A lawyer, Mr. Abubakar Sani, has filed a suit before the Federal High Court in Abuja seeking an order nullifying Section 2(3) of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission which subjects the nomination of the President for the Chairman of the EFCC to the confirmation of the Senate.
The plaintiff, in the suit marked, FHC/ABJ/CS/278/2017, joined the Senate, the House of Representatives and the Attorney-General of the Federation as the defendants.
Sani submitted to court as question for determination whether the Senate and House of Representatives were justified to have inserted the provision in Section 2(3) in the EFCC Act, given the fact that by virtue of Section 216(2) of the Constitution, the appointment of the head of the Nigeria Police Force is subject to such condition.
He asked the court to declare that, to the extent that Section 2(3) of the EFCC Act seeks to subject the appointment by the President of the Chairman of the EFCC to the confirmation of the first defendant (Senate), it is ultra vires and invalid on because it is inconsistent with the spirit and intendment of the Constitution in Section 216 (2)”.
Sani argued that the intention of the provision of Section 216(2) of the Constitution was to give the President a free hand in appointing the heads of law enforcement agencies, without such appointment being subject to confirmation by any person/authority.
The lawyer, in a supporting affidavit, said he was aware that by virtue of the provision of Section 216(2) of the Constitution, the appointment of the Inspector General of Police was not subject to the confirmation of the Senate.
He stated, “I also know as a fact that the appointment by the President of the heads of other security services, such as the State Security Service or Department of State Service, Defence intelligence Agency and National Security Agency are not subject to confirmation by the 1st defendant.
“Despite my discrete pleas and advocacy with the first defendant, that it cannot empower itself to confirm whoever the President appoints as the Chairman of the EFCC, the 1st defendant remains adamant. As such, a dispute has now arisen between us, which I hereby invite this honourable court to resolve.”
The suit has not been assigned to any judge