NBA Slams EFCC Over Osun Account Freeze, Demands Court Order Before Action
The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has criticised the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) over its decision to freeze the Osun State Government’s statutory allocation account, insisting that the anti-graft agency lacks the legal authority to impose such a restriction without first obtaining a court order.
The controversy erupted after the EFCC directed First Bank Plc to place a Post No Debit (PND) restriction on the state’s account as part of an investigation into the alleged mismanagement of ₦11 billion in ecological and intervention funds. The commission said the investigation began in March 2026 and that suspicious fund movements detected from August 2 prompted the restriction.
Reacting to the development, the NBA said the action could paralyse the operations of the Osun State Government and undermine constitutional governance if allowed to stand without judicial approval.
Outgoing NBA President Afam Osigwe (SAN) argued that while the EFCC has the power to investigate financial crimes, it cannot unilaterally freeze the bank account of a state government without securing an order from a competent court.
According to him, any blanket restriction placed on a state’s account outside the judicial process amounts to an abuse of power and violates constitutional provisions governing the powers of government agencies.
Osigwe further urged financial institutions not to enforce directives freezing government accounts unless such instructions are backed by a valid court order, stressing that due process must always be followed.
Governor Ademola Adeleke also condemned the account restriction, describing it as an attempt to cripple his administration and interfere with the constitutional rights of the state government.
The EFCC, however, defended its decision, maintaining that the restriction was necessary to prevent further movement of funds while investigations into the alleged diversion of ecological and intervention funds continue. The commission said it observed significant transfers from the account into several corporate entities during the course of its probe.
The disagreement has triggered a legal and political debate over the extent of the EFCC’s powers, with constitutional lawyers warning that anti-corruption investigations must be conducted within the limits prescribed by law.
As the dispute continues, attention is expected to focus on whether the account restriction will remain in place or be challenged in court, a development that could shape future enforcement actions involving state government finances.