Banner Online News

The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has launched a scathing attack on the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) over its directive freezing the Osun State Government’s bank account, declaring the move unconstitutional, unlawful and a dangerous abuse of power that threatens Nigeria’s constitutional democracy.

The legal body accused the anti-graft agency of exceeding its statutory powers by directing First Bank Plc to impose a post-no-debit (PND) restriction on the state’s statutory allocation account without what it insists should be a valid court order.

The EFCC’s directive, contained in a letter dated August 5, 2026, and signed by Assistant Commander Adenike Babalola on behalf of the Director of Investigation, was issued as part of an ongoing probe into the alleged diversion and fraudulent management of N11 billion ecological and intervention funds.

The action has triggered outrage from the Osun State Government and legal experts, who warned that freezing a state’s operational account could cripple governance, disrupt essential public services and undermine Nigeria’s federal structure.

Governor Ademola Adeleke condemned the restriction, describing it as another in a series of politically motivated attacks allegedly aimed at destabilising his administration.

According to the governor, the account freeze follows what he described as sustained attempts to frustrate his government, including the alleged harassment of members of the Accord Party and interference with the operations of local government councils in the state.

Defending its action, however, the EFCC said investigations into the alleged financial misconduct commenced in March and that it observed substantial transfers from the state’s account to several corporate entities beginning August 2 while the investigation was still ongoing.

But speaking in an interview with The Punch, the outgoing President of the Nigerian Bar Association, Afam Osigwe, insisted that the EFCC lacks the legal authority to unilaterally freeze the account of a state government.

While acknowledging that the commission has powers to investigate financial crimes, Osigwe stressed that any restriction on a bank account—particularly that of a government—must first be authorised by a competent court.

He warned that imposing a blanket freeze on a state’s account could effectively shut down government operations and constitutes a blatant abuse of statutory powers.

“No government agency or any person has the right or the power to restrict withdrawals from the account of any state because, first of all, the order has the effect of grounding the activities of a government,” Osigwe said.

He maintained that where the EFCC suspects fraud involving a particular account, the appropriate legal procedure is to approach the court for an order, rather than issuing unilateral directives.

“If the EFCC knows that any particular account is being used for the purpose of fraud, it may be able to obtain a court order, but it cannot make a blanket order freezing the accounts of any state.

“Such an order would be unconstitutional and also violate the powers of the EFCC and may actually amount to an abuse of power. We should not have such a situation.

“If there is a need to freeze the account of a person or government, there is a need to provide a proper basis for it and get a proper order.”

Osigwe also urged First Bank not to comply with the EFCC’s directive unless it is backed by a valid court order, insisting that the rule of law must prevail over administrative directives.

The controversy has further heightened tensions over the limits of the EFCC’s investigative powers, with legal observers warning that the outcome of the dispute could have far-reaching implications for the balance of powers between federal agencies and state governments.