Ngige, EFCC and The Days Ahead
By Adabo Omoja
The dramatic arrest and arraignment of former Minister of Labour, Employment and Productivity, Dr. Chris Nwabueze Ngige (OON) by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has continued to generate nationwide debate. Ngige was last week remanded in Kuje Correctional Centre by an FCT High Court, pending the hearing of his bail application.
According to the charge sheet, the EFCC accuses the former minister of abuse of office during his tenure as supervising Minister of the Nigeria Social Insurance Trust Fund (NSITF). The first count alleges that Ngige used his office to confer undue advantage on Cezimo Nigeria Limited, a company allegedly linked to his associate, by approving seven consultancy, training and supply contracts worth ₦366,470,920.68 for the NSITF.
The EFCC argues that this constitutes an offence under Section 19 of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000.
In the second count, Ngige is accused of awarding eight contracts worth ₦583,682,686 to Zitacom Nigeria Limited, also said to be linked to an associate. Further counts accuse him of facilitating eight contracts valued at ₦362,043,163.16 for Jeff & Xris Limited, and influencing four contracts worth ₦668,138,141 for Olde English Consolidated Limited, allegedly owned by another associate.
The fifth count similarly alleges that he approved four contracts worth ₦161,604,625 for Shale Atlantic Intercontinental Services Limited.
Counts six to eight accuse the former minister of receiving improper monetary gifts between May and June 2022. The EFCC claims that Ngige received ₦38.65 million from Cezimo Nigeria Limited through his campaign organisation, ₦55 million from Zitacom through his scholarship scheme, and ₦26.13 million from Jeff & Xris Limited. These alleged benefits, according to the anti-graft agency, violate Sections 17(a) and 19 of the Corrupt Practices Act.
While the EFCC’s allegations are weighty, they raise important legal questions when viewed within the framework of Nigeria’s Constitution and public service laws. Although the Constitution does not explicitly forbid public officers from awarding contracts to friends or associates, it provides the ethical foundation for avoiding conflicts of interest.
The Code of Conduct for Public Officers, contained in the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution, requires officials to avoid situations where personal interests conflict with official duties. Other key provisions are found in the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act (CCBTA):
Section 5 prohibits conflicts of interest; Section 10 forbids public officers from accepting benefits from government contractors;
Section 13 criminalises abuse of office for personal or associate advantage.
Importantly, the law also provides that using nominees, agents, or proxies to circumvent these ethical rules still constitutes a direct breach.
When these legal standards are compared with the charges, two critical questions emerge: Can the EFCC prove that the companies in question are in fact Ngige’s associates or proxies?
Can it establish that he personally influenced or approved contract awards in violation of procurement procedures?
It is noteworthy that the EFCC did not allege that the contracts were unexecuted or fraudulent in their implementation. The crux of the allegation is unfair advantage arising from relationships.
More importantly, ministers are not members of ministerial or parastatal tender boards, which are the bodies legally empowered to evaluate bids and award contracts. Tender boards are composed of civil servants and agency officials, not political appointees. Thus, if procurement rules were breached, the chair and members of these boards remain fully subject to investigation and prosecution.
Given this background, many observers have questioned why Ngige was singled out for arrest and remand, while members of the NSITF tender board—who played a direct statutory role in contract approval—have not been implicated. The development has fueled speculation that the arrest may be politically motivated, intended to pressure Ngige into political submission or alignment with the current administration.
While such claims remain unproven, the timing, high-profile nature, and dramatic handling of the arrest have opened the floor to broader political interpretations.
As the case proceeds, the EFCC carries the burden of proving not only that Ngige influenced contract awards, but that such influence amounted to abuse of office under Nigerian law. The former minister, on his part, will rely heavily on procurement structures, documentation, and the statutory insulation of ministers from tender board decisions.
Ultimately, the court will determine the facts. But what is clear for now is that the case has raised as many political and legal questions as the EFCC seeks to answer—and the coming weeks may prove decisive both for Ngige and the broader conversation about selective anti-corruption enforcement in Nigeria.
. Omoja, a lawyer writes from Jabi, Abuja
EDITOR
Sam Udekwe is a journalist working in the News and Current Affairs department, Enugu State Broadcasting Service (ESBS) Enugu. He is well trained in all genres of journalistic venture.
Mr Sam read Mass Communication, graduating all with Distinction in National Diploma, Higher National Diploma and Postgraduate Diploma at IMT, Enugu and Madonna University, Okija, Anambra state, as well as M.Sc Mass Communication with Second Class(Upper Division) at National Open University of Nigeria.
He is the immediate past NUJ Chairman, Enugu state.
samowailo@gmail.com
