The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, fixed October 22 for the hearing of a suit filed by no fewer than 16 state governments challenging the constitutionality of the laws establishing the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and two others.
A seven-man panel of justice, led by Justice Uwani Abba-Aji, fixed the date after the states were joined as co-plaintiffs and leave granted for consolidation of the case in the suit originally filed by the Kogi State Government through its Attorney General (AG).
Akelicious reports that the states that joined in the suit marked: SC/CV/178/2023 include Ondo, Edo, Oyo, Ogun, Nassarawa, Kebbi, Katsina, Sokoto, Jigawa, Enugu, Benue, Anambra, Plateau, Cross-River and Niger.
The 16 states are relying on the fact that the Constitution is the supreme law and any law that is inconsistent with it is a nullity.
The plaintiffs argued that the Supreme Court, in Dr. Joseph Nwobike Vs Federal Republic of Nigeria, had held that it was a United Nation Convention against corruption that was reduced into the EFCC Establishment Act and that in enacting this law in 2004, the provision of Section 12 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, was not followed.
The argument was that, in bringing a convention into the Nigerian law, the provision of Section 12 must be complied with.
According to them, the provision of the Constitution necessitated the majority of the states’ Houses of Assembly agreeing to bringing the convention in before passing the EFCC Act and others, which was allegedly never done.
The argument of the states in their present suit, which had reportedly been corroborated by the Supreme Court in the previous case mentioned, is that the law, as enacted, could not be applied to states that never approved of it, in accordance with the provisions of the Nigerian constitution.
Hence, they argued that any institution so formed should be regarded as an illegal institution.
When the case was called on Tuesday, lawyers, who represented the states, made their submissions.
While majority sought to be joined as co-plaintiffs, two of the states prayed for an order for consolidation of the case
