… seeks establishment of special courts to prosecute economic crime cases
Director General of the Inter-Governmental Action Group Against Money Laundering in West Africa (GIABA), Edwin Harris, on Tuesday, applauded the President Bola Tinubu administration’s resolve to prosecute high-profile public officials and recover assets acquired through stolen public funds.
The commendation is coming on the heels of the recovery of the largest real estate asset of 750 duplexes in Nigeria’s history, seized in Abuja from the erstwhile Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Godwin Emefiele.
Speaking during the second day of the 2025 National Conference on Public Accounts and Fiscal Governance organised by the Senate and House of Representatives Public Accounts Committees, Harris argued that asset recovery remains a credible strategy to combat money laundering, corruption, and terrorism financing.
He said: “Nigeria should ensure that enforcement is fair and impartial. No entity or individual – no matter how powerful – should be above the law. Recent moves to charge high-profile figures for money laundering and recover assets from former officials are encouraging.
“These efforts must continue without selective justice, strengthening enforcement and making it evenhanded will reinforce the integrity of Nigeria’s financial system, improve the overall compliance culture, and demonstrate tangible progress in meeting FATF obligations. This is key not only to exit the grey list but to prevent future relapses.”
Speaking further on accelerated asset recovery and management for public benefit, the GIABA helmsman who underscored the need for the present administration to sustain the momentum, described asset recovery as “a cornerstone of any credible strategy to combat money laundering, corruption, and terrorism financing. It serves the dual purpose of depriving criminals of their ill-gotten gains and recycling those resources back into the economy for the public good.”
According to him, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) recommendation 4 requires “countries to adopt measures to enable the confiscation of proceeds of crime and instruments used in offences. Nigeria has recently enacted the Proceeds of Crime (Recovery and Management) Act, which provides a comprehensive legal basis for the seizure, forfeiture, and management of criminal assets.
“The focus now should be on implementation and acceleration of asset recovery cases. Every corruption or money laundering case should systematically include efforts to trace and freeze the related assets, not after the fact but from the onset of the investigation. Nigeria should also leverage the full extent of its mutual legal assistance agreements to pursue assets located abroad.”
Speaking on the subject matter of Beneficial Ownership Transparency, Harris who expressed optimism that the global push for beneficial ownership disclosure is reshaping anti-corruption and financial integrity efforts, however noted that: “Opaque corporate structures and anonymous shell companies have long facilitated money laundering, terrorist financing, and illicit enrichment by concealing the true owners of assets. In response, FATF standards –particularly Recommendation 24 and its updated guidance – place clear obligations on states to identify and verify the real individuals who own or control legal entities, and to ensure authorities have timely access to that information.
“Here, Nigeria has made notable progress. In the past two years, Nigeria expanded its corporate beneficial ownership register coverage from under 15% of companies to nearly 70% through reforms in the Corporate Affairs Commission. Moreover, enforcement has begun over 19,000 companies were sanctioned for non-disclosure of ownership, and more than 170,000 defunct or non-compliant entities have been struck off the register.
“These are important strides toward shining light on corporate vehicles that could be used to hide ill-gotten wealth. However, meeting evolving international expectations requires going further – to ensure that beneficial ownership data is comprehensive, accurate, and kept up to date.
“The information in the registers must be independently verified and readily accessible to relevant authorities and, where appropriate, to the public. The remaining loopholes must be closed – no legal person or arrangement should be able to evade transparency.
Accelerating these reforms is essential to deter the misuse of corporate vehicles and to reinforce Nigeria’s credibility in combating financial crime. A transparent economy, where the true owners of assets and businesses are known, will not only satisfy FATF requirements but also bolster investor confidence and public trust in the integrity of markets.”
While stressing the need for Beneficial Ownership Enforcement, Mr. Harris acknowledged that Nigerian authorities have taken bold steps to enforce transparency in corporate ownership, by complementing the legal reforms.
He further observed that CAC has implemented regulations for mandatory disclosure of beneficial owners of companies, pursuant to the amended Companies and Allied Matters Act and FATF Recommendation 24. In a nationwide compliance drive, the CAC sanctioned over 19,000 companies that failed to submit their beneficial ownership information, demonstrating that non-compliance has real consequences.
“Furthermore, in a bid to clean up the corporate registry, more than 170,000 shell or dormant companies were struck off for failing to comply with registration and disclosure requirements. These actions send a strong signal that Nigeria will not tolerate the abuse of legal entities for hiding illicit funds. The Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU) and other stakeholders can now leverage a much richer repository of ownership data to trace assets and networks behind illicit transactions.”
Forging ahead, he underlined the need to empower Oversight Institutions such as the National Assembly’s Public Accounts Committees, Office of the Auditor General of the Federation (oAuGF), and various anti-corruption agencies.
“We must also recognise Nigeria’s efforts to reinvigorate oversight and accountability in the public sector. The National Assembly, through its Public Accounts Committees, has heightened scrutiny of government expenditures and audit reports. There is an encouraging legislative drive to ensure that recommendations from the Office of the Auditor-General are not only debated but acted upon.
“At the sub-national level, State Assemblies and Auditors-General are increasingly engaged in training and peer exchanges (as this conference facilitates) harmonizing oversight practices. Such efforts strengthen the checks and balances that underpin fiscal discipline. Meanwhile, the judiciary has shown greater willingness to adjudicate economic and financial crimes.”
He also called for the “introduction of designated courts/judges for adjudicating corruption and money laundering cases has expedited the trials of financial crimes cases. Just this year,
Nigerian judges and prosecutors participated in capacity-building workshops on handling complex financial crime cases, reflecting a commitment to improve adjudicative effectiveness. These institutional improvements are vital for sustaining the fight against corruption and financial crime.
Despite this notable progress, significant challenges remain – particularly in translating reforms on paper into consistent operational effectiveness. Nigeria’s end goal must be to ensure that these laws and frameworks yield the intended outcomes in reducing financial.
crime and improving governance. Allow me to highlight some persistent challenges: Effective Implementation & FATF “Grey List” Status: Nigeria is currently listed by FATF among Jurisdictions under Increased Monitoring (the so-called “grey list”) due to strategic deficiencies in AML/CFT implementation.
“Overlapping mandates and siloed operations have at times led to duplication, bureaucratic delays, or even turf rivalries that weaken enforcement.
While coordination platforms exist (such as the Inter-Agency Task Team on AntiCorruption), they need to be more action-oriented. Timely sharing of financial intelligence and case information between agencies remains inconsistent. For instance, the NFIU’s intelligence reports do not always seamlessly translate into law enforcement investigations, or there may be delays in prosecutorial review of case files. Breaking down these silos is critical.
“All agencies must work as one government, unified by a common strategy. Clear delineation of roles, regular interagency case conferences, and joint task forces for high-priority cases (as was effectively done for some high-profile asset recovery cases) can improve constructive collaboration.
“The establishment of the Presidential Committee on Financial Crimes Coordination last year is a step in the right direction, but it must be empowered to resolve bottlenecks decisively. Similarly, coordination between the federal and state levels on financial crime enforcement should be strengthened since corruption and misappropriation often straddle jurisdictions.”
Consistency and Proportionality of Sanctions: Another challenge lies in ensuring that enforcement actions – whether regulatory penalties or criminal prosecutions – are applied consistently and carry sufficient weight to deter wrongdoing. There have been instances where individuals or institutions caught in violation of AML/CFT laws received either no sanction or only a mild reprimand, sending the wrong signal. To build a credible compliance culture, Nigeria must ensure that sanctions for non-compliance are effective, proportionate, and dissuasive, in line with FATF Recommendation 35.
“This means, for example, that a bank failing in its due diligence duties should face commensurate fines and restrictions; a company that facilitates money laundering should risk license revocation or strong financial penalties; and individuals complicit in laundering should face prosecution and, upon conviction, meaningful sentences.
“A perception that enforcement is uneven – that small offenders get punished but the powerful escape consequences – can greatly undermine public trust. Thus, Nigeria’s enforcement agencies and the judiciary have the responsibility to apply justice without fear or favour. Recent efforts by the judiciary, as noted earlier, to establish special courts and expedite economic crime cases, are encouraging as they can increase the certainty and swiftness of sanctions.”
ALSO READ TOP STORIES FROM NIGERIAN TRIBUNE