Financial Scandal: Stop Blackmailing EFCC Over Probe of Ogun NUJ Council’s Account, Petitioners Tell Zone B

ABEOKUTA – Two petitioners who accused the Chairman of the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ), Ogun State Council, Comrade Akinwale Victor Olanrewaju, of alleged financial impropriety have criticised the NUJ Zone B leadership over its communiqué accusing the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Ibadan Zonal Office, of harassing and persecuting officials of the state council.

The petitioners, Comrade Oluwole Shokunbi, a former two-term Chairman of the NUJ in Ogun State, and Comrade Sina Oduntan, an elder of the council and former Secretary of the Omo Titun campaign group that supported Olanrewaju’s first-term election, described the communiqué as an attempt to blackmail the anti-graft agency, intimidate its officials and influence the outcome of an ongoing investigation.

They urged the zonal leadership to stop portraying a petition seeking financial accountability as politically motivated, frivolous or the handiwork of unidentified individuals.

The petitioners, in their reaction to the communiqué issued after the Zone B Zonal Executive Council (ZEC) meeting in Lagos, questioned why the zonal leadership had deliberated on the EFCC investigation at its Third Quarter meeting in Ibadan and subsequently resolved to pay a courtesy visit to the commission’s Ibadan Zonal Director.

They said the sequence of events raised concerns about the purpose of the visit, particularly as the Zone later issued a communiqué asking the EFCC leadership to prevail on its Ibadan office to stop what it described as harassment and persecution of Ogun NUJ officials.

According to them, the development suggested an attempt to influence the direction of an investigation that should be allowed to proceed independently.

They argued that the NUJ Zone B leadership had no authority to dictate how far the EFCC could go in investigating allegations of financial impropriety involving a serving union official.

The petitioners also rejected the claim that the petition was written by an unidentified group known as The Patriot, insisting that their identities were known to the zonal leadership.

They maintained that the validity of a petition should be determined by the evidence presented and the findings of the investigating agency, rather than the identities or affiliations of those who submitted it.

Describing the allegations as substantial and verifiable, the petitioners said the EFCC should examine relevant bank statements, receipts, approvals, financial records and other supporting documents before reaching a conclusion.

They particularly called for a thorough investigation into the N50 million donation reportedly made by Senator Solomon Olamilekan Adeola, popularly known as Yayi, for the development of the Ogun NUJ Council’s permanent secretariat site along Abiola Way, behind Providence Hotel, Abeokuta.

The petitioners alleged that the money, which was intended to commence the development of the permanent secretariat, was diverted to the construction of a hall at the council’s temporary premises at the Iwe Irohin Press Centre.

They questioned whether the alleged change in the purpose of the donation was authorised by the appropriate organs of the council, whether the donor was informed and whether his consent was obtained.

They also demanded clarification on the total cost of the construction, the amount expended from the N50 million donation and whether the transactions were properly documented and presented to the council.

The petitioners insisted that seeking an explanation on the utilisation of an institutional donation could not reasonably be described as political persecution.

They further urged the EFCC to extend its investigation to funds received and expenditures incurred during the 2025 and 2026 Ogun NUJ Press Week celebrations, as well as the council’s 50th anniversary celebration.

They called on the commission to establish the total donations, sponsorships and other financial contributions received for the events, the identities of the contributors, the accounts into which the funds were paid and how the money was eventually utilised.

According to them, contributions made to the council for institutional activities are not the personal property of its chairman or any other official but resources that must be properly accounted for.

The petitioners also faulted Zone B’s description of the EFCC investigation as profiling, harassment and mental torture, arguing that responding to invitations, presenting financial documents and answering questions are normal procedures in an investigation.

They said the claim that Ogun NUJ officials had been invited for questioning on approximately 25 occasions did not, in itself, establish harassment or misconduct by the commission.

They, however, maintained that any allegation of misconduct against an EFCC officer should be reported to the appropriate authorities for independent examination without being used as a basis to frustrate the substantive investigation.

On the allegation against an EFCC officer identified as Mr Bashir, Head of the Economic Governance Unit, who was accused of concluding his preliminary report before interviewing the Ogun NUJ chairman, the petitioners said the commission should independently establish the facts.

They argued that even if any procedural misconduct was established, it would not automatically invalidate the petition or justify terminating the entire investigation.

The petitioners also questioned Zone B’s objection to the jurisdiction of the EFCC Ibadan Zonal Office, arguing that the commission’s management had the responsibility to determine which of its zonal offices should handle a particular petition.

They described the jurisdictional argument as curious, considering that the zonal leadership had earlier discussed the investigation at its meeting in Ibadan and subsequently visited the EFCC Zonal Director.

They maintained that any administrative decision to transfer the matter to another zonal office should be left to the EFCC management rather than being used to frustrate the investigation.

The petitioners further dismissed the argument that the NUJ’s status as a professional and labour organisation, rather than a government agency or financial institution, should shield its financial activities from scrutiny.

They said the absence of statutory allocations or government subventions did not exempt the union’s officials from accountability, particularly when managing donations and voluntary contributions made for specific institutional purposes.

They argued that the NUJ could not demand accountability from public office holders and other institutions while resisting similar scrutiny within its own administrative structures.

According to them, the reputation of the union would be better protected by encouraging transparency and allowing allegations of financial impropriety to be independently investigated rather than mobilising its zonal structure to defend an individual office holder.

They stressed that Olanrewaju was entitled to the presumption of innocence and a fair opportunity to respond to the allegations, but added that such protection did not translate into immunity from investigation.

The petitioners said they were not asking the EFCC to convict anyone through the media but to investigate the allegations and allow the law to take its course.

They consequently called on the EFCC leadership to protect its investigating officers from external pressure and ensure that the ongoing investigation was neither compromised nor abandoned.

They specifically demanded further investigation into the N50 million donation by Senator Adeola, the circumstances surrounding the construction of the hall at the temporary Iwe Irohin Press Centre, the funds received for the 2025 and 2026 Press Week celebrations and the council’s 50th anniversary.

They also called for a comprehensive examination of the relevant bank statements, receipts, approvals, financial records and other supporting documents.

The petitioners maintained that the most important issue raised by the petition remained unanswered: how were the financial resources entrusted to the Ogun State Council administered?

They said the Zone B communiqué had concentrated on the identities of the petitioners, the conduct of EFCC investigators, the number of invitations issued and the jurisdiction of the investigating office instead of addressing the financial questions raised.

They further insisted that the earlier Third Quarter Zonal meeting in Ibadan, the subsequent visit to the EFCC Zonal Director and the latest communiqué issued after the Lagos meeting warranted public scrutiny.

The petitioners challenged the Zone B leadership to demonstrate its commitment to the integrity of the NUJ by supporting transparency and accountability rather than attempting to discredit those demanding explanations over the council’s finances.

They concluded that professional solidarity should not become a shield against financial accountability, insisting that the NUJ’s zonal leadership could not dictate the outcome of an EFCC investigation.

“Accountability is not harassment. Investigation is not persecution, and professional solidarity must never be allowed to become a conspiracy of silence,” the petitioners said.