A bill to cut down the powers of the President of the country on the removal of the Chairman, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, has scaled second reading.
After the bill seeking to amend the EFCC Act 2004 to guarantee security of tenure of its chairman passed second reading, it was accordingly referred to the Senator Suleiman Kwari (APC, Kaduna) led Senate Committee on Anti – Corruption and Financial Crimes for more legislative inputs and report at plenary within four weeks.
The bill which also seeks to amend EFCC Establishment Act 2004 to subject termination of appointment of the Chairman to confirmation of the Senate was sponsored by the Minority Whip, Senator Chukwuka Utazi (PDP, Enugu North).
In his presentation during a debate on the general principles of the bill, Senator Utazi explained that to ensure security of tenure for EFCC Chairman, the Senate should approve removal of any Chairman on the firing line of the President as it does in appointment.
According to him, it would guarantee the safety and security of tenure for leadership of the commission, just as he said that the bill had become imperative since Nigeria joined other state parties on signatories to the United Nation Conventions against corruption 2000.
During general debate on the bill, all Senators who contributed, supported the argument of seeking approval of the Senate before termination of appointment of any EFCC Chairman by the President but differed on restricting appointment of the commission’s chairman to insiders.
Senators who supported the bill include George Sekibo, (PDP-Rivers), James Manager (PDPDelta-South), among others.
However, Senator Sam Egwu (PDP-Ebonyi North), called caution in order for the Upper Chamber not to make a law that would restrain persons with required experience and capacity from outside to bring their wealth of knowledge, experience to bear in the governance of the nation’s agencies.
In his remarks, the Senate President, Senator Ahmad Lawan said that restricting appointment of Chairman of EFCC to insiders was a very good one, but the proposed law must state it clearly that the position was political.
