The Chartered Institute of Forensics and Certified Fraud Investigators of Nigeria (CIFCFIN) has criticised the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria (ICAN) for embarking on a training programme leading to the unauthorised designation, Certified Forensic Accountant of Nigeria (CFAN), adding that the certification programme has caused serious concerns within the forensic and fraud investigation ecosystem.

The Institute equally dragged ICAN to the Association of Professional Bodies of Nigeria (APBN), requesting it to prevail on the accounting body to suspend the certification programme.

In a statement signed by CIFCFIN’s Registrar/Chief Executive, Dr Isa Salifu, titled: “Protecting the Integrity of Forensic Accounting Certification in Nigeria,” the Institute maintained that the concern is neither about discouraging professional education nor about denying any institution the right to train its members in relevant areas of accounting, audit, compliance, fraud risk management, or forensic accounting, as continuous learning and interdisciplinary collaboration are essential to strengthening Nigeria’s response to financial crimes.

He said that the central issue is one of statutory mandate, professional identity, and protection of the public from avoidable confusion.

Giving a background to the status of CIFCFIN, he said the Institute was established under the Chartered Institute of Forensics and Certified Fraud Investigators of Nigeria (Establishment) Act, 2022.

“The Act created a specialised professional institute for the training, regulation, supervision, certification, and advancement of forensic and fraud-investigation practice in Nigeria,” he explained.

According to the Registrar, the Institute’s statutory mandate covers the professionalisation of forensics and fraud investigation, including specialist education, certification, standards, ethics, competence, and regulation in “this multidisciplinary field.”

Drawing attention to the official ICAN faculty page, Salifu noted that it expressly advertises a “Training programme for the Certified Forensic Accountant of Nigeria (CFAN).” He therefore said it is “imperative that the legal and professional basis for the designation be publicly clarified.”

While acknowledging ICAN as an important statutory professional accountancy body, with a long-standing role in the development of accountancy education and practice in Nigeria, he said the existence of a broad accountancy mandate does not “automatically displace or override a later and specific statutory mandate granted to a specialist institute in the field of forensics and fraud investigation.”

He said in law and professional regulation, specialist statutory mandates must be respected. “Where an Act of the National Assembly creates a dedicated institute and assigns it responsibility for a specialised profession, other bodies should avoid actions, titles, or certification arrangements that may create the impression of parallel statutory authority.”

Considering the foregoing, Salifu raised four major issues to be urgently addressed. “One, whether ICAN is authorised by law to award or confer the designation of Certified Forensic Accountant of Nigeria (CFAN). “Two, whether the designation conflicts with, duplicates, or encroaches upon the statutory certification and regulatory mandate of CIFCFIN. Three, whether persons awarded the designation are subject to the statutory standards, ethics, disciplinary processes, and professional regulation applicable to forensic and fraud investigation practitioners in Nigeria and, finally, what safeguards are in place to prevent the public, employers, courts, regulators, and international partners from being misled.”

The Registrar believes that Nigeria needs stronger, not competing professional institutions in the fight against financial crimes.

“The appropriate path is constructive engagement, statutory compliance, and institutional collaboration. CIFCFIN and ICAN can collaborate on capacity building, research, continuing professional development, fraud prevention, forensic accounting education, and professional referral arrangements. Such collaboration must, however, be founded on respect for the law, clear boundaries of professional authority, and protection of the public interest. The rule of law, professional integrity, and public protection must remain paramount.”