A potential turf war appears to be unfolding between the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Nigeria Police Force over the custody and legal handling of two suspects implicated in a controversial microfinance bank fraud case.
The suspects, Illesanmi Olaniyi and Ishola Maruf, were originally apprehended by operatives of the Force Intelligence Department (FID) in Abuja on March 17, 2024. They were later granted administrative bail, which their legal representatives insist remains valid and binding.
According to Khadijah Bayern, the suspects’ lead counsel, the police seized two vehicles a Toyota Hilux and a Toyota RAV4 alongside several documents and personal items during the initial arrest. These assets, she said, are still in police custody and are the subject of an ongoing forfeiture proceeding currently before a competent court of jurisdiction.
However, in a petition titled "Double Jeopardy and Intimidation" addressed to the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Bayern alleged that the EFCC has since re-arrested the suspects over the same matter already being prosecuted by the police and pending in court. She noted that Olaniyi and Maruf have now been detained in EFCC custody for more than 12 days, allegedly without bail or access to adequate medical care.
“The repeated arrests of the same individuals by different agencies on an already pending matter is a recipe for abuse of process and undermines the credibility of our justice system,” Bayern warned in her petition, urging the AGF to intervene decisively in order to prevent further violations of the suspects' rights.
In a separate communication dated July 29, 2025, another member of the defense legal team wrote to the Director of the EFCC’s Special Duty Section 2 (SDC2), requesting that the Commission review and ease the bail conditions initially set for the suspects.
The letter specifically appealed to the EFCC to accept civil servants on Grade Level 14 or 15 as sureties, as opposed to requiring senior officers of higher grades, which the defense argued was unnecessarily restrictive. The letter also drew attention to the suspects’ cardiovascular health issues, emphasizing the need for consistent and professional medical attention.
Despite the appeals, the EFCC has firmly denied any wrongdoing. Responding to the allegations, the Commission’s Head of Media and Publicity, Dele Oyewale, dismissed the claims of intimidation and abuse.
“The EFCC does not harass or intimidate suspects. We act strictly on credible intelligence and within the boundaries of the law,” Oyewale stated.
He clarified that the EFCC does not duplicate investigations unless new evidence or previously undiscovered angles emerge in a case. On the issue of extended detention, Oyewale explained that suspects may be held beyond the statutory 48-hour period if the Commission secures a remand order from a competent magistrate court, in line with legal procedures.
This incident underscores a growing concern among legal professionals about inter-agency rivalry, overlapping jurisdictions, and the implications of such conflicts on the rule of law and rights of suspects.
As the legal battle continues, all eyes are now on the Attorney-General’s office, with stakeholders hoping for swift intervention to clarify the appropriate handling of the case and ensure that justice is neither delayed nor denied.
Post a Comment