Court stops EFCC’s planned probe of Oyo finances, faults ‘fishing expedition’

The Federal High Court in Ibadan has issued a restraining order against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), preventing the anti-graft agency from proceeding with its planned investigation into the finances of the Oyo State Government. The court determined that the EFCC's request for comprehensive financial records amounted to a speculative "fishing expedition" rather than a lawful inquiry based on specific allegations.

In her judgment, Justice Nkeonye Maha affirmed the EFCC's statutory powers to investigate financial crimes but stressed that these powers must be exercised within the constitutional framework and the rule of law. The court consequently nullified the commission's letter dated June 2, 2025, which had demanded extensive financial records from the Oyo State Accountant General. The judge stated that any request for information must be reasonable and directly linked to identifiable allegations of wrongdoing.

The court cited Section 38 of the EFCC Act, clarifying that the commission is empowered to obtain information solely for the investigation of offenses under the Act. This does not authorize speculative or blanket inquiries into government finances. The judgment noted that the EFCC's request was overly broad and lacked the necessary specificity to justify such a wide-ranging demand for official documents.

The Oyo State Government had initiated the lawsuit after receiving the EFCC's letter, which sought copies of all state contracts and details of payments made to contractors from 2021 to the date of the letter. The government argued that the request was oppressive, unreasonable, and excessively wide, given the volume of contracts executed during the period. Represented by the Attorney General, Abiodun Aikomo, the state maintained that while the EFCC has investigative powers, these are subject to constitutional safeguards and cannot infringe upon citizens' right to a fair hearing. The government further contended that anti-corruption investigations must be evidence-driven and grounded in specific allegations, not broad requests spanning multiple years of transactions.

“

His Lordship noted that the constitutional rights of the plaintiffs to fair hearing could not be trampled upon under the guise of investigation.