The Court of Appeal, Kaduna Judicial Division, has issued a stern warning to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), cautioning the agency against interfering in civil transactions, as its mandate does not cover resolving disputes arising from simple contracts. This warning was delivered in a ruling related to a case involving EFCC, a business mogul, and a contractual dispute with the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC).
The case arose from an appeal filed by EFCC against Mr. Bela Becker, Managing Director of DKG ITCC Nigeria Limited, over allegations of criminal misappropriation and breach of trust involving over ₦30.4 billion in a transaction with the NNPC. EFCC argued that Mr. Becker’s company had failed to remit funds owed to a subcontractor, Advic Engineering Limited, claiming that this turned the case into an economic and financial crime.
However, a three-member panel of the appellate court, led by Justice Ntong Ntong, dismissed the EFCC’s appeal and upheld the earlier judgment of the Kaduna State High Court. The lower court had ruled in favor of Mr. Becker and awarded him ₦1 million in damages for the infringement of his fundamental rights by the EFCC.
Justice Ntong, in delivering the judgment, stated that EFCC’s claims of “criminal misappropriation” and “criminal breach of trust” were attempts to mislead the public and justify actions that were outside the agency’s constitutional powers. The judge noted that while criminal elements can arise in contractual disputes, intervention by law enforcement agencies like EFCC must be cautious, limited, and discrete. In this case, the dispute was strictly civil and contractual in nature, making EFCC’s actions ultra vires.
The court further noted that EFCC failed to provide evidence to challenge the claim that the transactions were purely civil. Justice Ntong emphasized that unchallenged affidavit evidence is deemed true and binding, underscoring that EFCC’s actions were based on illegality and amounted to a gross abuse of power.
The court condemned EFCC’s conduct as unconstitutional and opprobrious, stating that the agency “threw away their honour, discretion, and self-respect” to pursue personal interests. It criticized the EFCC for disrupting civil transactions that should have been resolved in a High Court, warning that no court should condone such illegality.
The judgment reinforces the principle that agencies like EFCC must respect constitutional boundaries and the rule of law, especially in matters that fall outside their jurisdiction.
