The Center for Fiscal Transparency and Public Integrity (CeFTPI) welcomes the recent move by the House of Representatives to amend the Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC) Establishment Act, 2004, seeking to limit the President’s power to remove the EFCC Chairman.
Section 3(2) of the EFCC Act, 2004 provides that: “A member of the Commission may at any time be removed by the President for inability to discharge the functions of his office (whether arising from infirmity of mind or body or any other cause) or for misconduct, or if the President is satisfied that it is not in the interest of the Commission or the Interest of the public that the member should continue in office.”
Under the proposed amendment, the removal of the EFCC Chairman would require the approval of a two thirds majority of both the Senate and the House of Representatives before it can take effect.
This legislative development marks an encouraging step toward deepening institutional independence and accountability within Nigeria’s anti-corruption agencies.
In the 2024 Civil Society Parallel Report on the Implementation of the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC), the Center identified issues of independence and presidential dominance over anti-corruption bodies as one of the most persistent challenges undermining Nigeria’s compliance with international standards.
The report noted that while Nigeria has strong laws and policies, institutional independence remains weak. The power of the President to appoint and remove leadership of key anti-corruption agencies e.g EFCC, has often translated into political interference, selective enforcement, and led to diminished public trust.
By proposing to subject the removal of the EFCC Chairman to two-thirds majority of both Senate and the House of Representatives, it has signaled a commitment to addressing one of the structural deficiencies that the CeFTPI report and the UNCAC framework both underscore: autonomy of anti-corruption institutions from undue influence.
The move aligns with Articles 6 and 36 of the UNCAC, which require States Parties to ensure that anti-corruption bodies have the “necessary independence” to carry out their functions effectively free from any undue influence.
The Civil Society Parallel UNCAC 2024 Report also emphasizes the need for similar reforms across the broader anti-corruption ecosystem including state-level agencies, asset-recovery units, public procurement institutions where weak autonomy and limited civil-society engagement persist, reporting and whistleblowing protection.
Key Recommendations for Priority Actions:
1. Legislators should ensure that the amendment clearly defines grounds and processes for removal and establishes tenure protection.
2.The Executive should demonstrate good faith by respecting institutional boundaries and refraining from political interference.
3. Civil Society and the Media must sustain pressure for accountability and monitor the bill’s implementation.
4. Development Partners should continue supporting reforms that advance UNCAC implementation and institutional capacity.
Conclusion
The current legislative initiative reflects growing recognition that the credibility of Nigeria’s anti-corruption regime depends on the autonomy of its institutions. Progress against corruption is not achieved by the strength of laws alone but by the integrity of systems that enforce them.
If effectively implemented, this reform could mark a pivotal shift from paper compliance to genuine institutional independence; a critical step toward restoring public trust and fulfilling Nigeria’s international commitments under the UNCAC.