The Executive Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, Ola Olukoyede, has called for legislation against unexplained wealth in Nigeria.
Olukoyede also identified some delays in asset recovery in Nigeria, including the technicality of the prosecution of looted assets that sometimes require publication in major newspapers as well as the recovery of stolen funds stashed in foreign jurisdictions.
Assets may be forfeited on an interim basis and may also be forfeited permanently, depending on the position of the law and the court
Olukoyede has identified several challenges hindering the swift recovery of assets in Nigeria. Among these challenges is the technicality involved in prosecuting cases related to looted assets. In some instances, the law requires the publication of information in major newspapers, a process that introduces delays and bureaucratic hurdles. Additionally, recovering stolen funds stashed in foreign jurisdictions adds another layer of complexity to the asset recovery process.
To address the intricate nature of asset recovery, Olukoyede highlights the concept of both interim and permanent forfeiture. Interim forfeiture allows assets to be seized temporarily during ongoing investigations, preventing their potential dissipation. Depending on the legal proceedings and court decisions, assets may either be permanently forfeited to the state or returned to their rightful owners. This dual approach aims to strike a balance between preserving assets and ensuring due process.
He explained that such a law would help check the criminal activities of treasury looters in the country.
Legislation against unexplained wealth serves as a proactive measure to deter individuals from engaging in corrupt practices. By clearly defining the legal consequences of possessing unexplained wealth, the law acts as a deterrent and empowers law enforcement agencies like the EFCC to take decisive action. Such legislation also provides a legal framework for the recovery and forfeiture of ill-gotten gains, creating a robust system of accountability.
In a statement by the EFCC Spokesperson, Dele Oyewale, on Thursday, the Chairman made the call during the two-day International Law Conference with the theme “Unexplained Wealth in the Global South: Examining the Asset Recovery and Return Trajectory” organized by Christopher University, Mowe Ogun State.
Represented by the EFCC Abuja Zonal Commander, ACE1 Adebayo Adeniyi, the Chairman emphasized that many foreign countries have adopted the Unexplained Wealth Orders, or UWOs, as a tool for tackling treasury looting and corruption since they came into force in 2018, regretting that Nigeria has yet to promulgate such a law but only relies on the provisions of Section 7 of its Establishment Act to act.
“The issue of unexplained wealth is not a local issue. There are jurisdictional laws across the world to tackle it. Till date, countries around the world are faced with criminalities emanating from money laundering practices and illicit funds. This circumstance led to the promulgation of Unexplained Wealth Orders, UWOs that came into force in 2018. Several countries, such as the United Kingdom, Australia, Mauritius and African countries like Kenya, Zimbabwe, and Trinidad and Tobago in the Caribbean, have come up with UWO. Nigeria is yet to come up with a national legislation on it.
“Owing to the absence of legislation on the issue of unexplained wealth, the EFCC continues to rely on provisions of Section 7 of its Establishment Act to handle it.”
The Chairman noted that unexplained wealth can only be beneficial to the state if it is forfeited, even as he mentioned that since its inception, the EFCC has secured sizable assets from fraudsters, which include houses, vehicles, barges, jewellery, money, furniture items, and properties, among others.
“Procedures for asset forfeiture usually involve the prosecution of the suspected fraudster. Assets may be forfeited on an interim basis and may also be forfeited permanently, depending on the position of the law and the court. However, whether interim forfeiture or permanent forfeiture, what is important is for every ill-gotten wealth to be recovered and kept with the government.” He added.
He urged the public to be forthcoming with information about suspicious assets in their various communities, as the Commission would work better only if intelligence and information were readily available.
Olukoyede also identified some delays in asset recovery in Nigeria, including the technicality of the prosecution of looted assets that sometimes require publication in major newspapers as well as the recovery of stolen funds stashed in foreign jurisdictions.
“Recovery of stolen funds stashed in foreign jurisdictions is more complex. Institutions of the state are usually involved in the recovery of such funds, and this takes far more time and effort. The return trajectory involved in this may even take years, and this can be frustrating to anti-corruption agencies or government institutions involved in the recovery. Nigeria is having such instances in the recovery of looted funds by many government officials.” He said.
