By Hassan Agboola

A lawyer and human rights activist, Hamza N. Dantani, has accused the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) of allegedly exceeding its statutory mandate and subjecting suspects to media trials.

Dantani, in a statement, urged the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) to intervene and ensure that the commission operates within the limits of its enabling law, the 1999 Constitution and other relevant legislation.

He expressed concern over the reported prosecution of a person for defamation, arguing that the offence did not fall within the EFCC’s statutory mandate.
According to him, the commission should not assume jurisdiction over allegations simply because they are controversial, politically sensitive or attract public attention.

“The EFCC is not a general-purpose criminal prosecution agency. Its mandate is principally directed at economic and financial crimes and offences properly connected to that statutory mandate,” he said.

Dantani also criticised the alleged practice of publicly releasing photographs and mugshots of suspects before conviction, describing it as inconsistent with the constitutional presumption of innocence and the rights to human dignity and privacy.

He cited Sections 34(1), 36(5) and 37 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, which protect the dignity of the human person, presumption of innocence and right to privacy.

He also referred to Sections 8 and 15 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, arguing that while law-enforcement agencies could take photographs of suspects for legitimate investigative and identification purposes, such powers should not be interpreted as authority to publicly parade or humiliate them.

Dantani said the publication of suspects’ mugshots could cause lasting reputational damage, particularly where the affected persons were subsequently discharged or acquitted.

“An allegation is not a conviction; an arrest is not guilt; and a charge is not proof,” he said.

The lawyer cited Supreme Court decisions, including Saude v. Abdullahi and Ransome-Kuti & Ors. v. Attorney-General of the Federation & Ors., to underscore the importance of fundamental rights in Nigeria’s legal system.

He also referred to Maryam Shehu v. EFCC, saying the case raised important questions concerning law-enforcement powers, presumption of innocence, human dignity and the public
dissemination of suspects’ photographs.

According to him, the EFCC should not simultaneously act as investigator, prosecutor and “judge in the court of public opinion.”
Dantani stressed that his criticism was not an opposition to the EFCC or the fight against corruption, but a call for the commission to discharge its responsibilities professionally and within the law.

He urged the AGF, as the nation’s chief law officer, to urgently examine the developments and take appropriate steps to ensure that the EFCC remained within its lawful jurisdiction.

He specifically called on the AGF to ensure that the commission restricted its investigations and prosecutions to offences within its statutory mandate, did not assume jurisdiction over matters belonging to other law-enforcement or prosecutorial authorities, and reviewed its policy on the publication of suspects’ photographs.

He further urged the EFCC to respect the constitutional rights to dignity, privacy and presumption of innocence at every stage of criminal proceedings.
“Good intentions cannot confer
jurisdiction where the law does not provide it, and the seriousness of an allegation cannot extinguish the constitutional rights of the accused,” Dantani said.

He added: “An allegation is not a conviction. A mugshot is not a judgment. Publicity is not evidence. And the EFCC is not above the law.”

Dantani urged the AGF to act decisively to protect the integrity of Nigeria’s criminal justice system and prevent what he described as the institutionalisation of abuse of powers by law-enforcement agencies.