By Dayo Benson & Oamen Areguamen

Since the Act establishing the Economic and Financial Crime Commission, EFCC came into being in 2004 under the administration of former President Olusegun Obasanjo, the commission has been engaging public attention. As it name implies, EFCC was set up to fight economic and financial crimes which has been denting Nigeria’s international image.

Despite some achievements of the commission, its public perception suffered at a point when it was seen as a tool which Obasanjo used to hound political enemies.

* Mr Mohammed Adoke, SAN, AGF & * Mrs Farida Waziri, EFCC chair

The EFCC then, was headed by Mallam Nuhu Ribadu. Before the commission, an earlier Act of the National Assembly had established the Independent Corrupt Practices and (Related Offences) Commission way back in 2000. Unlike the EFCC, ICPC was created to fight official corruption which has remained an endemic scourge in the polity.

Over the period however, the EFCC, because of its activities had attracted more media attention than the ICPC. While EFCC has been adopting legal and sometimes extra-legal methods to bark and bite, ICPC is seen by many as merely barking and not biting.

However, former chairman of ICPC, retired Supreme Court Justice, Emmnuel Ayoola had insisted that the commission under him was committed to the rule rather than playing to the gallery.

However, a perceived over-lapping of the operations of the two anti-graft agencies either rightly or wrongly has engendered calls for their merger.

The issue re-echoed again when the Attorney-General and Minister for Justices, Mr. Mohammed Adoke at the ministerial screening before the Senate last week called for their merger.

According to him, “Most of our anti-corruption agencies lack the capacity to do thorough investigations. They lack capacity to collate evidences to sustain a charge and secure conviction in court and until we properly reform these agencies, we will continue to experience the problems we are experiencing today.

“More often than not, people are arrested before they are investigated, they are arrested even before there is evidence, they traumatised them and the people are dramatically tried on the pages of newspapers and at the end of the day, when they are unable to prove their case, they end up blaming the courts.

“When we, the Ministry of Justice try to guide these agencies, they complain of interference. It will be appropriate to merge these agencies together so that they can effectively fight corruption,” he said.

However, in a swift response over the weekend, EFCC Chairman, Mrs. Farida Waziri rose in defence of the commission and dismissed the suggestion. For Mrs. Waziri, it was unnecessary to call for such merger because the roles of the two agencies are clearly defined in the Act.

In her words: “Our roles are clearly defined by the Acts; there has never been any conflict nor duplications as being alleged. Over $6.5bn bad loans were recovered and 1.5billion dollars were also recovered from Mrs. Cecilia Ibru alone.”

The argument is an old issue, but coming from the Attorney-General of the Federation this time around underscores its seriousness. The issue has also inspired the need to take a second look at the Acts establishing the two agencies, especially as its concerns their functions and operations.

According to the instrument setting up the ICPC, its duties are spelt out in section 6 and sections 8-25 .

That of EFCC are specifically listed in sections 6 and 7 of the Act.

According to S6-7 of the EFCC Act

“(b)the investigation of all financial crimes including advance fee fraud, money laundering, counterfeiting, illegal charge transfers, futures market fraud, fraudulent encashment of negotiable instruments, computer credit card fraud, contract scam, etc.;

“(d) the co-ordination and enforcement of all economic and financial crimes laws and enforcement functions conferred on any other person or authority; the adoption of measures to identify, trace, freeze, confiscate or seize proceeds derived from terrorist activities, economic and financial crimes related offences or the properties the value of which corresponds to such proceeds;

(e) the adoption of measures to eradicate the commission of economic and financial crimes;

(f) the adoption of measures which includes coordinated preventive and regulatory actions, introduction and maintenance of investigative and control techniques on the prevention of economic and financial related crimes;

(g) the facilitation of rapid exchange of scientific and technical information and the conduct of joint operations geared towards the eradication of economic and financial crimes;

(h) the examination and investigation of all reported cases of economic and financial crimes with a view to identifying individuals, corporate bodies or groups involved;

(i) the determination of the extent of financial loss and such other losses by government, private individuals or organizations;

G) collaborating with government bodies both within and outside Nigeria carrying on functions wholly or in part analogous with those of the Commission concerning –

(i) the identification, determination, of the whereabouts and activities of persons suspected of being involved in economic and financial crimes,

(ii) the movement of proceeds or properties derived from the commission of economic and financial and other related crimes;

(iv) the establishment and maintenance of a system for monitoring international economic and financial crimes in order to identify suspicious transactions and persons involved,

(v) maintaining data, statistics, records and reports on person, organizations, proceeds, properties, documents or other items or assets involved in economic and financial crimes;

(vi) undertaking research and similar works with a view to determining the manifestation, extent, magnitude, and effects of economic and financial crimes and advising government ‘on appropriate intervention measures for combating the crimes.

(k} Clearing with connected with the extradition, deportation and mutual legal or other assistance between Nigeria and any other country involving Economic and Financial Crimes;

(f) Any other law or regulations relating to economic and financial crimes, including the Criminal code of penal code.

However, Section 6 of the ICPC Act provides thus: It shall be the duty of the Commission

(a) where reasonable grounds exist for suspecting that any person has conspired to commit or has attempted to commit or has committed an offense under this Act or any other law prohibiting corruption, to receive and investigate any report of the conspiracy to commit, attempt to commit or the commission of such offense and, in appropriate cases, to prosecute the offenders;

(b) to examine the practices, systems and procedures of public bodies and where, in the opinion of the Commission, such practices, systems or procedures aid or facilitate fraud or corruption, to direct and supervise a review of them;

(c)to instruct, advise and assist any officer, agency or parastatals on ways by which fraud or corruption may be eliminated or minimised by such officer, agency or parastatals;

(d) to advise heads of public bodies of any changes in practices, systems or procedures compatible with the effective discharge of the duties of the public bodies as the Commission thinks fit to reduce the likelihood or incidence of bribery, corruption, and related offences;

(f) to enlist and foster public support in combating corruption.

Also, other relevant sections on its duties are provided in Sections 8- Section 25.

From the foregoing, the question is: are there areas where the functions of the two agencies overlap, and if so, should they be merged?