attorney General defended the commission’s legality.
- The Attorney General warned of negative consequences if the EFCC were set aside.
- A date for the reserved judgment will be communicated to the parties involved.
The Supreme Court has reserved its judgment in a lawsuit filed by 19 states challenging the constitutionality of the Act that established the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). This decision came after both sides presented their arguments.
Before the court reserved its judgment, Anambra, Adamawa, and Ebonyi states withdrew from the suit initiated by Kogi State and the other 18 states. A seven-member panel of justices, led by Justice Uwani Abba-Aji, struck the names of the three states from the case, marked SC/CV/178/2023, after individually hearing their applications for withdrawal.
The Attorney General for each of the withdrawing states submitted these requests, seeking to have their states removed from the suit. The court unanimously agreed to strike out Anambra, Adamawa, and Ebonyi from the proceedings.
During earlier proceedings, the Attorney General of the Federation, Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, requested the court to allow a reply on a point of law to be considered. The Supreme Court granted this application, recognizing the reply as part of the proceedings.
Additionally, the Attorneys General of Nasarawa and Osun states have sought to consolidate their positions in the suit. Kogi State’s counsel, Abdulwahab Mohammed, SAN, argued that the EFCC Act was flawed, asserting it was merely a replication of the United Nations Convention Against Corruption. He contended that the establishment of the commission did not adhere to Section 12 of the Constitution, which outlines the procedure for creating such bodies, and called for the abolition of the anti-corruption agency.
In defense, the Attorney General, who is the sole defendant in the case, countered that the actions of former Attorney General Kanu Agabi were irrelevant to this matter. Fagbemi asserted that the law does not reference the United Nations, and Section 15, subsection 5 of the 1999 Constitution supports Nigeria’s commitment to eradicating corruption. He cautioned that invalidating the EFCC could have detrimental effects on previous legal decisions.
The Supreme Court has thus reserved its judgment in the case for a future date to be communicated to the parties involved.
