AGF’s directives create tension in the EFCC

10 min read 1,962 words 4 views

There were fears yesterday over the future of the Buhari
administration’s anti-corruption war, following a letter from the
Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr.
Abubakar Malami (SAN).

The AGF is demanding for the outcome of some investigations and
recommendations on such cases from the Acting Chairman of the
Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mr. Ibrahim
Magu.

The letter is suspected to be a booby trap for Magu to show
whether or not he will disrespect the directive of the AGF.

At the EFCC, officials are concerned that the AGF may use his
constitutional powers to determine which cases to prosecute or
discontinue.

It was learnt that the Presidency may, however, wade into the
crisis of confidence between the AGF and the Acting EFCC
chairman.

The AGF, in an August 1 letter (titled Compliance with the
Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Enforcement) Regulations
2010) signed by Abiodun Aikomo Esq, directed Magu to ensure
“compliance going forward”. There was no timeline for the
submission of the reports on serious cases. Besides, such cases are
not listed.

The letter said: “I am directed by the Honourable Attorney-
General and Minister of Justice to refer to the Economic and
Financial Crimes Commission (Enforcement) Regulations 2010 (the
Regulation) published in the Federal Republic of Nigeria Official
Gazette No.61 Vol. of 21st September 2010, particularly the
obligations of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission
(EFCC/the Commission)thereunder. The said Regulation is attached
herewith for ease of reference.

“I am directed to refer specifically to Section 10 (1) which
mandates the Commission to forward to the Attorney- General, in
respect of a case of complaint which is serious or complex within
the context of the Regulation, the outcome of its investigation(s)
with its recommendations on whether there are sufficient grounds to
initiate prosecution.

“The Honourable Attorney-General observes that the Commission
has been in breach of the above cited provision of the Regulation
for some time, hence this reminder to the Commission to ensure
compliance going forward.

“Accept please, the assurances of the best of the Honourable
Attorney General.”

The AGF’s directive has created some tension in the EFCC because
it appears that the Minister has drawn a line.

A source, who spoke in confidence, said: “We suspect that the
AGF now wants to determine which serious cases to prosecute and
those to discontinue.

“This is a replica of what we experienced about 10 years ago
when a former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of
Justice, Mr. Mike Aondoakaa(SAN), was trying to exercise his
prosecutorial powers by cutting the former EFCC Chairman, Mallam
Nuhu Ribadu, to size.

“We are all downcast because what we consider good cases might
be rejected by the AGF. Yet, the Acting EFCC chairman cannot
disobey the AGF.

“This is the second time the EFCC will go through this type of
hurdle during the tenure of Magu. At a point, the National
Prosecution Committee demanded for similar case files but we could
not afford such a risk.”

The source added: “We are expecting that the Presidency will
intervene to manage the crisis of confidence between the AGF and
the Acting Chairman of EFCC.

“Magu has nothing against the AGF but some forces are just
creating bad blood between them.”

The office of the AGF said yesterday that it had no plan to take
over high profile criminal cases from the prosecuting agencies
handling them.

AGF spokesman Salihu Isah told The Nation that a letter from the
Federal Ministry of Justice, requesting some prosecuting agencies
to update the ministry with development in such cases was not an
attempt to take over the cases.

He said such information was required by the National
Prosecution Coordination Committee (NPCC) to enable it assess the
cases, plan and offer strategic advice where necessary.

Isah, who also acts as the spokesman for the NPCC, which resides
within the Federal Ministry of Justice, noted that the committee
was empowered to seek such information from the various prosecuting
agencies to enable it perform its responsibility of advising the
AGF.

He said: “The letter did not say they should hand over the cases
to us. The committee wants to know the status of the cases so that
they will know what to do to assist. It is not that we are taking
over. The media appears not to understand what we are doing.

“You should know that the Federal Ministry of Justice, being the
supervisory ministry for these prosecuting agencies, deserves to
know the status of these cases. So, that is why we want them to
furnish the ministry and the NPCC with information about the status
of these cases.”

Isah drew attention to a statement he issued late last year at
the inauguration of the NPCC, explaining the responsibilities of
the committee.

Isah, in the statement issued last November, said the 19-man
NPCC “is charged with ensuring the efficient, effective and result
oriented prosecution of high profile criminal cases in the
country.

“The Committee is also to guarantee prompt contact and synergy
between investigators and the prosecutors of high profile criminal
cases, manage information to the public on such cases as well as to
ensure strict compliance to the Administration of Criminal Justice
Act (ACJA), 2015.

“For its terms of reference, the NPCC is to advise the HAGF on
the exercise of his prosecutorial powers in Section 150 and 174 of
the 1999 Constitution, prepare the policy strategy document for the
coordination of investigation and prosecution of high profile
criminal cases in Nigeria and to also collate the list of such
cases as well as assigning them to prosecution teams.

“The Committee will scrutinise the proof of evidence and charges
in high profile criminal cases in the country before arraignment.
In addition, it will receive and analyse reports from the
investigation and prosecution teams engaged to handle such
cases.”