Photograph — The Osasu Show

Governor Ayodele Fayose is arguably the most talked about governor in Nigeria at the moment. This can be attributed to the fact that he has been doubling as a state governor and the ‘mouthpiece of the opposition.’ This is especially since January this year when Olisa Metuh, the erstwhile National Publicity Secretary of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) was put behind bars for allegedly receiving a share of the money meant for arms from the office of the National Security Adviser (NSA) in the previous administration.

Fayose currently governs Ekiti State on a non-sequential second term ticket. He could not complete his first tenure as a result of an impeachment in October 2006. However, he was re-elected as the governor in a popular, but highly controversial, gubernatorial poll that saw the incumbent governor at the time, Kayode Fayemi, unseated. Ekiti, the 29th most populous state in Nigeria, with about 2.4 million people has weathered through storms on its governorship; within a year (October 2006 – October 2007), Ekiti survived five different authorities that occupied the apex seat of power state.

Before the exit of Goodluck Jonathan as the Nigerian president, during the build up to the 2015 general elections, Fayose, who belongs to the same party with the former Head of State, had been an ardent and unrepentant critic of Muhammadu Buhari, mostly on his economic policies, appointments and method of fighting corruption. A popular stint by the governor was his prediction about the Buhari-led government, which he released last December. Fayose’s “20 things Nigerians may experience in 2016 under Buhari’s government” highlighted many challenges Nigeria is presently contending with.

Recently, the wife of the Nigerian president, Aisha Buhari, ‘refused to keep quiet’ as she tweeted that Fayose is “an unchained dog” and “a mad dog that isn’t chained,” via her verified Twitter page. Those tweets were later taken down from the page, but not before Nigerians fed on it and expressed their various sentiments. The backlash from the president’s wife is believed to have come as a result of Fayose declaring she is the ‘Aisha Buhari’ named in the Jefferson bribery scandal. The outbursts from Fayose and Aisha came on the heels of the freezing of the governor’s personal bank account by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC); a move that has thrown the judicial sphere of the country into frenzy – Nigerian lawyers are opining conflicting points of view of the law on the matter.

This is not the first time Fayose is in an unhealthy relationship with the presidency. In 2006, former President Olusegun Obasanjo ordered a state of emergency in Ekiti after Fayose was illegally impeached by the State House of Assembly on issues bordering on corruption. Many reports had it then that his impeachment saw the light of the day because he already fell out of favour with ‘Baba.’ Now, many Nigerians are of the opinion that Fayose’s outspokenness against Buhari’s government has caused him and his allies unfavourable treatment from federal-controlled forces including the EFCC and Nigeria’s secret police, the Department of Security Services. Overall, considering claims by opposing quarters to the governor, relative to the concerns raised by him [Fayose], the question of whether he is being investigated for corruption by the anti-graft agency or being persecuted by the ruling government remains difficult to answer accurately.

Constitutionality of freezing Fayose’s personal bank account by EFCC in doubt

For a couple of days now, Nigeria’s media space has been agog with different versions of the constitutionality of the EFCC’s decision to block Fayose’s personal bank account. Some Nigerian legal practitioners, including Itse Sagay and Inibehe Effiong, are of the opinion that Section 34(1) of the Act that created the anti-graft body empowers it to order banks to freeze any account “if [the Chairman of the Commission is] satisfied that the money in the account of a person is made through the commission of an offence under this Act and or any of the enactments specified under section 7 (2) (a)-(f) of this Act,” hence, there is no constitutional aberration committed by EFCC on the matter. Some other constitutional lawyers like Mike Ozekhome and Kayode Ajulo say EFCC’s action is illegal. While the duo asserted that immunity covers Fayose from such actions since he is a serving governor, Ajulo went further by saying an arrest is expected to precede the freezing of an account.

“…Moreover, sections 26-34 of the EFCC Act, established a process to be followed that is, a suspect must have been arrested for his account to be frozen however section 308 of 1999 Constitution, exempted Ayodele Fayose from those could be arrested and his bank account cannot be frozen,” Ajulo averred.

Nigeria’s law custodians remain silent

The chief law officer of the country; the Attorney-General of Nigeria, Abubakar Malami, and the lawmakers who are meant to clarify the provisions of the constitution on the matter are currently at fierce loggerheads. The latter summoned the former to explain why he encouraged the federal government to interfere in what they described as ‘internal affairs of the National Assembly.’ With their continued silence on the issue, the constitutionality of the EFCC’s action remains subject to varying opinions from Nigerians – many of which could be based on individual sentiments.

Effects on Nigeria and its citizens

1.) President Buhari has been accused several times of focusing his anti-corruption drive at the opposition. Some Nigerians see the latest move by the EFCC as another one of the many steps it has made in that direction. This paints Buhari’s corruption fight in a bad light.

2.) Perceived inadequacies of the provisions of the amended 1999 constitution have once again been ripped open. Since the immunity clause provided by the constitution to the President, Vice-President, Governors and Deputy Governors remains ambiguous on matters like this, there is a need for clarification. The Nigerian parliament is currently making moves to amend some portions of the country’s constitution.

3.) Another serious concern is that the Nigerian democracy is been overstretched. Truly, Nigerians still bask in the euphoria of the maturity and statesmanship exhibited by the former President for peacefully transferring power to the incumbent, but the action of the anti-graft body that has been alleged as one outside the ambit of law, raises concerns and suggestions of a too reactive government.

4.) The crisis in the southern region of the country may be fuelled with this development. The south-east and south-south regions of Nigeria have been plunged into chaos by activities of the Biafran agitators and oil militants respectively. Part of their claims has been that Buhari is using the anti-corruption fight to conduct a witch-hunt on loyalists to the previous administration. They may only see the action against Fayose as one motivated by the president and his ruling party.

Elsewhere on Ventures

Triangle arrow