President Bola Tinubu’s directive ordering the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission to reverse the freezing of an Osun State Government account has triggered fresh political controversy, with opposition parties questioning the President’s explanation, lawyers and civil society groups backing the intervention, the Osun State Government dragging the commission to court, and scores of Nigerians on social media demanding the resignation or removal of the EFCC Chairman, Ola Olukoyede.
The EFCC on Wednesday directed that no money be withdrawn from the Osun State Government’s statutory allocation account as part of an ongoing investigation.
The anti-graft agency, in a statement, said the action followed suspicious movement of funds amid an ongoing investigation into alleged fraudulent handling of about N11billion in Ecology Funds, Intervention Funds and Federal Account Allocation Committee allocations.
Tinubu, in a personally signed statement on Thursday, directed the anti-graft agency to immediately approach the court to vacate the order freezing the account and discontinue the action, saying although he was yet to be fully briefed on the circumstances surrounding the case, the timing of the restriction was inappropriate given the August 15 Osun governorship election.
Reversing the agency’s decision, Tinubu, in the statement titled ‘President Tinubu Directs EFCC To Vacate The Court Order Freezing Osun Government Account’, said he felt “deeply embarrassed not by the EFCC’s exercise of its mandate backed by a court order, but by the timing of the agency’s action.”
The President said no action by any federal institution should create the impression that the Federal Government was attempting to influence the outcome of the poll.
“Osun State is only a few days away from its gubernatorial election. Therefore, nothing ought to be done to give an impression that the EFCC or indeed any other agency of the Federal Government is being used to interfere with the election,” the statement partly read.
“I am not in the slightest doubt that the timing of the action of EFCC is inauspicious,” Tinubu said, adding that while anti-corruption agencies must remain independent, preserving public confidence in the credibility and fairness of elections was paramount.
“Accordingly, I have directed the EFCC to immediately proceed to the court to vacate the order and discontinue whatever action it has instituted against the Osun State Government in this regard,” he added.
The directive followed the EFCC’s decision to restrict one of the state’s statutory allocation accounts over an investigation into the alleged diversion and laundering of about N11bn.
Defending the action earlier on Thursday, the EFCC’s Director of Public Affairs, Wilson Uwujaren, said the commission acted under Sections 34 of the EFCC Act and 7(6) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, which empowered it to place a temporary restriction on suspicious accounts for up to 72 hours before obtaining a court order where necessary.
Uwujaren insisted the commission did not freeze all Osun State accounts but only placed a temporary restriction on one statutory account after detecting what it described as suspicious transactions.
He disclosed that investigations into the state began in March and that intelligence gathered from August 2 necessitated urgent intervention to preserve public funds, adding that similar action was taken in Edo State before its governorship election.
The EFCC maintained that its action was unrelated to politics and was purely driven by its statutory anti-corruption mandate.
Legal tussle
In response to the EFCC’s actions, the Osun State Government on Thursday, filed a suit against the commission, seeking to nullify the account freeze and asking the court to award N2bn in exemplary damages against the commission.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1762/2026, was filed on August 5 (Wednesday) before the Federal High Court in Abuja.
Governor Ademola Adeleke, the state’s Attorney-General and the state’s Accountant-General are listed as plaintiffs, while the EFCC, its Executive Chairman and First Bank of Nigeria Limited are named as defendants.
The state is asking the court to determine whether the anti-graft agency’s directive to First Bank to freeze the account “does not constitute an egregious act of executive lawlessness, an unlawful resort to self-help, a flagrant abuse of statutory powers, an unlawful suppression of the constitutional powers and functions of the plaintiffs, a threat to the constitutional and corporate existence of Osun State, a brazen and unlawful denial of the democratic rights and dividends of the people of Osun State, and a direct violation of the fundamental constitutional principles of due process, the rule of law, and the financial autonomy of a federating unit?”
According to the originating summons, the EFCC had, in a letter dated August 5, 2026, with reference number CR:3000/EFCC/ABJ/HQ/PFS/TA/OSUN/VOL.17/666, directed First Bank to freeze the state’s statutory allocation account.
The plaintiffs contend that neither the EFCC nor the bank can lawfully restrict access to the account without a subsisting court order.
Among the reliefs sought, Osun is asking the court to declare the freeze unlawful, unconstitutional, null and void; to declare that the EFCC cannot restrict a state’s statutory account by mere administrative directive; to set aside the freeze; to issue perpetual injunctions restraining further interference with the account without judicial authorisation; and to award N2bn as exemplary and aggravated damages for what it described as unlawful interference with public funds.
Adeleke is seeking re-election for a second term on the platform of the Accord Party.
In recent weeks, the state has witnessed heated exchanges between the governor’s supporters and those of the All Progressives Congress, which is seeking to reclaim the state after four years.
The governor’s camp has accused the APC of using federal agencies, including the police and the EFCC, to intimidate Accord Party supporters ahead of the poll — a claim the APC has denied.
Osun denies allegation
The Osun State Government dismissed the commission’s claim that the restriction was linked to the alleged diversion of N11bn, describing the allegation as an afterthought intended to justify an illegal action.
In a statement by the state Commissioner for Information and Public Enlightenment, Kolapo Alimi, the government alleged that the real reason the EFCC froze the account on the order of a former governor of the state, Gboyega Oyetola, was to stop the payment of palliatives the state government had promised workers some months ago.
The state also accused the EFCC of conducting what it described as a witch-hunt since March without finding any evidence against government officials, insisting that Osun had consistently maintained high standards of fiscal transparency.
Governor Adeleke had earlier challenged the EFCC chairman Ola Olukoyede to explain why the account was frozen, insisting the action was taken without a court order and amounted to an assault on democracy.
Atiku faults Tinubu
The opposition African Democratic Congress welcomed Tinubu’s decision to reverse the EFCC action but argued that the President’s explanation had raised more questions than it answered.
In a statement by its National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, the party challenged Tinubu to explain his repeated references to an alleged court order authorising the account freeze, insisting that the EFCC never mentioned obtaining such an order in any of its public statements.
“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,” the statement 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,” Abdullahi said.
The ADC argued that if the President could direct the EFCC to discontinue proceedings, then the long-standing claim that anti-corruption agencies operated independently of the Presidency had effectively collapsed.
It also questioned why the President personally signed the statement announcing the directive and urged him to exercise similar authority by directing the ICPC to stop opposing the bail application of former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai.
“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.”
Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar also stated that Tinubu’s directive had exposed presidential control over anti-corruption agencies.
In a statement by his spokesman, Phrank Shaibu, Atiku said the President could no longer claim the EFCC was operationally independent after publicly directing it to withdraw from court proceedings.
“It is impossible to ignore the implications of freezing a state’s principal operational account on the eve of a governorship election. Such an action could disrupt governance, delay salary payments, impede essential public services and create an atmosphere of intimidation that has no place in a democratic society,” Atiku said.
He maintained that if Tinubu could intervene in the EFCC matter involving Osun, he should equally direct the ICPC in the El-Rufai case.
Earlier, Atiku had accused the Federal Government of weaponising the EFCC against opposition-controlled states, warning that freezing Osun’s statutory allocation account days before the election amounted to intimidation capable of undermining confidence in the poll.
“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.
“If there are legitimate concerns requiring investigation, the law provides due process. Anti-corruption agencies must not conduct themselves in a manner that creates the perception that they are being deployed to influence political outcomes or weaken elected governments at critical electoral moments.
“The selective and politically convenient deployment of state institutions diminishes public trust and weakens the democratic order. Institutions established to enforce the law must never become instruments for creating fear or conferring political advantage” he added.
Olukoyede under fire
Beyond the legal and political arguments, the controversy also sparked widespread criticism of EFCC chairman Ola Olukoyede across X and Facebook, with many users demanding his resignation or removal.
On X, @Otunse1 wrote that Olukoyede should immediately tender his resignation letter, describing his continued stay in office as “clear evidence that he is being influenced.”
A.M. Temidayo (@AnewNaija) alleged that the EFCC chairman had presided over the erosion of the commission’s credibility, stating “By the time Ola Olukoyede exits the EFCC, his departure will be the most ignominious in the commission’s history. When the records are written, he will not be remembered as an anti-corruption czar. Under his watch, an institution meant to fight corruption became an instrument for settling political scores. That is the legacy he is carving for himself.”
Samuel Omogor (@SamuelOmogor) accused the commission of selectively targeting opposition-controlled states, while Nefertiti (@firstladyship) said Olukoyede had abused his office and should honourably step aside.
Political commentator J.J. Omojuwa (@omojuwa) also described the entire EFCC-Osun controversy as a mess, adding that there was “only one solution.”
Several citizens also expressed similar sentiments on Facebook, venting their anger on Olukoyede.
Gbenga Shoyemi argued that if Tinubu truly had no prior knowledge of the EFCC’s action, Olukoyede should be removed for embarrassing the country’s democratic system.
“If President Bola Ahmed Tinubu was truly unaware of Ola Olukoyede and his team’s nebulous decision to freeze the Osun State Government’s account, then the EFCC chairman, Ola Olukoyede, should be sacked immediately for actions that have brought embarrassment to our democratic system,” he wrote.
Onatoye Temitope Michael questioned the chairman’s integrity and capacity, stating that Olukoyede “doesn’t have the integrity and capacity to remain as the boss.”
In a short post, Segun Ben-Ajayi said Tinubu had effectively thrown the EFCC chairman under the bus, adding that the President had shown more integrity than Olukoyede, a Pastor with the Redeemed Christian Church of God.
“If Tinubu is more ethical than you (Olukoyede) as a pastor, then you are worse than Judas Iscariot,” he stated.
Deji Fasusi argued that Olukoyede should honourably resign following the President’s intervention, saying the commission’s conduct amounted to an abuse of public institutions.
Another Facebook user, Dada Bukola Francis, called on the EFCC to restore public confidence by demonstrating fairness and transparency, while Francis Gbenga Silas urged that Olukoyede be reprimanded over what he described as interference in Osun State affairs ahead of the election.
Lawyers, CSOs react
Constitutional lawyer and Principal Partner at Liberty Semper Fidelis LP, Tokunbo Afikuyomi, commended Tinubu’s intervention, describing it as a demonstration of commitment to constitutional democracy and electoral fairness.
Afikuyomi, however, stressed that while the President acted appropriately, the EFCC must return to court to seek the discharge of the freezing order rather than relying on executive fiat.
He said the President’s approach respected the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers by allowing the judiciary to determine the matter.
The lawyer also urged all institutions involved in the Osun governorship election, including security agencies, the Independent National Electoral Commission, political parties, the media and the judiciary to emulate the President’s commitment to protecting the integrity of the electoral process.
Earlier, the President of the Nigerian Bar Association, Afam Osigwe (SAN), faulted the reported freezing of Osun State accounts, warning that any blanket restriction on a state’s finances without due legal process could cripple governance and amount to an abuse of power.
Also reacting, the Executive Director of the Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre, Auwal Musa Rafsanjani, said the controversy highlighted the need to harmonise constitutional provisions with statutes establishing anti-corruption agencies to eliminate legal overlaps.
He said while the EFCC appeared to have acted within the powers conferred on it by law, the Osun State Government was equally entitled to challenge what it considered an encroachment on its constitutional autonomy.
Rafsanjani described Tinubu’s intervention as a political solution prompted by public pressure but maintained that preventive action remained an important component of anti-corruption efforts.
He said, “The EFCC has done what it has done based on the powers it has, and the state is also right to protest what it considers an encroachment on its autonomy. What we need is to harmonise the legal provisions so there is no contradiction.
He added that anti-corruption agencies should continue taking preventive measures to safeguard public funds but must ensure that every action conforms with the Constitution and the country’s federal structure.
Rafsanjani also warned that public resources at both the federal and state levels must not be deployed for election campaigns, stressing that the same standard should apply across the country irrespective of which political party controlled a state.
Similarly, the Executive Chairman of the Centre for Anti-Corruption and Open Leadership, Debo Adeniran, said Tinubu’s intervention appeared to have been prompted more by public outcry over the timing of the account restriction than by any conclusion that the EFCC acted unlawfully.
He said the President’s decision was aimed at protecting public confidence in the electoral process and distancing himself from allegations of political interference.
According to him, while the EFCC may have had legitimate reasons to investigate the transactions, enforcement actions capable of disrupting governance should have been delayed until after the governorship election.
“The President has just done the right thing by listening to the voice of the majority of Nigerians. If there are genuine reasons to investigate, the commission can continue monitoring the account and take appropriate action after the election,” Adeniran said.
He, however, maintained that state governments must not deploy public funds for electioneering, urging the EFCC to continue monitoring suspicious financial transactions while avoiding actions that could create the impression of interference in the electoral process.”
The controversy has deepened political tensions ahead of the August 15 governorship election, with the EFCC insisting it merely discharged its statutory responsibilities, the Osun Government now pursuing the matter in court, and opposition parties questioning the independence of anti-graft agencies.
‘Apologise to Tinubu’
Meanwhile, the Osun State chapter of the All Progressives Congress on Thursday called on Governor Adeleke to apologise to President Tinubu and the Minister of Marine and Blue Economy, Adegboyega Oyetola, over what it described as false accusations following the restrictions placed on the Osun State Government’s accounts by the EFCC.
Reacting to President Tinubu’s explanation on the matter, the Osun APC, in a statement signed by its spokesperson, Kola Olabisi, said the President did not absolve the Osun State Government of alleged complicity in the issues that led to the EFCC’s action.
The party said the President merely expressed concern over the timing of the EFCC’s action against the Osun State Government, noting that it had created room for political interpretations.
“The confused and frustrated Governor Ademola Adeleke and his misdirected political co-travellers must apologise to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Minister Gboyega Oyetola for wrongfully accusing them and the All Progressives Congress of setting the anti-graft agency against the Accord Party and Governor Adeleke.
“It should be noted that President Tinubu did not absolve the Osun State Government of being complicit in the raging EFCC allegations against Governor Adeleke and his administration. What the President frowned on was the timing of the EFCC’s action against the Osun State Government to prevent political meanings from being read into it.
“The development is a lesson for the Accord Party and its governorship candidate on the need to demonstrate political maturity by carefully processing their thoughts before making public statements. Enough of the needless gibberish directed at President Tinubu, Alhaji Oyetola and other APC leaders and members in Osun State,” the statement read.
The party further stated that President Tinubu’s directive on the EFCC-Osun State matter demonstrated his disposition as a father of the nation.
“We hope Governor Adeleke will learn from President Tinubu’s large-heartedness by withdrawing the political charges against the newly sworn-in executives of the National Union of Road Transport Workers. After all, one good turn deserves another,” the statement added.
punch.ng
FOLLOW US ON:
