Hottestgistnaija.com
The evident zeal of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in executing its statutory mandates, especially in declaring individuals wanted, raises concerns about its adherence to due legal processes and the potential overstepping of its allocated powers.
The habitual issuance of public notices by the EFCC and other security agencies, labeling individuals as “WANTED,” is not only unlawful but also lacks the necessary authorization from the law. This practice, reminiscent of dictatorial tendencies from past military regimes, compromises the principles of due process and the rule of law.
Operational actions that defy the law and undermine established processes contradict the very essence of legal frameworks. In Nigeria, there is no legal provision granting the EFCC or the State Security Service (SSS) the authority to declare anyone wanted without a valid court order.
The Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015, a comprehensive criminal procedural law applicable to all federal agencies, explicitly outlines processes from arrest to conviction or acquittal. Section 41 of this Act empowers only the court to issue public summons through newspapers or other means when a suspect, against whom a warrant of arrest was issued, absconds or conceals themselves. Thus, obtaining a valid warrant of arrest is a prerequisite before security agencies can approach the court to declare a suspect wanted.
This legal perspective was reinforced in a case between Mr. Benedict Peters and the EFCC, where the court invalidated the EFCC’s declaration of the claimant as wanted, emphasizing that only the court has the discretion to make such a declaration.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Enforcement) Regulations, 2010, in Regulation 12(2), explicitly states that the EFCC must comply with all laws related to arrest and granting bail to suspects. Therefore, the EFCC can declare a suspect wanted only when armed with a valid court order and after fulfilling all necessary conditions, including obtaining a warrant of arrest.
Similar instances have occurred with other agencies, such as the State Security Service, highlighting a systemic issue where agencies seem either ignorant of the law or defiant to its provisions.
The publication of pictures and details of persons arrested or detained, commonly practiced by agencies like the EFCC, constitutes a breach of the constitutional right to the presumption of innocence and amounts to a prejudicial media trial.
These normalized but unlawful practices underscore an institutional problem and a systemic erosion of due process. Urgent corrective measures are necessary to ensure these agencies operate within legal boundaries and uphold the principles they are meant to defend.
Additionally, some privately individuals have also emulated this unpopular behaviour by declaring people wanted on line on their own without the requisite order, this is unknown to law and with possible heavy liability.
