By appointing Olanipekun Olukoyede as the Executive Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), President Bola Tinubu has given the country its first Christian and Southern head of the anti-graft agency. But Olukoyede’s résumé shows that much should be expected of the 54-year-old fraud advisory law expert in the expected anti-graft war than just his faith and region, ROBERT EGBE reports.
President Bola Tinubu made perhaps his second most important appointment in his government’s expected crusade against corruption last Thursday when he named a Christian cleric, Mr. Olanipekun, as the Executive Chairman of Nigeria’s foremost anti-graft agency, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
The first was the appointment in August of a highly respected Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Mr. Lateef Fagbemi, as Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice. Together, both men are expected to lead the Tinubu administration’s quest to tame the country’s embarrassing, age-long hydra-headed corruption monster.
Olukoyede’s appointment, pending confirmation by the Senate, was announced in a statement by the President’s Special Adviser on Media and Publicity, Mr. Ajuri Ngelale.
He will step into the shoes of his predecessor, Abdulrasheed Bawa, for four years, not as a novice, but as a former top brass of the agency, having served as the commission’s secretary between 2018 and 2020.
President Tinubu, in June this year, suspended Bawa as EFCC chair, and in his place, appointed Abdulkarim Chukkol, then Director of Operations, in an acting capacity.
Bawa’s suspension, anchored on “weighty allegations of abuse of office levelled against him” followed a pattern of unceremonious removal of past EFCC bosses.
Olukoyede also served as Chief of Staff to an ex-EFCC Chairman, Ibrahim Magu, between 2016 and 2018.
The man Olukoyede
Born in Ikere-Ekiti, Ekiti State, on October 14, 1969, Olukoyede is a lawyer with over 22 years of experience as a regulatory compliance consultant and specialist in fraud management and corporate intelligence.
He had his university education at the Lagos State University; University of Lagos; Institute of Arbitration ICC – Paris, France and the University of Harvard (Kennedy School of Executive Education).
In 2008, he established his law firm, Ola Olukoyede & Co.
The same year, he established Global Compliance GRC, a governance, risk and legal consulting outfit, where he served as an attorney for investigation and civil litigations of fraud and corruption in international aid projects.
Olukoyede worked at Ecodev Investment, a finance and investment company, for about five years before moving to Legal Research and Corporate Development Projects (LRCDP Consulting).
He was a member of the Fraud Advisory Panel, in the United Kingdom, and also a member of the Federal Government technical committee on the repositioning of the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU).
The 54-year-old is a pastor of the Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG).
All EFCC chairpersons before Olukoyede — Nuhu Ribadu, Farida Waziri, Ibrahim Lamorde, and Abdulrasheed Bawa — were Northern Muslims, which makes him the first Southerner and Christian as well as a pastor, to lead the agency.
Magu, Abdulkarim Chukkol, and Mohammed Umar, who served in acting capacities, were northerners and Muslims.
Opposition to Olukoyede’s appointment
But the appointment stirred controversy in some circles over his qualifications for the job.
Some critics argued that Olukoyede was not qualified to be EFCC chairman under the law establishing the anti-corruption agency.
Section 2 of the EFCC Act stipulates that a chairman of the commission “must be a serving or retired member of any government security or law enforcement agency not below the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police or equivalent; and possess not less than 15 years experience.”
In their view, Olukoyede does not meet the criterion, because his experience in any security or law enforcement agency began with his appointment as the chief of staff to the EFCC chairman in 2016.
However, in 2018, he was appointed the Commission’s secretary, a position most likely higher than the equivalent of the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police.
One of those that faulted his appointment was Mr. Daniel Bwala, a spokesperson for the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Presidential candidate in the last election.
Bwala argued that the appointment ran a foul of Section 2 of the EFCC Act.
An activist-lawyer, Abdul Mahmud, said Olukoyede was not qualified to be appointed chairman of the anti-fraud commission.
“He’s not qualified. His years as Chief of Staff to Magu or as Secretary of EFCC don’t come near the 15 years of cognate experience required by law,” he said.
On the claim by the Presidency that Bawa resigned, Mahmud said, “Then, again, how could anybody claim that Bawa, who is currently in detention, resigned his position as Chairman?”
Also, a group, The Alliance for Good Governance and Due Process, faulted the government’s decision.
The group, in a statement by its National Coordinator, Mr. Ayelabola Hussain, said the nomination violated the EFCC Act which, in its view, was specific about the qualities and qualifications of persons that should be the Chairman of such an important commission.
According to the group, there are many questions.
“In what way is Olukoyede qualified to be so nominated if true? What happens to the pending cases against him even as Secretary of the EFCC under the leadership of Ibrahim Magu? Was Olukoyede exonerated by the Justice Ayo Salami Investigative Panel of the EFCC? If so, where is the report of that panel?
“By the way, it is public knowledge that Olukoyede’s account is still under investigation and frozen. So why is he in a hurry to go back to the EFCC? Is there something we don’t know? Does a man with such a huge baggage deserve to be rewarded with the chairman of the EFCC?” Hussain said.
Opposition baseless, says lawyer
But his lawyer, Mr. Tony Idoko, explained that Olukoyede was suspended merely as part of administrative protocol and not because of any wrongdoing, thus his eligibility was not affected.
Idoko accused Hussain of, among others, erroneously “claiming that Mr Olukoyede’s bank account was under investigation and frozen and also made allusions to the fact that this was public knowledge.
“It is completely false. He is still operating his bank accounts without let or hindrance. I await Mr Ayelabola Hussain to prove otherwise.
“Let it also be put on record that Mr. Olukoyede was not suspended because of any wrongdoing or crime he committed. Note also that he was not suspended on the recommendation of the Justice Isa Ayo Salami Panel of Inquiry. Rather, he was amongst other staff of the EFCC who were suspended as administrative protocol demanded because the Panel claimed that it wanted unhindered access to documents in the offices of the affected officers. It is also very instructive to state that the Presidency lifted the suspension after he was cleared of any wrongdoing by the Panel. He was also further issued with a clearance letter to that effect.”
Idoko also addressed other concerns about the candidate’s qualifications for the office.
He argued that Olukoyede’s credentials surpass the “15 years cognate experience” needed to qualify for the commission’s chairmanship position.
Why Olukoyede is qualified to head EFCC, by Presidency
The Presidency also faulted the opposition to Olukoyede’s appointment, saying he was eminently qualified under the law for the office.
Relying on Section 2(3) of the EFCC Act, the government, in a post by a Senior Special Assistant to the President for Public Engagement, Fredrick Nwabufo, on the social media platform X, listed eight grounds for the legality of his appointment. They are:
Olukoyede was the Chief of Staff to the Executive Chairman of the EFCC (2016-2018) and Secretary to the Commission (2018-2020). He was a member of a law enforcement organisation as Secretary, in this case, the EFCC, as stipulated in the EFCC Act, and as such, satisfied every legal detail to be appointed as Chairman.
Section 2(1)(p) of the EFCC Act plainly, ordinarily, and unambiguously established the Secretary to the Commission (i.e., EFCC) as its member and head of its administration.
The Supreme Court determined in the case of Ejuetami v. Olaiya & Anor (2001) LPELR-1072 (SC) at Pg.23-24, that: The words used are to be given their ‘ordinary and natural sense’. Therefore the clear, explicit and unambiguous words used in sections 2(1)(a)(i)-(iii), (p), 2(2), 3(1)-(3) and 8(5) of the EFCC Act must be given their ordinary and natural sense in line with the guidelines set by the Supreme Court in its long line of undisturbed judicial precedents.
The provision of Section 2(1) sub-paragraph (iii) of the EFCC Act did not state the nature of the experience which a person is required to possess its similar or alike for fifteen (15) years. This implies that such cognate experience is presumed to be that of the work or functions of the EFCC acquired anywhere since the EFCC Act did not state the specific place where it must be acquired. It is also unambiguous by the provisions of sub-paragraph (iii) that once a person possessed fifteen (15) years of such cognate (i.e., similar or alike) experience, then he has satisfied the provisions of sub-paragraph (iii) of section 2(1)(a) of the EFCC Act.
It is clear from provisions of the EFCC Establishment Act, 2004, that any member of the Commission whether serving or retired who has 15 years’ cognate experience in their chosen career are eligible to be appointed as the Chairman of the Commission.
Prior to this time, the convention and precedence, is that to be qualified for appointment as the Executive Chairman of the Commission, the nominee must be a Police Officer or someone with a law enforcement background, particularly in the area of investigation. This has not only exposed the commission to all manner of vices but has brewed internal wrangling, discontent, and hatred among the members of staff of the commission.
It is nonjusticiable to elevate convention above statutory provision. It is time to move away from fiction to fact and from convention to strict adherence to the statutory provisions of the enabling Act of the Commission in our constitutional democracy.
According to the government, Mr Olukoyede thus satisfies every legal requirement to be appointed as EFCC Chairman.
Falana: Olukoyede qualified
Activist-lawyer, Mr Femi Falana (SAN) weighed in on the matter, saying Olukoyede is qualified to lead the anti-graft commission having previously served in a high capacity in the agency.
His grouse, however, was that the President appointed the EFCC and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) chairmen from the same geopolitical zone.
Both Mr Olukoyede and ICPC Chairman, Prof Bolaji Owasanoye (SAN), who has been in office since February 2019, are from the South-West geopolitical zone.
According to Falana, who spoke during a live appearance on Channels Television’s Sunrise Daily programme on Monday, this was unlawful and against the Federal Character Principle.
Falana said: “There is no issue (with Olukoyede’s qualifications); the only issue that has been raised (and) has to be considered by the government is that we have in this country, the Federal Character Commission Act and also by the virtue of Section 14 of the constitution, appointments must reflect Federal Character,” he said.
“If you are going to have the EFCC and the ICPC, the heads cannot come from same zone. If there are two positions in the public service, one must go to the North, one must go to the South. If there are four, two must go to the South, two must go to the North. If there are six, one must go to each geopolitical zone. That is the law in Nigeria today.
“So, I am not comfortable with the fact that the heads of the EFCC and the ICPC are from the same zone.
“Apart from that, Mr Ola Olukoyede, is eminently qualified to head the EFCC. My colleagues who have criticised the appointment have not looked at the relevant provisions of the EFCC which is Section 2.”
Tasks before Olukoyede
Criminal law expert Mr. Olalekan Ojo (SAN) congratulated Olukoyede for his appointment, saying he was confident the new chairman’s law experience would be invaluable in the performance of his duties.
Nevertheless, the senior lawyer warned that much was expected of Olukoyede if he is to succeed in his mission of taming corruption through the EFCC.
Ojo said: “The appointment carries with it enormous challenges. The highly exalted office of the Chairman of the EFCC is not for timorous souls. He should be prepared to pursue the anti-corruption crusade of the EFCC without fear or favour. There should not be selective prosecution, selective arrest of persons who are suspected to have committed or been involved in one form of financial crime or another. In the past, the EFCC was justifiably accused of doing ‘selective prosecution’.
“Secondly, the fight against economic crimes must be carried out within the rule of law. You cannot jettison the rule of law under the guise of fighting corruption. As someone who has been at the criminal Bar for many years, I know as a fact that the pretrial right of many suspects in the EFCC’s custody are not protected. Most of the operatives of the EFCC do not give or accord sufficient respect to the rights of suspects. This is from my experience. Especially in the case of the so-called suspected internet fraudsters. Most of them are coerced into entering into plea bargain. That is not fighting corruption within the rule of law.
“Thirdly, the idea of obtaining detention order, called remand order, most times that order is abused. Even when investigation is no longer ongoing, they’ll still procure that order to keep them there for 30 days or longer. The whole essence is to psychologically traumatise the suspect. This must stop.
“Fourthly, the way and manner persons charged to court are prosecuted must also be revisited. Everybody is learning, but so many cases have been lost by the EFCC due to either lack of thorough investigation or what in my view is shoddy investigation and prosecution. When this happens the EFCC is in the habit of saying the courts are relying on technicalities. When EFCC secures a conviction, the court is not accused of reliance on technicalities, it’s only when EFCC loses a case, whether at trial stage or on appeal. In my view, what they call technicalities is in most cases the failure to have done the right thing.”
The Nation reports that the EFCC has consistently maintained that it carries out its duties fairly and in accordance with the rule of law, that it does not engage in selective prosecution, that it respects the rights of suspects and does not engage in any form of torture whether psychological or otherwise.
For the Chief Executive Officer of Connected Development (CODE) Hamzat Lawal, Mr. Olukoyede must ensure EFCC’s independence, be transparent and carry the public along.
Lawal said the new EFCC chairman should engage the youth and the public in the agency’s anti-corruption efforts through awareness campaigns.
“More importantly, he needs to uphold the independence of the EFCC in its operations, ensuring that it remains free from undue political influence,” he said in a Friday statement.
“My advice to him is to provide solid and principled leadership to guide the EFCC in fulfilling its mandate and promote professionalism and ethical conduct within the organisation.
“As the world continues to evolve, I will advise the new EFCC boss to encourage a culture of continuous learning and adaptation to address evolving forms of corruption in the country.
“He should also focus on a multi-faceted approach that combines effective law enforcement, prevention, and recovery efforts.
“Combating financial crimes is a complex task, and success will depend on adapting to new challenges and maintaining a strong commitment to the rule of law and justice.”
The founder of the Social Accountability Initiative Follow The Money, urged Olukoyede to enhance the protection of whistleblowers who play a critical role in exposing financial crimes.
According to him, the efficient recovery and forfeiture of assets gained through corruption are pivotal just as he called for the anti-corruption agency to streamline the processes.
