The Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA) has faulted former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, over his public demand that the Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission(EFCC), Olanipekun Olukoyede, step aside from probing allegations levelled against him, describing the move as legally baseless, evasive and an attempt to personalise a statutory process.
It said Malami’s argument that the EFCC chairman lacks the locus to investigate him is not only untenable, but also smacks of panic and desperation by a former chief law officer, who should know better.
The rights group stressed that the EFCC is a legally constituted agency empowered by law to investigate and prosecute economic and financial crimes involving any Nigerian, regardless of status, past office or political affiliation.
The organisation questioned Malami’s posture, asking who he believes himself to be that a statutory anti-graft agency of the Federal Government cannot investigate allegations linked to his tenure.
According to HURIWA, attempting to divert the matter to another agency, such as the ICPC, based on alleged bias amounts to chasing shadows and trivialising serious allegations that demand clear answers, not procedural gymnastics.
The group said if the EFCC has made allegations suggesting the commission of offences, the former minister must submit himself to investigation, offer explanations where necessary, and, if charged, defend himself robustly before a court of competent jurisdiction.
HURIWA described Malami’s stance as reminiscent of what it called children’s arguments, warning that it is unbecoming of him to be disputing the authority of an institution he once worked closely with as a key pillar of the criminal justice system.
It dismissed insinuations that the EFCC chairman has any personal issues with Malami, stressing that the anti-graft boss was appointed by President Bola Tinubu based on merit and in line with extant laws.
The group said it is misleading for Malami to individualise his case and attempt to frame the investigation as a vendetta rather than what it is: an institutional inquiry into alleged wrongdoing.
The association warned against reliance on any panel report to argue that the EFCC lacks investigative powers over Malami, stressing that no administrative panel can override clear statutory provisions establishing the EFCC and defining its mandate.
