A legal practitioner and public affairs analyst, Frank Tietie, has defended the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) over its decision to freeze an Osun State Government account, saying the anti-graft agency does not need prior approval before restricting an account suspected of being linked to unlawful transactions.
Naijaonpoint reports that Tietie stated this on Friday during an interview on Arise Television while reacting to the controversy surrounding the EFCC’s action ahead of the Osun governorship election.
President Bola Tinubu had subsequently directed the commission to take steps to vacate the court order freezing the state government’s account.
Reacting to the intervention, Tietie argued that the President’s directive could amount to interference with law enforcement.
“It is a case of hindrance of law enforcement and nearly borders on obstruction to justice,” he said.
Tietie said his position was supported by provisions of the EFCC Establishment Act and the Money Laundering Act, as well as previous decisions of the Court of Appeal.
“I establish it by referring to the various decisions of the Court of Appeal with regards to the cases against EFCC in terms of Benue State in the time of former Governor Samuel Ortom, and then the express provisions of Section 34 of the EFCC Act and Section 7, Subsection 6 of the Money Laundering Act,” he said.
According to him, the commission has powers under the law to take immediate action against suspicious transactions or accounts, subject to applicable legal limits.
Tietie said, “The EFCC didn’t need to apologise to anybody, didn’t also need to consult anybody before exercising its powers to freeze a particular transaction, which I urge it to do, or to freeze a particular bank account, so long as it does not exceed three days.
“The EFCC chairman and the commission were acting within their powers.”
‘Election Season Should Not Stop Enforcement’
Tietie also rejected the argument that the proximity of the Osun governorship election should have restrained the commission from acting.
He said an anti-graft agency could not ignore suspicious financial activity simply because an election was approaching.
“Now, you couldn’t expect that a reasonable and responsible commission would see state monies, for example, being ferreted to terrorists in terms of terrorist financing, and you want to say that because of an election season, the EFCC shouldn’t exercise these statutory powers?” he asked.
He added that failure to act in such circumstances would amount to neglect of duty.
“That will be unpatriotic, illegal and gross negligence on the part of those leading the EFCC,” Tietie said.
