As Courts Fine the EFCC for Repeated Trial Failures, Nigeria’s Anti-Corruption Campaign Risks Becoming a Costly Spectacle Rather Than a Route to Justice.
KEHINDE ADEGOKE writes.
When a court fines Nigeria’s Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for mishandling yet another corruption trial, it exposes more than a legal failure—it signals a deeper anti-corruption crisis. The institution designed as Nigeria’s anti-corruption watchdog is becoming less credible. Each court sanction chips away at the core mission, risking a shift from genuine justice to an expensive, performative spectacle that erodes public trust and accountability.
Each fine for the EFCC’s procedural failures highlights a central problem: inefficiency and delays in corruption trials erode public trust and push justice further from reach. Repeated sanctions underscore how these failures threaten to turn trials into hollow displays rather than opportunities for justice.
A sharp example illustrates this crisis: On March 17, 2026, at the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory in Maitama, Abuja, Justice Hamza Mu’azu imposed a N500,000 fine on the EFCC during the trial of former Central Bank of Nigeria Governor Godwin Emefiele.
The commission sought its eighth adjournment after failing to produce its 13th prosecution witness, DCP Edwin Okpoziakeo. This was despite prior notice and the court’s order for a fast hearing. The charges are serious: abuse of office, forgery, breach of trust, and financial misconduct involving large sums.
Under Section 396(6) of the ACJA 2015, the judge awarded costs against the prosecution for delay. The EFCC, funded by taxpayers, must pay the fine. Ordinary Nigerians indirectly pay for these lapses. They bear costs for what is seen as EFCC’s incompetence.
Reacting to these failings, the court granted what it labelled a final adjournment and issued strong warnings against further lapses, signalling a last opportunity for EFCC compliance.
This is not an isolated lapse. Data reveal a systemic challenge: Of 393 corruption cases initiated by the EFCC from 2013 to 2026, only 144—about 37%—reached final judgment, meaning the court issued a verdict. More than 235 cases, representing over 60% of the total, are still pending and have not been concluded in courts nationwide.
The EFCC reports thousands of convictions overall. From 2023 to 2024, there were over 7,000 convictions. In the first half of 2025 alone, it secured 1,417 more. These numbers show success in routine cases. Major cases stall due to witness issues, bureaucratic delays, or complex evidence collection.
These repeated delays and fines force us to confront a central issue: Is Nigeria’s anti-corruption fight delivering genuine justice, or has the EFCC’s failing performance rendered the process an expensive spectacle, masking the absence of real accountability?
When trials of powerful figures drag on for years, they attract scrutiny. Defendants often get bail, stay visible, and make statements. Some retain political influence. Each court appearance puts them in the media, but verdicts are delayed. Critics ask whether these are just media trials that reward influence rather than deter crime.
Defence teams cite the right to a fair hearing and challenge evidence. But when the EFCC comes unprepared, citing administrative delays or missing witnesses, it shows a lack of urgency.
Complex financial crimes need forensic work and often international cooperation. Yet starting trials without ready case files causes delays. These failures are now punished by courts with fines and warnings.
Viewed together, these ongoing problems prompt critics to question whether the situation reflects deliberate agency tactics, complacency, or outright professional ineptitude.
Preferential Treatment and Class-Based Justice
The EFCC often keeps high-profile suspects in guest houses or special units. These have air conditioning, better food, medical care, and managed visits. Ordinary citizens accused of lesser crimes face harsher police cells or prisons.
EFCC officials say special arrangements are in place to support security, health, and logistics for influential detainees. Many defendants get bail, subject to restrictions such as asset freezes or travel bans. Still, the clear disparity fuels the view that elites get special treatment. This harms the EFCC’s public image and undermines legal equality.
The Wider Picture and Critical Need for Reform
The EFCC works under strain. It faces over 20,000 open cases and deals with reluctant or scared witnesses, red tape, and at times, political influence. These are challenges any agency must fix. Nigeria’s judiciary faces backlogs and old infrastructure. EFCC and ICPC leaders complain about delays in high-profile trials. Convictions in cybercrime and routine cases are up, but elite cases are still slow.
These issues cannot excuse the anti-graft agency from sanctions. Public faith declines when high-profile cases appear performative and reflect the interests of those in power. Despite recoveries, the core danger remains: without systemic change, the credibility and effectiveness of anti-corruption efforts erode further.
Concrete reforms are overdue and must be prioritised. Special anti-corruption courts with strict deadlines, specialised judges, and efficient procedures could speed up high-profile trials and preserve fair hearings. The EFCC chairman supports this. Strong witness protection, backed by a dedicated bill, would help witnesses testify. Missing witnesses often result from this gap.
Mandatory pre-arraignment case readiness audits to ensure files, exhibits, and witnesses are courtroom-ready before charges are filed.
Improved digital forensics and better asset tracing tools are essential. Laws such as the EFCC Act and the Proceeds of Crime Act should be strengthened. This would allow faster evidence work and speed asset recovery, even before conviction.
Detention standards must be improved throughout all facilities. This is necessary to eliminate disparities and ensure humane treatment for all suspects, regardless of status.
Enforce ACJA adjournment limits more strictly. Pair this with capacity building for prosecutors and judges handling financial crimes.
Additional proposals include accelerating the passage of the Whistleblower Protection Bill and introducing policies that incentivise reporting while shielding informants.
The Real Cost to Nigeria
The N500,000 fine is more than a penalty—it signifies the EFCC’s struggle to deliver credible justice. Delays continue to undermine asset recovery and public confidence in Nigeria’s anti-corruption framework. True reform is about restoring faith and bringing swift, real justice, not allowing public funds to be wasted on repeated institutional failure.
Despite the EFCC’s conviction record, only bold, systemic reform will convert numbers into real progress in major cases. Without urgent action to restore trust and efficiency, delay, fines, and public disappointment will persist, reducing anti-corruption efforts to a spectacle rather than genuine justice.
Nigeria cannot afford to let delay and inefficiency undermine the fight against corruption. Now is the time for policymakers, legal authorities, and citizens to demand urgent, concrete reforms that will drive true accountability — ending the cycle of spectacle. Only through unified action and unwavering commitment can real justice be restored. The country deserves a system that delivers results from anti-corruption efforts, not endless disappointment.
