A potential turf war is brewing between two of Nigeria’s major law enforcement agencies — the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Nigeria Police Force — over the custody and prosecution of two suspects involved in a controversial microfinance bank fraud case.

The suspects, 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 — a decision their legal counsel maintains is still valid.

However, tensions have escalated after the EFCC reportedly re-arrested the same suspects in connection with the same matter, sparking accusations of overreach, intimidation, and legal redundancy.

Legal Battle Over Bail, Detention, and Assets

Khadijah Bayern, the lead defense counsel representing the two men, revealed that the police had seized two vehicles — a Toyota Hilux and a Toyota RAV4 — along with personal items and documents during the initial arrest. These assets, she said, are currently the subject of ongoing forfeiture proceedings before a competent court.

In a formal petition titled “Double Jeopardy and Intimidation” submitted to the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Bayern accused the EFCC of unlawfully re-arresting and detaining her clients for over 12 days without bail or adequate access to medical care.

“The repeated arrests of the same individuals by different agencies on an already pending matter is a recipe for abuse of process and undermines the credibility of our justice system,” Bayern stated.

In addition to her petition to the AGF, another lawyer from the defense team submitted a separate request dated July 29, 2025, addressed to the Director of the EFCC’s Special Duty Section 2 (SDC2). The letter appealed for a review of the suspects' bail conditions, which the legal team described as overly restrictive.

Specifically, the EFCC had reportedly required sureties who are senior civil servants beyond Grade Level 15. The defense argued this condition was unnecessarily harsh and proposed that civil servants on Grade Level 14 or 15 should suffice. They also raised urgent concerns over the suspects' cardiovascular health, calling for consistent medical care while in custody.

EFCC Denies Wrongdoing

In response to the allegations, the EFCC has firmly denied any claims of misconduct or procedural abuse. The Commission’s Head of Media and Publicity, Dele Oyewale, defended the agency’s actions, insisting all operations were backed by legal authority.

“The EFCC does not harass or intimidate suspects. We act strictly on credible intelligence and within the boundaries of the law,” Oyewale said.

He further clarified that the Commission only reopens investigations when new evidence or previously unknown details come to light.

Addressing concerns about prolonged detention, Oyewale explained that in instances where suspects are held beyond the statutory 48 hours, the EFCC must — and does — obtain remand orders from a competent magistrate court, in accordance with Nigerian law.

A Broader Issue of Jurisdiction and Legal Conflict

This case has reignited long-standing concerns within Nigeria’s legal community about inter-agency rivalry, overlapping mandates, and the broader implications for the country’s justice system.

Observers warn that without clear protocols on investigative jurisdiction and prosecutorial authority, suspects risk being subjected to duplicative investigations and potential rights violations.

As legal tensions mount, all eyes are now on the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation. Stakeholders are calling for prompt intervention to clarify the legal pathway in the case, enforce respect for due process, and prevent further escalation between the EFCC and the police.

Whether the AGF will step in to mediate remains to be seen, but the outcome could set a crucial precedent for law enforcement cooperation and the protection of constitutional rights in Nigeria.