Osun Rejects ₦11bn Looting Allegation

The Osun State Government has dismissed allegations that ₦11 billion was looted from its accounts, insisting there was no financial misconduct and describing the reported claims by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) as politically motivated. The dispute over the Osun account freeze has intensified ahead of the state’s governorship election.

In a statement posted on X, the Commissioner for Information and Public Enlightenment, Kolapo Alimi, claimed the Osun account freeze was carried out on the directive of former Governor Gboyega Oyetola to stop the payment of palliatives promised to state workers.

According to the government, the plan failed because the palliatives had already been paid following negotiations with workers aimed at easing the impact of the country’s economic hardship. It also stressed that such payments were not new, noting that similar cost-of-living support had previously been provided.

Rejecting allegations of financial mismanagement, the state accused the EFCC of conducting a politically driven investigation. It insisted that available public funds had been used to execute infrastructure projects, improve workers’ welfare and support development across key sectors.

The government further claimed that anti-graft investigators had been probing senior officials since March 2026 without uncovering evidence of wrongdoing. It alleged that the repeated investigations and the Osun account freeze were intended to distract officials from governance.

While maintaining that no public funds were looted, the government argued that if the EFCC possessed credible evidence, it should follow established legal procedures instead of freezing government accounts. It described the reported allegations as an afterthought designed to justify what it called an unlawful action.

The response follows the EFCC’s explanation that the account freeze was intended to prevent the alleged diversion of public funds despite the August 15 governorship election.

Do you think disputes like this should be resolved entirely through the courts before major elections?