The Federal High Court, Abuja, on Wednesday, dismissed a suit seeking the sacking of Ola Olukoyede as the chairperson of theEconomic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
The judge, Obiora Egwuatu, dismissed the suit in a judgment anchored on the grounds that the applicant lacked locus standi (legal right) to institute the case.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that an Abuja-based lawyer, Victor Opatola, had filed the suit against President Bola Tinubu over his appointment of Olukoyede as EFCC’s chair.
Mr Opatola filed his suit to challenge the validity of the appointment, arguing that Mr Olukoyede did not possess the cognate experience of service required by law of any persons seeking to occupy the office of chairman of the anti-graft agency.
He had sued the president, the National Assembly, the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Mr Olukoyede as respondents in the suit marked HC/ABJ/CS/1403/2023.
PulseNets reported how Mr Tinubu appointed Mr Olukoyede as the next EFCC chairperson in October last year amid controversy over his qualifications.
Many had said Mr Olukoyede, although a former secretary of the EFCC and ex-chief of staff to the chairman of the commission, did not meet the requirements of section 2(3) of the EFCC Act to be qualified for the appointment.
The law stipulates that a chairman of the commission “must be a serving or retired member of any government security or law enforcement agency not below the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police or equivalent; and possess not less than 15 years’ experience.”
Those who opposed Mr Olukoyede’s appointment argued at the time that his previous experiences as the chief of staff to the then EFCC chairperson from 2016 to 2018 and subsequently as the secretary of the EFCC between 2018 and 2020 did not meet the legal requirements under section 2(3) of EFCC Act.
Specifically, they argued that the experiences did not correspond to 15 years of experience of a serving or retired member of any government security or law enforcement agency not below the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police or equivalent as stipulated in the law.
Defence
The respondents to Mr Opatola’s suit opposed these arguments similarly canvassed at the hearing on the subject matter. They maintained that Mr Olukoyede was qualified for the job.
The EFCC chair, who was represented by Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), at the previous hearing session, challenged the legal authority of the plaintiff to institute the suit in the first instance.
Besides, Mr Olukoyede maintained that he was eminently qualified to occupy the office of EFCC Chairman, having served as secretary of the commission, an equivalent of a grade Level 17 position. According to him, his previous position was higher than the rank of an Assistant Commissioner of Police, a grade Level 14 position.
He asked the court to dismiss the suit.
Plaintiff’s claims
Mr Opatola had asked the court to determine, among others, whether by the true construction and interpretation of Section 2 (1) (a) of the EFCC Act 2004,
Mr Olukoyede, who has not fulfilled the conditions of the Act can be validly appointed as EFCC chairman.
He also asked the court to determine whether, by the actual construction and interpretation of section 2(1)(a) of the EFCC Act 2004, the person appointed to the office of the chairman of the EFCC can be said to be above the rank of assistant commissioner of police or its equivalent.”
Also Read: Anti-corruption boss Olukoyede orders EFCC staff to declare their assets
The applicant also urged the court to determine whether, by the true construction and interpretation of Section 2(1)(a) (iii) of the EFCC Act 2004, the interpretation of subsection (iii) should be read disjunctively of subsection (ii) of the Act in a manner that Mr Olukoyede was appointed to the office of the chairperson of EFCC, can be said to have 15 Years of cognate experience in any field outside the government security or law enforcement agency.
After listening to all parties in the suit, the judge, Mr Egwuatu, adjourned until Wednesday for judgement. He dismissed the suit in his judgement on Wednesday.
