Why Ex-Lawmaker Gave EFCC 14-Day Ultimatum to Reopen Atiku Financial Crimes Case
A former member of the House of Representatives, Ehiozuwa Agbonayinma, has given the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) a 14-day ultimatum to reopen and prosecute alleged financial crime allegations involving former Vice President Atiku Abubakar.
Agbonayinma, who also served as a member of the Code of Conduct Bureau, made the demand through his lawyer, Hannibal Egbe Uwaifo, SAN, of Sagitarian Law Firm. The petition, dated August 27, 2026, was reportedly received at the office of the EFCC Executive Chairman on September 1.
The former lawmaker is asking the anti-graft agency to revisit an investigation it allegedly conducted between 2005 and 2006, when Atiku was serving as Vice President of Nigeria.
Why Agbonayinma wants the case reopened
At the centre of the petition is an EFCC report titled “The EFCC Report on Vice-President Abubakar Atiku (Full Report),” which was dated September 2006.
According to Agbonayinma’s petition, the earlier investigation concerned allegations of grand corruption and financial misconduct involving Atiku. The petitioner claimed the report contained allegations relating to corruption, money laundering and other financial crimes.
Agbonayinma further alleged that the EFCC had indicated that Atiku could be prosecuted after leaving office because of the constitutional protections applicable to a sitting Vice President at the time.
However, the former lawmaker argues that despite the passage of many years, no prosecution followed. He described the alleged failure to pursue the matter as a serious concern for the country’s anti-corruption campaign.
US Senate report also cited
The petition also refers to a report from a United States Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, dated February 4, 2010.
Agbonayinma wants the EFCC to examine the US report alongside its own 2006 investigation and determine whether the material provides a basis for renewed investigation or prosecution.
The petitioner argued that reopening the matter would demonstrate that Nigeria’s anti-corruption agencies are prepared to investigate allegations involving politically influential individuals.
He also said prosecution, if supported by admissible evidence, could reinforce the principle that no individual is above the law.
What happens after the 14-day ultimatum?
The 14-day deadline is significant because Agbonayinma’s lawyers warned that failure or refusal by the EFCC to act would lead to legal action against the commission.
The petition therefore does not simply ask the EFCC to review the allegations. It also puts the agency on notice that the petitioner intends to pursue legal remedies if he believes the commission has failed to respond appropriately.
However, the 14-day demand itself does not establish Atiku’s criminal liability. The allegations would still have to be independently investigated and, if charges were brought, proven before a competent court.
As of the latest reports, the EFCC had not publicly announced that it would reopen the matter or commenced prosecution against Atiku.
Atiku’s response
The renewed allegations come as political activity intensifies ahead of Nigeria’s 2027 general elections, with Atiku emerging as a major opposition figure and the presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).
Atiku has rejected the renewed allegations and argued that similar matters were previously subjected to investigations and political scrutiny without resulting in a conviction. His camp has described the renewed focus on decades-old allegations as politically motivated.
The controversy therefore places the EFCC in a sensitive position. Any decision to reopen the matter could attract significant political attention, while declining to act could lead to further questions from the petitioner.
For now, the central issue remains whether the EFCC will review the historical reports and determine that there is sufficient evidence and legal basis for further action.
It is important to stress that the claims contained in Agbonayinma’s petition remain allegations. They have not, by themselves, established that Atiku committed any financial crime. Any criminal responsibility would have to be determined through due process and, ultimately, by a court of law.
About the Author
