The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) have defended its actions over the re-arrest of two criminal suspects, which led to a clash with police operatives.
Chronicle NG reports that personnel of the EFCC and the Nigeria Police Force clashed over the re-arrest of two suspects by the anti-graft agency over a case already under police investigation—a move a lawyer has described as “double jeopardy”.
Khadijah Bayern, an Abuja-based lawyer, has petitioned the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), saying that the EFCC intimidated and unlawfully detained her clients, Illesanmi Olaniyi and Ishola Maruf.
The “Double Jeopardy and Intimidation” suit questions the EFCC’s activities after the accused were previously detained and given administrative release by the Police Force Intelligence Department (FID) in March 2024.
According to Bayern, her clients were initially arrested due to a supposed financial issue with a new generation bank.
During the police investigation, two vehicles — a Toyota Hilux and a Toyota RAV4 — together with commodities, equipment, and papers were taken from their homes.
These objects remain in police custody, and a related forfeiture case is still pending in court.
Despite this, Bayern alleged that the EFCC’s Special Duty Section 2 (SDC2) invited and detained the same individuals on the same allegations, holding them for 12 days without bail.
“This amounts to double jeopardy,” she said. “The EFCC is aware that the case is already under police investigation and is currently in court. Their continued detention not only undermines ongoing legal proceedings but also poses serious health risks to my clients, who have documented medical conditions.”
Bayern urged the AGF to intervene and maintain legal consistency in the case’s management, warning of the hazards of overlapping authority among law enforcement organisations.
In a separate letter dated July 29, 2025, another legal representative for the suspects requested that the EFCC examine its bail restrictions, noting their clients’ fragile health and earlier administrative bail by the police.
The letter encouraged the EFCC to accept public officials with Grade Level 14 or 15 as sureties rather than the previously specified higher-grade criteria.
“This request is made in good faith,” the letter stated, “and will not interfere with the Commission’s investigation. What we are against is prolonged detention over a bailable offence already being handled by another agency.”
Reacting to the allegations, EFCC’s Head of Media & Publicity, Dele Oyewale, defended the agency’s actions, stating that their investigation was based on new intelligence.
“Every operation of the EFCC is based on actionable intelligence and petitions,” Oyewale said. “There is no way the Commission will deploy its resources to a case already being handled by the police unless there are fresh angles.”
He further elucidated that suspects can be lawfully detained beyond 48 hours with a valid remand warrant obtained from a magistrate court.
“The EFCC does not harass or intimidate anyone. We operate strictly within the law,” he added.
