The African Democratic Congress (ADC) says President Bola Tinubu’s directive to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to vacate the court order freezing the Osun state government’s bank account has raised fresh questions about the anti-graft agency’s independence.

The opposition party also challenged the president to disclose the court order he said the EFCC had obtained, noting that the commission had consistently defended its action on the basis of its statutory powers and never publicly claimed to have secured judicial approval before Tinubu’s intervention.

The development follows Tinubu’s directive on Thursday ordering the EFCC to immediately return to court and vacate the order freezing the Osun government’s accounts, saying although the commission acted within its statutory powers, the timing of the action — days before the August 15 governorship election — was inappropriate.

The president said he felt “deeply embarrassed” by the development because actions of federal agencies are often attributed to the presidency, adding that no action should create the impression that the federal government was attempting to influence the outcome of the Osun governorship poll.

Before the president’s intervention, the EFCC had defended the account freeze, saying it was investigating the alleged fraudulent handling of ecological and intervention funds by the Osun government and that suspicious transfers had been observed during the probe.

Wilson Uwujaren, EFCC director of public affairs, also insisted the action was routine and not politically motivated, citing a similar restriction placed on Edo state’s accounts before the 2024 governorship election.

Reacting in a statement on Thursday, Bolaji Abdullahi, ADC national publicity secretary, welcomed Tinubu’s directive but said the president’s explanation had raised more questions than answers.

“What we find most curious about the statement is the President’s repeated reference to an alleged court order authorising the freezing of the Osun State Government’s accounts,” he said.

“In all of its public statements on this matter, the EFCC never once claimed that it had obtained a court order. The commission consistently defended its actions on the basis of its statutory powers and what it described as its ‘preventive mandate’.

“At no point did it inform Nigerians that a court had authorised its actions. The obvious question, therefore, is: where did the President obtain the information that a court order existed? If such an order exists, why was it never mentioned by the EFCC in its statement while defending one of the most controversial actions it has taken in recent times?

“If no such order exists, why would the president introduce one into the public narrative? It is either the president was misinformed or he had chosen to misrepresent the facts. Either possibility is deeply disturbing.”

The party argued that Tinubu’s admission that he directed the EFCC to withdraw the matter contradicted repeated claims that anti-corruption agencies operate independently.

“The President also insists that he does not interfere in the operational activities of anti-corruption agencies, yet in the same statement he publicly announces that he has directed the EFCC to approach the court, vacate the alleged order, and discontinue its case,” Abdullahi said.

“If the President possesses the authority to direct the EFCC to withdraw from court proceedings because the political consequences may affect an election, then it follows that he possesses the authority to direct the commission in other operational matters as well.

“The net implication is that the carefully cultivated argument that these agencies operate entirely independently collapses under the weight of the President’s own statement.”

Click to signup for FREE news updates, latest information and hottest gists everyday
Advertise on NigerianEye.com to reach thousands of our daily users