A Nigerian-American forensic psychologist and criminal justice expert, Professor John Egbeazien Oshodi, has described the Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Ola Olukoyede, as a “man of integrity” who is building the anti-graft agency beyond his personality.
Oshodi, in a commentary on Monday, said Olukoyede was strengthening professional systems within the EFCC, developing young officers, recovering public assets, promoting preventive measures and building public confidence in lawful anti-corruption enforcement.
He said the EFCC chairman’s leadership was particularly significant because Olukoyede appeared focused not merely on his personal visibility but on strengthening the institution he heads.
“Olukoyede is building more than cases. He is building professional capacity. He is building young officers. He is building preventive systems. He is building public awareness. He is building confidence in lawful anti-corruption enforcement,” Oshodi said.
The professor said Olukoyede’s approach represented a departure from personality-driven leadership, arguing that Nigeria needed strong, professional, transparent and enduring institutions rather than public officials whose personal influence overshadowed the institutions they headed.
According to him, the true measure of Olukoyede’s leadership would not be how frequently his image appeared in the media but whether the EFCC became “more capable, professional, impartial, transparent, and resilient” as a result of his tenure.
Oshodi’s assessment followed Olukoyede’s recent presentation at the 43rd Cambridge International Symposium on Economic Crime in the United Kingdom, where the EFCC chairman reportedly disclosed that the Commission had secured the forfeiture of cash and assets valued at more than $500 million to the Federal Government.
The professor said the figure, though significant, was only part of a broader pattern that had attracted his attention to Olukoyede’s leadership.
He said the EFCC chairman had repeatedly emphasised professional investigation, asset tracing, forensic capacity, preventive frameworks, international cooperation, whistleblower participation, legal procedure and the development of young officers.
“He does not appear interested in presenting himself as a solitary national hero. Instead, he consistently directs attention towards the institution, its mandate, its personnel, and the systems required to combat sophisticated financial crimes,” Oshodi said.
He argued that a leader who concentrated on personal influence would make an institution dependent on his presence, while an institution builder would strengthen procedures, develop personnel, transfer knowledge and create professional standards capable of surviving beyond his tenure.
“A personality may dominate a moment; a strong institution can protect generations,” he said.
Oshodi also praised Olukoyede’s emphasis on due process in the recovery and forfeiture of assets, noting that the EFCC must operate within the law while pursuing suspected proceeds of crime.
He cited the case involving properties allegedly linked to former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, saying EFCC investigators had traced 57 properties allegedly connected to the former minister.
According to him, a Federal High Court ordered the final forfeiture of 48 of the properties but declined to order the forfeiture of nine others after finding that the EFCC had not sufficiently established their connection to unlawful activity.
Oshodi said the different outcomes demonstrated the importance of judicial oversight and due process, stressing that the EFCC’s responsibility was to investigate and present evidence, while the courts determined whether the legal requirements for forfeiture had been met.
He said the Commission’s reported consideration of an appeal over the properties not forfeited was the appropriate way to challenge a decision it considered legally incorrect.
The professor also addressed criticism that the EFCC had engaged in selective prosecution.
He acknowledged that concerns about selective enforcement should not automatically be dismissed, saying every law-enforcement institution must remain alert to political pressure, personal influence, unequal treatment and unconscious bias.
However, he argued that allegations of selective prosecution should not be used to prevent the EFCC from pursuing cases where credible evidence exists.
“A crime remains a crime,” Oshodi said, arguing that suspected wrongdoing did not become lawful merely because another suspected offender had not been investigated or prosecuted.
He said the appropriate response to concerns about selectivity was for all credible allegations to be investigated with the same seriousness, professional independence and respect for due process.
Oshodi further urged the EFCC to remain accountable, warning that recognising Olukoyede as a man of integrity should not place either the chairman or the Commission beyond scrutiny.
He said the EFCC must guard against selective enforcement, political pressure, unlawful detention, mistreatment of suspects, compromised evidence, careless public statements and avoidable investigative failures.
According to him, the strongest test of Olukoyede’s leadership would ultimately be whether the EFCC could continue operating professionally and effectively after he leaves office.
“The true test of Olukoyede’s leadership will not be whether the EFCC remains dependent upon him. It will be whether the Commission can continue operating professionally and effectively after he is gone,” he said.
Oshodi said investment in young investigators and professionals was therefore central to institution-building, noting that the EFCC needed officers trained in asset tracing, forensic accounting, cybercrime investigation, digital evidence, cryptocurrency, intelligence analysis, corporate structures and international cooperation.
He added that professionalism should not be measured solely by the number of arrests made but by the quality of investigations, reliability of evidence, treatment of suspects and witnesses, strength of cases presented in court, and officers’ willingness to resist corruption and improper pressure.
The professor also backed Olukoyede’s emphasis on prevention, arguing that Nigeria could not “arrest its way out of corruption.”
He said enforcement remained necessary, but preventing corruption required stronger procurement systems, beneficial-ownership information, meaningful audits, suspicious-transaction reporting, digital financial records and effective internal controls.
Oshodi further commended Olukoyede’s call for stronger whistleblower protection and public participation in the recovery of assets allegedly taken abroad.
He said the EFCC could not fight sophisticated financial crimes alone and would require cooperation from banks, professionals, civil servants, journalists, international partners and ordinary citizens.
Oshodi concluded that Olukoyede’s most enduring legacy would not be his public profile but whether the EFCC emerged from his tenure as a stronger, more professional, transparent, impartial and resilient institution.
“Let the world know that a man of integrity is doing difficult work in very difficult terrain,” he said.
“Let it know that he is not merely occupying an office; he is trying to strengthen it.”
