The Centre for Public Accountability, Rule of Law and Transparency Initiative has backed the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) over its restriction of an account belonging to the Osun State Government, while faulting President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s directive for the commission to lift the restriction.

The group, led by Dr Raymond Chukwuebuka Ndukwe, said the EFCC should be allowed to carry out its statutory responsibilities without political interference, arguing that the timing of an investigation should not prevent an anti-corruption agency from acting where it suspects that public funds may be at risk.

President Tinubu recently directed the EFCC to vacate the court order restricting the Osun State Government’s account, saying although the commission had the authority to act, the timing of the action was “deeply embarrassing”. The directive has triggered wider debate over the independence of anti-corruption agencies, particularly with the Osun governorship election scheduled for August 15.

In a statement, the Centre said the EFCC’s powers should not be determined by political considerations.

“There is no such thing as a good or bad time for the EFCC to carry out its constitutional duties,” the group said, while arguing that the commission must be permitted to investigate suspected financial crimes irrespective of the political calendar.

The organisation said Osun was not the first state whose account had been subjected to an EFCC restriction, citing previous actions involving Benue, Kogi and Edo states.

It argued that the commission’s mandate under Nigerian law extends to investigating economic and financial crimes involving public funds and that the status of an account holder does not automatically place the funds beyond investigation.

The group further alleged that the EFCC had commenced investigations into financial transactions involving the Osun State Government before imposing the restriction.

According to the organisation, investigators had received information about substantial withdrawals from the state government’s accounts between August 3 and 4, 2026, including transfers allegedly made to private companies.

The Centre said the transactions raised concerns about possible dissipation of public funds and that the restriction was therefore intended as a preservative measure while investigations continued.

Those allegations remain the position of the organisation and have not, by themselves, established wrongdoing by the Osun State Government or any individual involved in the transactions.

The group also cited the Court of Appeal’s decision in EFCC v. A-G Benue State & Ors, which recognised that a state government account falls within the class of accounts that may be restricted by the EFCC in accordance with due process. The court also held that the commission could impose a stop order for up to 72 hours without a court order, after which a further judicial order would be required if the restriction was to continue.

The Centre said the judgment demonstrated that the EFCC’s authority was not limited to private individuals or companies and could extend to government accounts where the statutory requirements were satisfied.

It also referred to provisions of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022, which provide mechanisms for temporarily restricting transactions suspected to be connected with unlawful activity and for obtaining further judicial orders where necessary.

The group called on political parties, politicians, civil society organisations and members of the public to avoid politicising the work of anti-corruption agencies.

It maintained that the protection of public funds should transcend partisan interests and urged the EFCC to continue its investigations in accordance with the law.

“The defence of public funds is not a partisan project; it is a constitutional imperative,” the organisation said.

The controversy over the Osun account restriction has meanwhile intensified debate over the balance between anti-corruption enforcement, institutional independence and political neutrality ahead of the state’s governorship election.