Fresh Tensions Erupt Between EFCC and Police Over Custody of Microfinance Bank Glitch Suspects

A new wave of tension appears to be mounting between Nigeria’s top anti-graft agency, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), and the Nigeria Police Force over the controversial re-arrest and continued detention of two suspects linked to a microfinance bank glitch case.

The suspects, identified as Illesanmi Olaniyi and Ishola Maruf, were initially arrested by operatives of the Force Intelligence Department (FID) in Abuja on March 17, 2024. Following their arrest, they were granted administrative bail. However, recent developments suggest the EFCC has re-arrested the duo, sparking concerns about overlapping jurisdiction and the potential abuse of legal procedures.

NCAA Blacklists Fuji Star Kwam 1 For Six Months Over Airport Misconduct

Double Arrest Raises Legal and Ethical Questions

According to their legal representative, Khadijah Bayern, the initial arrest and bail conditions remain valid and are being legally enforced. Bayern also noted that a Toyota Hilux, a Toyota RAV4, several documents, and personal items seized during the first arrest are still in the custody of the police, with a forfeiture case currently before the courts.

In a strongly worded petition to the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Bayern accused the EFCC of not only re-arresting her clients on a matter already under police jurisdiction but also of detaining them for more than 12 days without bail or adequate medical attention. The petition, titled Double Jeopardy and Intimidation, called for urgent intervention from the AGF to prevent what Bayern described as “a dangerous precedent of agency overreach.”

“Multiple arrests by different agencies on the same matter risk derailing the legal process. It compromises due process and can lead to prolonged detention and unnecessary hardship for the accused,” Bayern warned.

The petition has reignited debates over the coordination — or lack thereof — between Nigeria’s various law enforcement and anti-corruption agencies, especially when jurisdictional overlaps occur.

Legal Team Demands Humane Bail Terms, Cites Health Concerns

Adding to the tension, another member of the suspects’ legal team addressed a letter to the Director of the EFCC’s Special Duty Section 2 (SDC2) on July 29, 2025. The letter appealed for more lenient and practical bail conditions for Olaniyi and Maruf, citing medical concerns and their willingness to cooperate.

Specifically, the legal team requested that the EFCC accept civil servants on Grade Level 14 or 15 as sureties — a departure from the high-ranking officers initially demanded. The letter also underscored that both suspects suffer from cardiovascular ailments that require ongoing medical supervision, a condition they say is not being adequately addressed in custody.

The defense emphasized that the suspects pose no flight risk and have cooperated with authorities throughout the investigation. “All we ask for is a fair and humane process, not unnecessary hardship,” the letter read.

EFCC Responds: ‘There Are New Angles’

In response to the allegations, the EFCC’s Head of Media and Publicity, Dele Oyewale, categorically denied claims of harassment or procedural misconduct. According to Oyewale, the agency’s actions are based solely on fresh intelligence that warranted a renewed investigation into the suspects’ activities.

“There is no way the commission will deploy its resources to investigate a matter already with the police if there are no fresh angles,” Oyewale stated during a press briefing.

He further clarified that the EFCC operates within the legal framework and that suspects can be held beyond the standard 48-hour detention period when a remand order is obtained from a competent magistrate’s court.

“The EFCC does not harass or intimidate anyone. We operate strictly within the ambit of the law. Every move we make is backed by due process and authorized by the courts when necessary,” Oyewale added.

Clash of Mandates: Jurisdictional Grey Areas Persist

The unfolding situation once again highlights the persistent lack of clarity surrounding the mandates of Nigeria’s key enforcement bodies. While both the EFCC and the Police share certain overlapping responsibilities, particularly in financial crime cases, disputes over handling and prosecutorial jurisdiction remain common.

Legal experts argue that the ongoing friction is symptomatic of a broader institutional challenge — one that demands urgent reforms to clearly define agency boundaries and reduce duplication of efforts.

“This is more than just a turf war,” said Barrister Okechukwu Elendu, a criminal law specialist. “When agencies clash over suspects, it’s the accused who suffer the most. Prolonged detention, legal confusion, and violations of constitutional rights can easily follow.”

What Lies Ahead for the Suspects and Law Enforcement Relations?

As the suspects remain in EFCC custody, their legal team continues to press for their release or at the very least, improved detention conditions. The AGF’s office is yet to publicly respond to the petition, but observers say the coming days will be crucial in determining how the case unfolds and what implications it holds for inter-agency collaboration in Nigeria.

Meanwhile, civil society organizations have called for increased transparency in the handling of the case and urged both the Police and EFCC to prioritize justice over jurisdictional power struggles.

For now, the fate of Illesanmi Olaniyi and Ishola Maruf hangs in the balance — caught in the crossfire of two powerful institutions, both claiming to act in the interest of justice.