Press "Enter" to skip to content

Double faced law: The Nigerian law shielding ex-DSS DG, NIA Boss from EFCC

The Department of State Security (DSS) has come out with legal backing for its refusal to allow the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), arrest the former Director General of the SSS, Ita Ekpenyong. 

Operatives of the Nigerian Intelligence Agency also blocked the EFCC from arresting former DG of the Agency, Ayodele Oke, who was sacked, last month by President Buhari, after over $43 million was found in an Ikoyi apartment.

The Instrument 1 of the 1999 Constitution, which is a subsidiary legislation from the Armed Forces Act, which came into effect on May 23, 1999, was used as a basis for its actions. The then Military Ruler Abdulsalami Abubakar signed it in less than a week before handing over power to civilian rule.

The Instrument 1 which indirectly stopped the EFCC from performing its duties, despite the search and arrest warrant from a reputable court, states that:

“The principal officers of the agencies shall in the discharge of their functions under this act (a) in the case of the State Security Service and the National Intelligence Agency be responsible directly to the President.

(b) In the case of the Defence Intelligence Agency be directly responsible to the Chief of Defence Staff”.

The three agencies are all under the National Security Agency (NSA). Another version of the law states that:

“The Director General of the National Intelligence Agency and the State Security Service is responsible to the President and Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces for the proper expenditure and accounting of all funds made available in the service from the security vote or any other source.

“The account of the National Intelligence Agency and the State Security Service shall not be subjected to external audit but the Director General shall by the first week of March each year , render to the President, and Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces returns of expenditure and copy the National Security Adviser”.

The State Security Service still adheres to the provisions of this law that was enacted during the Military era because it has not been nullified or replaced by a National Assembly enacted Act.

The law undermines the work of EFCC operatives, which is provided for in the EFCC Establishment Act.

EFCC is charged with the responsibility of preventing, investigating, prosecuting and penalizing economic and financial crimes.

The commission is also charged with the responsibility of enforcing the provisions of other acts, including the EFCC Establishment Act 2004, Money Laundering Act 1995 and the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act 1995.

The EFCC has as members the Director General of the State Security Service and the National Intelligence Agency, among others but cannot carry out investigation on its activities as a result of this law.

Facebook Comments
ETN24 - Explaining the News is about putting News in the correct context to promote understanding and education. We believe News should educate, not agitate. Our dedication is to fighting Fake and Sensational News, as well as to keep an eye on the media to ensure our peace and sanity are not sold for traffic.
+ posts