The appointment of a new Chairman for the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), represents a defining moment in Nigeria’s ongoing fight against corruption and financial malfeasance. The task at hand is not only to build on past triumphs, but also chart a new course that addresses Nigeria’s unique challenges while drawing inspiration from the experiences of anti corruption bodies in countries where giant strides have been taken to address the scourge.
The aim of this piece, for that reason, is to provide a comprehensive roadmap for the incoming EFCC Chairman, leveraging both the experience of the incumbent and global best practices in combating corruption.
While some commendable achievements have been recorded by previous helmsmen to increase EFCC’s institutional capacity, one of the new EFCC Chairman’s top priorities should be to further strengthen the agency’s institutional capability. This includes attracting and keeping top-tier talent, developing a professional and ethical culture, and offering continuous training and development opportunities for employees. Furthermore, the Chairman should prioritise infrastructure, technology, and resources in order to facilitate effective investigation, prosecution, and asset recovery.
For the Chairman to succeed even beyond his own expectations, he must embrace international collaboration. Nigeria can learn from more advanced countries on how to improve international collaboration. In this context, the EFCC should form and strengthen alliances with foreign law enforcement agencies, financial institutions, and international organisations.
This will ease the tracking and repatriation of criminally acquired funds stashed overseas, and foster a global network for intelligence sharing and joint operations. The recovery of illicit assets has, regrettably, emerged as a cornerstone in Nigeria’s fight against corruption given that vast sums were siphoned off from the nation’s coffers by state officials in successive administrations. Success on this front requires collaboration as the recovery procedure, complex and multifaceted, involves domestic actions, international cooperation, and a combination of legal, diplomatic, and administrative measures.
Equally important, going forward, is the prioritisation of preventive measures. While investigations and convictions are crucial in the fight against corruption, so are preventive measures. The new Chairman should strive to instill a culture of transparency, ethics, and accountability in both the public and private sectors. This approach must focus on enforcing strict anti-corruption policies, performing regular audits, and developing strong whistleblower protection processes.
To further enhance the financial intelligence systems already in place, the EFCC should deploy advanced data analytics and financial intelligence skills to combat financial crimes effectively. These tools can help detect suspicious transactions, discover hidden assets, and track down illicit funds. Collaboration with financial institutions to share information and establish effective risk assessment models will be advantageous in this context.
The new EFCC helmsman must work diligently to make legal processes more efficient. Protracted legal processes that frequently delay cases are widely known to be one of the EFCC’s long-standing concerns. The Chairman should seriously advocate for legal reforms targeted at speeding up EFCC trials, eliminating case backlogs, and ensuring speedy and equitable justice. Additionally, alternative dispute resolution mechanisms should be reinforced to free up the judicial system and resolve cases more efficiently.
Having previously worked in that agency at a very high level as Chief of Staff, the new EFCC’s boss very well knows that prioritisation is essential for maximising the EFCC’s limited resources. The Chairman should, for that reason, take a risk-based approach, focusing on high-impact cases involving considerable financial losses to the nation or having a significant societal impact. This method will enhance the EFCC’s deterrence effect and demonstrate its commitment to combating corruption at all levels.
Whistleblowers are critical in exposing corruption and have been used to great effect in some reputable jurisdictions to combat financial crimes. Consequently, the EFCC must strengthen whistleblower protection procedures to encourage individuals to come forward with vital information.
This involves maintaining strict privacy, giving legal assistance, and, where appropriate, offering cash incentives. Moreover, a well-structured whistleblower program can greatly improve the agency’s investigative capabilities.
It is not for nothing that Singapore is regarded as one of the least corrupt countries worldwide. The East Asian country has made substantial improvements in safeguarding whistleblowers by implementing strong legislation and establishing comprehensive frameworks. The Whistleblower Protection Act, enacted in 2018, serves as the primary instrument in this context. The aforementioned Act offers legal protections for individuals who disclose misconduct in both the public and private domains.
The implementation of this system guarantees the preservation of anonymity for individuals who expose wrongdoing, and provides protection against potential acts of reprisal, such as termination of employment or the occurrence of harassment.
In order to enhance the efficacy of whistleblower protection, the government of Singapore has established specialised channels for the purpose of reporting, such as the Whistleblowing Programme Office (WPO). This office functions as a centralised outlet for reporting, catering to employees from both the public and private sectors. WPO conducts comprehensive investigations into allegations of misbehavior and engages in collaborative efforts with pertinent agencies to guarantee that appropriate measures are implemented against those involved in wrongful activities.
The implementation of these policies has established a conducive and protected atmosphere for individuals who disclose sensitive information, hence promoting openness and responsibility within Singaporean society.
The United Kingdom has, in the same vein, established a robust framework for safeguarding whistleblowers, which encompasses a range of measures designed to guarantee the security and confidentiality of those who disclose misconduct. The primary legislation in the United Kingdom pertaining to this matter is the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (PIDA), which encompasses a wide range of sectors, encompassing both public and private entities.
The Protected Disclosures Act (PIDA) offers legal safeguards to those who expose wrongdoing by granting them immunity from unjust treatment or termination as a consequence of their disclosure. Moreover, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) in the United Kingdom has implemented rigorous regulations requiring financial institutions to establish internal mechanisms for reporting misconduct and designate individuals as advocates for whistleblowers to ensure their protection.
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) additionally offers regulatory safeguards to those who disclose misconduct within the financial services industry. The aforementioned actions have significantly enhanced the United Kingdom’s endeavours in addressing corruption and fostering accountability in many industries, thereby establishing a compelling model for other countries to emulate in safeguarding whistleblowers.
Public awareness and education is of critical importance to the success of an anti corruption agency operating in a clime where there is a convergence or collision of culturally acceptable norms, on the one hand, and acts proscribed as crimes under anti-corruption laws, on the other.
The Chairman should initiate public awareness efforts about the negative consequences of corruption and the role citizens can play in exposing financial crimes. Strong and enduring partnerships with civil society organisations and the media can also help generate awareness and public support for the anti-corruption campaign. To effectively tackle corruption, the EFCC must collaborate with other government agencies to institutionalise integrity and accountability.
Collaboration between the judicial, legislature, and executive branches in enacting and enforcing anti-corruption laws and regulations will result in a more comprehensive and effective anti-corruption system.
Public trust and confidence in law enforcement authorities can only be established by openness and accountability. The EFCC can take steps to improve openness in its activities. For instance, the agency can, within constitutional limits, make a database of its investigations and outcomes available to the public.
By so doing, the public would have access to details about pending cases, convictions, and confiscated property through this database. Additionally, the EFCC can establish a complaints and feedback mechanism to allow citizens to report incidents of misconduct by operatives. To demonstrate its commitment to transparency, the EFCC can regularly publish reports on its activities, including financial audits and performance assessments, showcasing its achievements and challenges.
As regards the rampant criticism of selectivity and bias in investigations, this can be addressed through a non-partisan and inclusive approach. The Chairman should ensure that investigations and prosecutions are not influenced by ethnic, political or personal biases. To demonstrate impartiality, the EFCC can prioritise high profile cases with clear evidence of corruption, regardless of the political or social status of the individuals involved.
Additionally, the EFCC can establish advisory committees composed of diverse stakeholders, including civil society representatives, to review and provide oversight on the agency’s operations. This inclusivity fosters trust and ensures that decisions are made collectively, thereby reducing the perception of selective enforcement.
Finally, the EFCC Chairman should adopt a proactive and dynamic approach to leadership. In a new technological age and fast growing world, corruption evolves every day with new methods devised to obscure the detection of its modus operandi and proceeds. The agency must, therefore, as a matter of necessity adapt to new challenges and tactics.
All of the above mentioned measures, including monitoring the effectiveness of strategies, seeking feedback from stakeholders, and making necessary adjustments are essential for staying ahead of the curve in the fight against corruption. Cognizant of the odds stacked against him, the new Chairman must constantly be on his toes, and on top of his game, as he takes his place in the vanguard of notable anti-corruption Tsars worldwide.
Jegede is a Legal practitioner and former United Nations International Prosecutor.
