The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has strongly rejected allegations by Bauchi State Governor, Bala Mohammed, that it is being used by political opponents to persecute him and members of his administration.
In a press statement issued on Thursday, the anti-graft agency described the governor’s claims as “wild, far-fetched and condemnable,” insisting that the Commission operates independently and without political influence.
Governor Mohammed had alleged that the EFCC was acting at the behest of political rivals, particularly the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike. However, the Commission said such claims were an attempt to misrepresent its statutory mandate and discredit its work.
“The EFCC is an independent, non-partisan agency created to fight economic and financial crimes,” the statement read. “The attempt to portray it as a pliable agency that panders to the demands of certain political interests is mischievous.”
The Commission further described it as “derogatory” for the Bauchi governor to link its investigative activities in the state to the influence of the FCT minister, stressing that no political office holder has the power to influence its operations.
The EFCC also recalled that Bala Mohammed was standing trial for money laundering at the time he won election as governor, noting that only the constitutional immunity attached to his office stalled the prosecution.
“If Bala Mohammed wants to be honest, he would have revealed to Nigerians that he was already facing trial when he became governor,” the Commission stated, questioning who allegedly influenced its investigation and prosecution of him as far back as 2016.
On the ongoing cases involving officials of the Bauchi State Government, the EFCC maintained that the facts are already before the court and accessible to the public.
“Members of the public can assess the charges and determine whether they are products of vendetta or the outcome of painstaking investigation,” the statement added, explaining that the governor was mentioned in the charge because he was the approving authority in the state.
The Commission reaffirmed its commitment to carrying out its duties without fear or favour and urged public office holders to allow the courts to determine issues before them.
