EFCC Defends Use of Recovered Proceeds, Puts Asset-Recovery Governance in Focus

 The Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, Olanipekun Olukoyede, has defended the use of recovered proceeds of crime to fund public programmes, arguing that Nigeria’s asset-recovery framework allows such funds to be channelled towards productive social investment.

 Speaking during a briefing marking his 34 months in office as EFCC chairman, Olukoyede said the commission’s recovery efforts should not be viewed solely through the lens of enforcement, but also in terms of how recovered assets are ultimately deployed for public benefit. 

 The EFCC chairman specifically cited the allocation of recovered funds to the Nigerian Education Loan Fund (NELFUND) and the Nigerian Consumer Credit Corporation. He referred to Sections 69, 70 and 73 of the Proceeds of Crime Act as the legal basis for the treatment and application of recovered proceeds.

 According to Olukoyede, two out of every three naira recovered by the EFCC were recovered on behalf of beneficiaries other than the Federal Government. He argued that converting criminal proceeds into education financing and household credit represents a form of social reinvestment.

 The position brings a significant compliance issue to the fore: how recovered proceeds are managed after enforcement action.

 From an asset-recovery perspective, effective controls do not end with identifying, freezing or forfeiting suspected proceeds of crime. Governance over the custody, valuation, transfer and eventual use of recovered assets is equally important.

 Clear legal authority, transparent accounting, independent oversight and auditable records are essential to demonstrate that recovered proceeds are handled in accordance with applicable law and are not exposed to further diversion or misuse.

 The issue also highlights the distinction between asset recovery and asset utilisation. While recovery seeks to deprive offenders of the benefits of financial crime, subsequent deployment of those assets creates a separate governance and accountability chain.

 For compliance professionals, the EFCC’s position underscores the need for robust proceeds-of-crime management frameworks, including traceability from recovery through final utilisation.