A Federal High Court sitting in Ibadan has restrained the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) from proceeding with what it described as a sweeping and unspecified investigation into the finances of the Oyo State Government, ruling that the anti-graft agency cannot embark on speculative “fishing expeditions.”
Justice Nkeonye Maha, who delivered the judgment in suit No. FHC/IB/CS/61/2025, held that although the EFCC has the statutory mandate to investigate financial crimes, such powers must be exercised within the confines of the Constitution and cannot be used to conduct open-ended or oppressive investigations.
The judgment was widely seen as a legal victory for the administration of Governor Seyi Makinde, with the court reaffirming the constitutional limits of federal investigative powers and emphasizing the need to protect the autonomy of state institutions while upholding transparency and accountability.
The dispute arose from a letter dated June 2, 2025, sent by the EFCC to the Oyo State Accountant-General, directing the state government to produce certified copies of all contract awards, procurement records, payment vouchers and other financial documents relating to all ministries, departments and agencies for a four-year period spanning 2021 to June 2, 2025.
In response, the Oyo State Government sought clarification from the commission, requesting details of the specific contractors, companies or transactions being investigated so that the relevant documents could be provided.
However, after the EFCC failed to identify any particular petition, allegation or transaction under investigation, the state government instituted a fundamental rights action before the Federal High Court. The suit was filed by the Attorney-General of Oyo State, Abiodun Aikomo, alongside Governor Seyi Makinde and the Accountant-General.
The plaintiffs argued that the demand for four years of procurement and financial records without reference to any identifiable complaint or alleged offence was unreasonable, oppressive and capable of disrupting the administration of government.
In his judgment, Justice Maha agreed with the plaintiffs, ruling that the EFCC’s investigative powers, though provided by law, must conform to constitutional safeguards and cannot justify harassment through broad and indefinite requests for official records.
The court held that demanding every contract and financial record covering a four-year period without any specific allegation amounted to a speculative inquiry or “fishing expedition.”
Justice Maha further ruled that the constitutional right of the plaintiffs to a fair hearing could not be undermined under the guise of an administrative investigation.
“The proposed investigation, particularly the demands contained in the June 2, 2025 letter to the Oyo State Accountant-General, was not anchored on any specific allegation and therefore amounted to a speculative inquiry. The constitutional rights of the plaintiffs to fair hearing could not be undermined under the guise of an investigation,” the judge held.
The judgment reinforces constitutional boundaries governing the exercise of investigative powers by anti-corruption agencies, with legal analysts noting that the court underscored the need for the EFCC to establish a prima facie case or rely on specific petitions before compelling state governments to produce extensive financial records.
Reacting to the verdict, counsel to the Oyo State Government welcomed the decision, describing it as a reaffirmation of the rule of law. The state maintained that it remains committed to accountability, transparency and prudent management of public funds, while insisting that government institutions must be protected from procedural abuse, administrative oppression and politically motivated fishing expeditions.
