EFCC has no sacred cows, Malami not exempted- Oshoma, legal practitioner

Legal and political analyst, Liborous Oshoma, has defended the statutory powers of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission to invite and investigate any individual reasonably suspected of breaching the law, insisting that no public office confers immunity from scrutiny. In this interview on Channels TV’s ‘Politics Today’ monitored by David Lawani, the legal practitioner dismissed claims that the EFCC’s probe of former Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, is unlawful or politically motivated. He argued that allegations against any former public official must be tested through due process and not pre-emptively politicised

From your point of view, is the EFCC biased? Are officials who served under former President Buhari the only ones who are corrupt?

Remember that during the campaign that brought former President Muhammadu Buhari to power, the narrative was that the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan was deeply corrupt. Nigerians were told that once corruption was defeated, the country would stand on firmer ground. That narrative sold the idea of bringing in a leader who would decisively fight corruption. Ironically, once the Buhari administration assumed office, Senator Shehu Sani famously remarked that those within government and the ruling party were “deodorised,” while opposition figures were treated with “insecticide.” He openly criticised the selective nature of the anti-corruption fight. At that time, Malami was the Attorney-General of the Federation. Whenever concerns were raised about prosecutorial style or selectivity, the response was often that “corruption is fighting back.” One lesson some of us learnt—and it is worth repeating in local parlance—is that when you enter a native doctor’s house, you should not be surprised to see white chalk. The moment you shine a searchlight on public office holders, you are likely to find skeletons. That is why the Emir of Kano, Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, once provocatively suggested dissolving the entire Senate and replacing it with random Nigerians—arguing that the same behaviour would still surface because many educated Nigerians behave irresponsibly once entrusted with power. As the late Gani Fawehinmi repeatedly asked: Are you corrupt, or are there allegations against you? Allegations, once raised, must be interrogated through lawful processes.

A former Attorney-General says his ordeal is a personal vendetta and a politically motivated witch-hunt. What is your response?

As I have said before, even during his tenure as Attorney-General, many of those he prosecuted also accused him of witch-hunting. These expressions have become part of our political and legal lexicon. Once a public official leaves office and is investigated, the default response is to cry “witch-hunt.” That refrain is predictable and not unique to Malami.

Malami insists the EFCC Chairman, Ola Olukoyede, should recuse himself, alleging bias and political motives. What do you make of that?

There is no precedent in global legal jurisprudence for an investigative agency to recuse itself simply because a suspect alleges bias. Investigation is not adjudication. The principle of audi alteram partem applies at the court stage, not during the investigation. It is the court—specifically the judge- that can be asked to step aside if there is credible evidence of bias arising from conduct, utterances, or behaviour. Telling the EFCC Chairman to step aside from an investigation amounts to taking undue advantage of status and influence. We constantly say we want strong institutions, not strong individuals. Being a Senior Advocate of Nigeria or a former Attorney-General does not place anyone above investigation. Legally speaking, even if someone previously sat on a panel or was involved in a process related to you, that does not vitiate the statutory powers of an investigative body. Investigation is not a court of law. During the investigation, the suspect has the right to present a defence. The investigator’s duty is not to condemn, but to gather evidence and present it to the court. If Malami believes the EFCC lacks the power to investigate him, the appropriate step is to approach the court. Otherwise, tomorrow, if I commit an offence and am investigated, I could also cite Malami as precedent and demand that the EFCC “recuse itself.” Taken further, we would end up telling the Inspector-General of Police to step aside. That is a dangerous path.

Is the Tinubu administration genuinely fighting corruption, or merely targeting political opponents? Malami is now in the ADC, while others, such as Ngige and Buhari-era ministers, are being probed.

To be clear, Chris Ngige is still a member of the APC. Even Malami himself was part of the system he now criticises. If you examine documented prosecutions—such as those involving Alison-Madueke, Dasuki, Olisa Metuh and others—you will see that similar arguments were made in the past. Then, we were told it was not witch-hunting. The enduring legal principle remains: he who comes to equity must come with clean hands. The real question is not party affiliation but whether allegations are substantiated.

There was also an attack on Malami’s convoy and controversy over how the EFCC handled his arrest. What is your assessment?

Let us avoid patronising former office holders. Many people currently in government—God willing—will one day leave office and face similar scrutiny. They, too, will claim persecution. Public office in Nigeria often operates like a tenure monarchy: while in power, you wield enormous influence; once you leave, you suddenly realise there is no protective shield. Malami approached the court seeking bail, but the court, after reviewing the issues, declined because the arrest was based on a valid court order. The judge rightly noted that granting bail would amount to sitting on appeal over a court of coordinate jurisdiction. Instead, administrative bail was granted, subject to conditions. Once those conditions are met, he walks free. So when you hear “recuse yourself,” it is akin to telling an investigator to stop investigating you. It is similar to a suspect demanding that another agency handle his case simply because he dislikes the investigator. That is how we create untouchable super-humans. I even hope that just as Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration is probing officials of the Buhari era, a future government will also scrutinise Tinubu’s officials. The constant question must be: are these allegations baseless, or are they true?

Is there any legal basis for the EFCC Chairman to recuse himself?

None whatsoever. Once a public officer lives above his means, the law empowers the EFCC to invite and investigate him.

So, is the EFCC simply doing its job?

Yes. Malami has not said there are no allegations against him. Allegations exist. The proper thing is to allow the law to take its course.