Human rights lawyer Femi Falana, SAN, has backed the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission over its decision to freeze Osun State Government accounts, saying the anti-graft agency acted within the law. His intervention comes amid a heated legal and political dispute over the action, which was taken days before the Osun governorship election and has since been ordered withdrawn by President Bola Tinubu.
The development adds a significant legal voice to a controversy that has divided senior lawyers and political parties over how far the commission can go when investigating public funds.
Falana’s position should not, however, be interpreted as a finding that Governor Ademola Adeleke or any Osun State official committed an offence. An account freeze is an investigative measure and does not amount to a conviction.
New Daily Prime has previously examined the legal processes available to the EFCC when investigating financial crimes, including the circumstances in which the commission may seek court orders against bank accounts or property.
EFCC obtained court order before Osun freeze
A key issue in the dispute has been whether the commission had judicial approval for the restriction.
President Tinubu confirmed on Thursday that the EFCC obtained a court order on 5 August 2026 freezing the Osun State Government accounts as part of an investigation into alleged financial infractions.
The President said he was not troubled by the EFCC exercising its statutory powers through the courts, but was concerned about the timing because Osun was only days away from its governorship election.
Tinubu subsequently directed the commission to return to court immediately and ask for the freezing order to be vacated.
That distinction is important. The President did not simply instruct a bank to disregard a judicial order. He directed the EFCC to approach the court that granted the restriction and seek its removal through the legal process.
The President said federal institutions should avoid actions that could create an impression of interference in an election.
New Daily Prime previously published Tinubu’s Democracy Day address, in which he called on INEC, security agencies, political parties, the judiciary, the media and civil society to protect confidence in elections, including the approaching Osun poll.
Falana has previously defended EFCC powers over state funds
Falana’s latest position is consistent with arguments he has made before.
In December 2022, he rejected suggestions that federal anti-corruption agencies lacked authority to examine state government finances. Falana maintained that both the EFCC and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission could investigate state accounts where financial crimes were suspected.
The wider constitutional question has also reached Nigeria’s highest court.
In November 2024, the Supreme Court dismissed a challenge brought by several states against the constitutionality of laws establishing the EFCC and other anti-corruption institutions.
Falana has separately argued that the EFCC and ICPC are national crime-fighting institutions whose role in combating corruption has been recognised by the courts.
However, the commission’s powers are not unlimited.
Court decisions have established that the EFCC generally cannot simply direct a bank to freeze a customer’s account indefinitely without judicial authority. Section 34 of the EFCC Act provides a mechanism for obtaining a court order where money in an account is suspected to be connected with an offence.
The EFCC has also argued that other legislation allows temporary restrictions in certain circumstances, but longer restrictions require judicial intervention.
Osun denies N11bn allegations
The dispute followed an EFCC investigation into alleged financial misconduct involving Osun State funds.
According to PUNCH, the state government rejected allegations of misappropriation involving about N11 billion and disputed the commission’s claims. The EFCC maintained that its investigation was not politically motivated and said it was exercising its mandate to investigate suspected financial crimes.
Those allegations remain allegations. No completed criminal trial has established that Governor Ademola Adeleke or other state officials unlawfully diverted the funds.
The legal debate is therefore separate from the question of whether wrongdoing eventually can be proved.
Falana’s intervention supports the EFCC’s authority to investigate state finances and obtain appropriate court orders. Tinubu’s subsequent directive, on the other hand, focuses on the timing and potential political consequences of maintaining the freeze immediately before an election.
Both issues can exist at the same time: an investigation may have a lawful basis while questions remain about the proportionality and timing of particular enforcement measures.
What happens next?
The EFCC is expected to comply with Tinubu’s directive by approaching the court to have the order lifted.
Until the court formally vacates or changes its order and the banks receive the appropriate legal documentation, the presidential announcement should not automatically be treated as a court judgment unfreezing the accounts.
The investigation itself may also continue unless the commission or a court determines otherwise.
For Osun residents, the central issues now are whether access to state funds is fully restored, whether the EFCC continues its investigation into specific transactions, and whether the controversy affects public confidence ahead of the governorship election.
Related news
