A Federal High Court sitting in Ibadan on Wednesday restrained the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) from proceeding with its planned investigation into the finances of the Oyo State Government, describing the exercise as speculative and amounting to a fishing expedition.

Justice Nkeonye Maha, who delivered judgment in suit FHC/IB/CS/61/2025 filed by the Oyo State Government, held that although the EFCC has statutory powers to investigate financial crimes, such powers must be exercised within the confines of the Constitution and the rule of law.

The judge ruled that the Commission’s proposed investigation, particularly the demands contained in its June 2, 2025 letter to the Oyo State Accountant-General, was not anchored on any specific allegation and therefore amounted to a speculative inquiry.

Justice Maha further held that the constitutional rights of the plaintiffs to fair hearing could not be undermined under the guise of an investigation.

The Oyo State Government had approached the court after receiving a letter from the EFCC requesting copies of all contracts awarded by the state government and details of all payments made to contractors from 2021 to June 2, 2025.

According to the state, it subsequently wrote to the anti-graft agency requesting clarification on the contractors, companies or transactions under investigation to enable it provide relevant documents. However, the EFCC allegedly failed to respond, prompting the suit.

The plaintiffs — Governor Seyi Makinde, the Attorney-General of Oyo State and the state’s Accountant-General — argued through their counsel, the Attorney-General, Abiodun Aikomo, that the Commission’s request was oppressive, unduly burdensome and unreasonable, considering the volume of contracts executed by the state within the period.

They contended that while the EFCC possesses investigative powers under its enabling Act, those powers remain subject to constitutional safeguards and cannot justify indiscriminate or roving investigations without identifiable allegations or evidence of wrongdoing.

Counsel to the EFCC, I.G. Ojibor, who led S. Adamu, relied on Section 38 of the EFCC Act, 2004, arguing that the provision empowers the Commission to demand information from any person, authority, corporation or company without hindrance in the discharge of its investigative functions.

He maintained that the provision entitled the Commission to seek information relating to the state’s financial activities.

But Justice Maha rejected the argument and ruled in favour of the Oyo State Government.

The court set aside the EFCC’s June 2, 2025 letter and held that any request for information by the Commission must be reasonable, specific and directly linked to identifiable allegations or offences under the EFCC Act.

The judge stressed that Section 38 of the Act authorises the Commission to demand information only for the purpose of investigating offences created under the law and does not empower it to embark on speculative or blanket inquiries into the finances of any individual or government.