Commission Accuses Media of Deliberate Misrepresentation, Rejects Claims of Pressure Over Investigation Report
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has faulted reports allegedly misrepresenting the reaction of its counsel, Larry Peters Aso, to a judgment delivered by the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court in a fundamental rights enforcement suit instituted by legal practitioner, Dr Ted Iseghoi-Edwards.
The commission described the reports as misleading, insisting that its lawyer’s comments after the judgment had been twisted to create an impression of external interference and questionable motives in its investigation of the controversial London-Paris Club refunds.
Justice Suleiman Belgore reportedly cleared Iseghoi-Edwards of allegations of fraud relating to services rendered to Nigeria’s 774 local government councils.
The judge also reportedly disagreed with aspects of the EFCC’s investigation report concerning the London-Paris Club refunds.
Reacting to the judgment, Aso reportedly commended the judge for his industry in handling the matter, adding that the commission would apply for the Certified True Copy (CTC) of the judgment and study it to determine the appropriate legal steps.
However, the EFCC said its counsel never made any statement suggesting that a 2024 investigation report concerning Iseghoi-Edwards was prepared under pressure from senior officials of the commission.
The agency particularly rejected claims that Aso linked the report to allegations that Iseghoi-Edwards fraudulently obtained judgments after instituting proceedings against the Federal Government in the United States.
It also dismissed as mischievous and deliberately defamatory reports suggesting that the investigation report was produced under pressure following the alleged assignment of promissory notes by Iseghoi-Edwards to third parties in the United States, who subsequently threatened legal action against the Federal Government.
According to the commission, the narrative was deliberately framed to insinuate that external considerations influenced its investigation, insisting that no such circumstances existed.
The EFCC maintained that the interpretation of its counsel’s courtroom reaction amounted to character assassination and urged media organisations to verify statements made during court proceedings rather than rely on misleading accounts.
The commission further directed journalists seeking clarification to consult the record of proceedings of Tuesday, October 20, 2026, when Justice Belgore delivered the judgment.
It urged the media to uphold objectivity, accuracy and professionalism in reporting judicial proceedings, stressing that fair reporting remains essential to the administration of justice.
