Regina Otokpa 
An activist, Dr Ifeanyichukwu Okonkwo has called on the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to stop disrespecting due process and rule of law by disregarding Supreme Court decisions against it.
Okonkwo in a statement made available to newsmen, also urged the Commission to ensure it sticks to its democratic ideals and original mandate as an anti-graft agency, so as not to drift away and be mistaken for a debt recovery agency.
Okonkwo, a former governorship candidate of Action Democratic Party (ADP) in Anambra State, frowned at some alleged activities of the Commission which he listed to include; media trial, blackmail and intimidation, internal corruption, lack of integrity, political interference and absence of proper oversight by the leadership.
Questioning the the connection between Section 6(b) of the EFCC Act, 2004 and the one-count charge filed against him by the commission, Okonkwo while citing Section 211(1) of the Nigerian Constitution and five Supreme Court decisions, challenged the competence of the EFCC and the jurisdiction of the High Court of Enugu State to entertain the case.
The said case reads: “That you Ifeanyichukwu Okonkwo on or about the 23rd day of November 2015 in Enugu within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court fraudulently converted to your own use the sum of Forty-One Million Naira (N41,000,000.00) being money received by you from one Onyishi Maduka Samuel for the family of late Joel Ifemelunma.”
According to Okonkwo, the Court in spite of the processes pending before the Court of Appeal, refused to stay athe ction and without jurisdiction ordered the arraignment of Okonkwo citing the inapplicable case of, Metu vs. F.R.N. (2017) 11 NWLR (PT. 1573) 153.
While challenging the jurisdiction of the Court in the entire proceedings, Okonkwo averred that where a court entertains a matter in which it lacks jurisdiction, the whole exercise including the proceedings and order, amount to a nullity.
He insisted that the Court suo moto (on its own motion) has inherent jurisdiction to set aside the order, just as the party or parties affected by the proceedings/orders can take necessary steps by motion and necessary by way of appeal, to set aside such a judgment that is invalid, on the grounds of being a nullity.
He said: “As far as the procedure for having it set aside is concerned, the Court in its inherent jurisdiction can set aside its own order and an appeal against the Order is not necessary.
“The entire proceeding/order dated Wednesday, 26th February 2025, in Suit No. E/298C/2019 is invalid in the sense that it was delivered against the Supreme Court decision in Western Steel Works Ltd. vs. Iron and Steel Workers Union (1986).
“It is to avoid this ugly and unfortunate situation that the Court of Appeal, in the case, Olaseni vs, Olaseni (2010) counselled that: it borders on judicial impertinence for the trial court to disregard the process of the Court of Appeal.
“It is an affront to the authority of the Court of Appeal. All Courts established under the Constitution derive their powers and authority from the Constitution. The hierarchy of Courts shows the limits and powers of each Court. To defy the authority and powers of a higher Court is undesirable.”
Okonkwo challenged the Chairman of the EFCC, Ola Olukayode to strengthen his oversight desk and do some serious internal house cleansing to stop the drift, stressing the need to reset the Commission immediately to enable it to focus on its original mandate as contained in the EFCC to Establishment Act (2004).
