Burden of Words: EFCC Chair and Stigmatisations of Youths, Religious Leaders
By Haroon Aremu
It is difficult to ignore the shockwaves generated by recent remarks attributed to the Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Ola Olukoyede. His claim that six out of every ten Nigerian students are involved in cybercrime—and his assertion that pastors, bishops, and imams are among those in EFCC detention—have stirred public debate, not merely because of their content, but because of their implications.
At a time when Nigeria’s youth are already battling unemployment, economic uncertainty, and social pressure, such sweeping generalisations risk doing more harm than good. They do not only raise questions about statistical validity; they also cast a shadow over millions of hardworking students striving to build legitimate futures.
Equally concerning is the broad-brush characterisation of religious leaders. While no sector should be immune from scrutiny in the fight against corruption, public statements that appear to stigmatise entire groups—without clear distinctions between allegations, investigations, and convictions—can erode trust and provoke unnecessary backlash.
The issue here is not whether corruption exists among students or religious leaders. It does. The issue is how institutions communicate about it.
As someone who has closely observed Nigeria’s intelligence and security ecosystem, I recognise that the EFCC occupies a uniquely sensitive position. It is not just another enforcement agency; it is the public face of Nigeria’s anti-corruption war. Its words carry weight. Its tone shapes perception. Its credibility underpins public confidence in justice.
When Ola Olukoyede assumed office in October 2023, expectations were high. His background as a lawyer and fraud investigator suggested a leadership that would emphasise professionalism, restraint, and institutional dignity.
Yet, early signals raised concerns. His reported declaration that he would resign if former Kogi State Governor Yahaya Bello was not arrested or prosecuted introduced a tone that many considered overly personal for the head of an investigative body. Whether intended as a demonstration of resolve or confidence, such statements risk compromising the perception of neutrality.
Anti-corruption agencies are expected to speak through evidence, not emotion. Once a leadership voice appears publicly invested in a particular outcome, it opens the door for critics to question the integrity of the process.
This is not a trivial matter.
For years, the EFCC has struggled with a perception challenge. Many Nigerians believe the Commission is swift and visible when dealing with internet fraud suspects—popularly known as “Yahoo boys”—but less consistent when confronting powerful political actors. Whether entirely accurate or not, perception shapes legitimacy.
And legitimacy is everything.
When citizens begin to suspect that justice is selective, every arrest becomes suspect, every prosecution appears political, and every public statement is scrutinised for bias. That is the environment Olukoyede inherited—and it is one that requires careful, disciplined communication to navigate.
This is why the reported claim about Nigerian students is particularly troubling. If such a statistic exists, it demands rigorous evidence, transparent methodology, and verifiable data. Without these, it risks becoming an unsubstantiated narrative that undermines the morale of a generation.
Nigeria’s universities are not breeding grounds of crime. They are spaces of innovation, scholarship, entrepreneurship, and aspiration. To reduce them to hubs of cybercrime without empirical grounding is not only inaccurate—it is damaging.
Similarly, the suggestion that professionals such as lawyers facilitate corruption, if not properly contextualised, can create panic within critical sectors. There is nothing wrong with investigating wrongdoing across professions. But communication must differentiate clearly between suspicion, investigation, prosecution, and conviction. Blurring these lines weakens institutional credibility.
A useful contrast can be drawn with the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) under Musa Adamu Aliyu. While not without its own challenges, the ICPC has generally adopted a more restrained communication style—avoiding sensationalism and focusing on measured, evidence-driven messaging.
This is not about comparison for its own sake. It is about institutional discipline.
There is, in fact, a recurring pattern in the leadership trajectory of the EFCC. Many chairmen begin with public enthusiasm, only to leave office amid controversy, political baggage, or reputational strain. When such a pattern repeats itself, it suggests that the challenge may not lie solely with individuals, but with institutional culture—how power is exercised, how communication is handled, and how public trust is managed.
For Ola Olukoyede, the moment is still redeemable.
He has an opportunity to recalibrate—to move from provocation to precision, from generalisation to evidence-based communication. The EFCC does not need louder statements; it needs clearer ones. It does not need broader accusations; it needs stronger cases.
Public trust is not rebuilt through rhetoric. It is rebuilt through consistency, transparency, and demonstrable fairness.
Years ago, during a visit to the EFCC headquarters—captured in my reflective piece “A Visit to the EFCC Headquarters: A Corper’s Experience”—I encountered a professional institution with dedicated personnel and immense potential. That memory remains relevant, not as nostalgia, but as a reminder of what the agency can represent at its best.
Criticism today is not borne out of hostility. It is driven by expectation.
Nigeria needs a strong EFCC—one that commands respect, inspires confidence, and speaks with authority grounded in evidence. The fight against corruption is too important to be undermined by avoidable communication missteps.
The path before Olukoyede is narrow but significant. He can either reinforce existing doubts or redefine the narrative.
In the end, the success of the EFCC will not be measured by the volume of its statements, but by the integrity of its actions—and the credibility of its voice.
Haroon Aremu is a strategic Communicator and writes from Kano