Human rights activist and lawyer Deji Adeyanju has criticised opposition political parties over their reaction to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission’s handling of the case involving former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, SAN, accusing them of undermining anti-corruption efforts through what he described as partisan defence of individuals facing serious allegations.
Adeyanju, in a statement made available to journalists on Monday, expressed disappointment with opposition figures, arguing that their response to the EFCC’s actions concerning Malami reflected inconsistency and a lack of genuine commitment to the fight against corruption in Nigeria.
The activist maintained that opposition parties, by virtue of their role in democratic governance, should be leading demands for accountability and transparency, rather than questioning the legitimacy of anti-corruption agencies when their actions involve politically significant individuals.
“I am disturbed by what I see as hypocrisy in the reaction of some opposition figures to the arrest of former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, SAN,” Adeyanju said.
“You cannot claim to desire a better Nigeria while appearing to defend individuals facing serious allegations of corruption. What is required is a consistent commitment to accountability and the rule of law.”
Abubakar Malami served as Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice from 2015 to 2023 under the administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari. During his tenure, Malami was a central figure in the legal and prosecutorial framework of the federal government, overseeing major policy decisions and legal reforms. His time in office was also marked by public controversies and allegations of ethical breaches, though he consistently denied wrongdoing.
The EFCC’s recent actions concerning Malami have sparked reactions across the political spectrum, with opposition voices raising concerns about the timing and motives behind the commission’s move. Some have questioned whether the investigation is politically motivated, while others have called for caution in interpreting the commission’s actions.
However, Adeyanju argued that such reactions are counterproductive and represent a troubling pattern in Nigerian political discourse, where accountability measures are often resisted or politicised depending on the identity of the accused.
“What the opposition should be demanding is a transparent and comprehensive investigation, not public attacks on the EFCC or attempts to discredit its actions,” he said.
Adeyanju emphasised that allegations against any public officeholder, regardless of political affiliation, must be subjected to thorough investigation by the appropriate authorities. He noted that the opposition’s role in a functioning democracy is to hold power to account, not to shield individuals from lawful scrutiny when allegations arise.
“If Nigeria is truly serious about fighting corruption, we must stop defending individuals on the basis of politics and insist that all allegations are properly investigated and, where necessary, prosecuted in line with the law,” he said.
The activist also urged political actors to refrain from what he described as attempts to vilify the EFCC, stressing that the commission should be supported in carrying out its constitutional mandate professionally and without interference. He warned that undermining anti-corruption agencies weakens the institutional framework necessary for accountability and good governance.
“You cannot build a credible system when institutions are attacked simply because they act against individuals with political connections. The opposition should be at the forefront of demanding accountability from public office holders, regardless of whether such individuals belong to the ruling party or the opposition,” Adeyanju stated.
Nigeria’s anti-corruption framework has long been a subject of public debate, with successive administrations pledging to tackle graft while facing accusations of selective enforcement and political interference. The EFCC, established in 2003, remains the primary agency responsible for investigating and prosecuting financial crimes, but its work has frequently been criticised as politically influenced, particularly when high-profile figures are involved.
Adeyanju’s comments reflect broader concerns among civil society actors about the politicisation of corruption cases in Nigeria. Many advocates have argued that genuine anti-corruption efforts require consistent application of the law, free from partisan considerations, and that political leaders from all sides must demonstrate commitment to accountability.
The activist cited the EFCC’s handling of other high-profile cases as part of its responsibility to investigate individuals accused of corruption, noting that no one should be shielded from lawful scrutiny simply because of their political status or past positions.
He concluded by calling for equal application of the law across the board, insisting that accountability and the rule of law must prevail for Nigeria to make meaningful progress in addressing systemic corruption.
“Accountability and the rule of law must prevail for the country to make meaningful progress. The opposition cannot claim to be champions of good governance while resisting efforts to hold individuals accountable when allegations are made,” Adeyanju said.
