Human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Femi Falana, has backed the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission’s decision to freeze an Osun State Government account, arguing that the agency acted within the law despite the controversy surrounding the timing.
Speaking on Channels Television’s Politics Today on Friday, Falana said the EFCC’s authority to restrict access to public funds is provided for under Nigerian law, provided the commission seeks judicial approval within the required period.
“As far as the law is concerned, the EFCC has not acted illegally,” Falana said.
He noted that President Bola Tinubu’s comments on the matter also recognised the commission’s legal authority, with the President’s concern focused primarily on when the action was taken.
Falana explained that the EFCC could freeze accounts belonging to federal, state or local governments where circumstances warrant such intervention.
“Under the law, the EFCC has the power to freeze the account of the Federal Government or of any state or local government in Nigeria and, in not more than 72 hours, has to go to court,” he said.
The senior lawyer cautioned against creating a situation where anti-corruption investigations are suspended whenever an election is approaching.
He argued that the timing of an investigation should not automatically prevent an agency from acting where it believes public funds are being moved improperly.
“We must be very careful that we don’t give the dangerous impression that when elections are 10, 20 or 30 days away, the anti-graft agency must turn the other eye,” Falana said.
“If funds are being moved to the tune of billions of naira, it cannot ignore such transactions simply because elections are coming.”
While defending the EFCC’s legal authority, Falana said the concerns raised by President Tinubu over the timing could have been addressed through administrative channels rather than a public directive to the commission.
He suggested that the Attorney-General of the Federation could have intervened to resolve the issue.
“The embarrassment alluded to by the President would have been handled by the Attorney-General of the Federation,” Falana said.
According to him, the President could have directed the Attorney-General to take over the matter after expressing concern about developments in Osun.
The controversy erupted after Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke accused the EFCC of freezing one of the state government’s accounts shortly before the governorship election.
Adeleke described the action as politically motivated, raising concerns about its possible effect on the election.
The EFCC has rejected that position, maintaining that its action followed the detection of suspicious movements involving public funds transferred to several corporate entities.
The commission said it was acting as part of its statutory responsibility to safeguard public resources.
President Tinubu subsequently directed the EFCC to approach the court to vacate the freezing order.
Although the President acknowledged the commission’s mandate, he described the timing as “inauspicious,” warning that the action could create an impression of federal interference in the forthcoming Osun governorship election.
The dispute has also moved into the courts, with Governor Adeleke filing a two billion naira lawsuit against the EFCC.
Falana’s intervention therefore draws a distinction between the legality of the EFCC’s action and the political sensitivity of its timing—maintaining that an approaching election should not, by itself, shield suspected financial transactions from investigation.
