Counsel to the Osun State Government, Prof. Mubarak Adekilekun, SAN, has challenged the legal basis of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission’s restriction of the state’s statutory allocation account, insisting that no court order was served on either the government or First Bank.
Adekilekun made the claim on Friday during an appearance on Channels Television’s Politics Today, as the controversy over the EFCC’s Post No Debit restriction on the account continued.
The senior lawyer said the EFCC’s letter was transmitted by First Bank to the Osun Government but was not accompanied by any court order.
He argued that the applicable money-laundering law required judicial authorisation for the continued blocking of the account and that the order should be served on the affected bank.
“You will recall that after the letter was written to First Bank in Osun, which in turn transmitted the letter to the state government, the requirement of the law in this regard is that a court order must be issued and served on, especially, First Bank,” Adekilekun said.
He maintained that the state’s position was not that the EFCC lacked powers to investigate suspected financial crimes, but that those powers had to be exercised within the limits prescribed by law.
The dispute centres on the provisions of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, which allow a temporary restriction on an account suspected to be linked to unlawful activity while investigations are conducted.
Adekilekun, however, insisted that the Osun account could not be subjected to the restriction without the requisite judicial process.
His position contrasts with that of human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Femi Falana, who has defended the EFCC’s authority to impose a temporary restriction before seeking a court order.
Falana cited a 2022 Court of Appeal decision involving the Benue State Government and the EFCC, which upheld the commission’s power to place a state government account on Post No Debit for up to 72 hours during an investigation.
The legal disagreement has consequently shifted attention to the precise point at which judicial approval becomes necessary and whether the procedure followed in the Osun case met the statutory requirements.
Adekilekun also rejected allegations of money laundering involving the account, saying it was established to receive allocations from the Federation Account.
“You can’t do an act of this magnitude and just say you are transmitting a letter to put a PND on a state government account,” he said.
The controversy has gained additional political attention because Osun is preparing for its August 15, 2026 governorship election.
The timing of the EFCC action has generated debate, with concerns raised about its possible implications for the state’s finances and electoral preparations. The legal questions surrounding the account, however, remain distinct from the political contest.
President Bola Tinubu has reportedly directed the EFCC to approach the court over the restriction and discontinue the action in view of the proximity of the governorship election.
Asked whether the Osun Government would proceed with its legal challenge, Adekilekun said the final decision would depend on his client.
“Well, it depends on what my client thinks, which is the Osun State Government. If they give us the go-ahead, but I think and I believe that it should be tried,” he said.
The dispute could ultimately require judicial determination of whether the EFCC complied with the statutory procedure governing temporary restrictions and subsequent court authorisation.
