EFCC chair Olukoyede denies Tinubu is targeting opposition, says APC bigwigs face more probes. Is Nigeria’s anti-graft war politically rigged?
Late April 2025, the surprising April 23 defections of Delta State Governor Sheriff Oborevwori (PDP) and numerous top officials, including former governor Ifeanyi Okowa, to the ruling APC sent shockwaves through Nigerian politics. Rather than dismissing the defections as usual politics, opposition leaders shouted foul. They noticed that at least some defections occurred following EFCC summons and warned of a coordinated campaign. A coalition of democracy advocates even argued that “many defections seem to follow invitations from the EFCC for questioning on financial impropriety, suggesting a pattern where state institutions are being weaponised for partisan gain.” Critics saw this as a ‘EFCC political witch-hunt’, part of a larger persecution of Nigerian opposition figures aimed at boosting President Tinubu’s political party.
The presidency categorically rejects this story. In a robust rejoinder, Special Adviser Bayo Onanuga described the defections as completely voluntary and due to the APC’s appeal. In a statement headed “Democracy Strong and Alive in Nigeria,” he claimed that the wave of defections was a natural political shift and dismissed any allegations of coercion as “baseless and exaggerated.” He also joked that claims of “weaponising state institutions” were “figments of the imagination” of angry politicians. In summary, Tinubu’s team claims that there is no presidential directive to silence opponents and that the EFCC is not the APC’s political tool.
Ola Olukoyede, the EFCC Chairman, stepped into this tense atmosphere. In an interview with Olukoyede on Channels Television’s Politics Today programme (April 30, 2025), he defended the agency’s work vigorously. Olukoyede dismissed the charges as distractions from the government’s agenda, calling them “a ploy to distract the President from the good work he is doing,” according to host Seun Okinbaloye. Invoking President Tinubu’s public emphasis on recovery, he asked Nigerians to judge by outcomes. “I believe Nigerians should applaud the current president… So, what have you done? “How much have you recovered?” he enquired. “The man doesn’t have time for this issue,” Olukoyede stated clearly; “people are just trying to distract the government.”
Olukoyede went further to stress that the EFCC prosecutes corruption across party lines. He noted that, if one examined the EFCC’s case list, “you will perhaps find more members of the ruling party” among those charged. “You will find prominent members of the ruling party as part of the people we have investigated and filed charges against,” he said, warning that it would be “an injustice” to ignore corrupt officials simply because they belonged to the opposition. Repeatedly he insisted the agency treats all offenders the same: “If we discover that you have stolen money, you will have questions to answer, regardless of whether you are from the APC, PDP, Labour Party, SDP, or NNPP,” he stated. “Irrespective of political affiliation, it’s our duty to do the right thing,” Olukoyede said. He stressed his own neutrality: “I’m apolitical, I don’t belong to any political party… and we are not being influenced to do our work in such a way that is against our mandate”.
The historical context demonstrates that these accusations and counterclaims follow a typical pattern. Nigeria’s anti-corruption institutions have frequently been accused of partisanship, by both sides, particularly around elections. According to a recent Chatham House study of Nigeria’s anti-graft policies, even under President Obasanjo, the EFCC “was accused of political selectivity in its operations”. It highlighted that the EFCC remained “to be perceived as partisan” under Buhari’s administration, even adding that “politicians who defected to the ruling party ensured their misdeeds were overlooked, while those aligned with the opposition risked increased scrutiny”.
Former First Lady Patience Jonathan railed in 2017 against what she called a “unjustified witch-hunt” by the EFCC, accusing the agency’s leadership of conducting a “microscopic scrutiny” of her assets as “revenge” for her husband’s 2015 campaign support. Similarly, following the 2019 election, Nigeria’s opposition leader Atiku Abubakar expressed concern that his associates were being targeted, tweeting that aides imprisoned by the EFCC were “paying the price for supporting me” in his presidential bid. These cases have raised widespread suspicions about Nigerian opposition persecution under the guise of anti-corruption.
Olukoyede’s reply on Channels TV is currently the EFCC’s official statement. He categorically denies any coordination with Tinubu or partisanship, insisting that the agency will pursue the facts wherever it leads. The next step will determine whether this satisfies sceptics. If future EFCC prosecutions continue to entangle officials from across the political spectrum – including prominent APC individuals – the charges of bias may vanish. If not, the narrative of an EFCC political witch-hunt would strengthen. In Nigeria’s volatile atmosphere, a democracy lacking meaningful opposition is not a democracy. Observers would be watching closely to see whether Tinubu and the EFCC demonstrate their impartiality in practice or simply in words.
