EFCC Accused of Double Standards for Ignoring Tompolo and Okoya in Corruption Crackdown

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has come under fire for what many Nigerians are calling “selective justice,” with critics accusing the anti-graft agency of turning a blind eye to high-profile figures such as Government Ekpemupolo, popularly known as Tompolo, and billionaire industrialist Rasak Okoya.

Public outrage escalated after recent arrests of social media influencers and small-time entrepreneurs over alleged financial misconduct, while long-standing allegations involving powerful political and business figures remain unaddressed.

On social media, the hashtag #EFCCSelectiveJustice trended throughout Tuesday, with many users calling out what they described as the EFCC’s unwillingness to pursue individuals with deep political connections or economic influence.

Also Read: NDLEA’s Nationwide Operation: British National and Nigerians Arrested in Major Drug Bust

“EFCC is always quick to parade Yahoo boys and skit makers, but when it comes to people like Tompolo or Okoya, they suddenly go blind,” one user tweeted, echoing a sentiment shared by thousands.

Tompolo, a former Niger Delta militant leader turned government contractor, has faced multiple corruption allegations in the past, while Okoya has often been linked to questionable government deals, although neither has been convicted of any wrongdoing.

Transparency advocacy groups have also weighed in. The Civil Society Network Against Corruption (CSNAC) issued a statement demanding equal treatment under the law, urging the EFCC to reopen old files and ensure no Nigerian is above scrutiny.

When contacted for comment, the EFCC declined to respond directly to the accusations but reiterated its commitment to impartial justice.

“The Commission acts on evidence. No individual or group is exempt from investigation or prosecution if there is sufficient cause,” said EFCC spokesperson Dele Oyewale.

However, critics argue that selective prosecution undermines public confidence in the agency’s integrity and raises questions about political influence over law enforcement.