By The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission has told the Federal High Court in Lagos that FAMFA Oil Limited, the oil company controlled by billionaire Folorunso Alakija, went to court to stop an investigation into alleged fraud, economic sabotage, tax evasion and money laundering after the company declined two invitations to answer questions and produce its records, court documents obtained by SecretsReporters have shown.
In Suit No. FHC/L/CS/482/26, FAMFA Oil Limited is the applicant and the EFCC is the respondent, in a fundamental rights proceeding before the Lagos Judicial Division of the Federal High Court. Opposing the application, the Commission filed a counter-affidavit sworn on June 16, 2026 by one of its investigators, Abubakar Magaji, who deposed that the company was reasonably suspected of involvement in undeclared and under-declared foreign transfer payments, crude oil exports and tanker shipments allegedly supported with altered and fraudulent documents. Magaji further deposed that $1,268,969.33 linked to FAMFA was converted to personal use.
Undeclared foreign transfers, where they are proved, offend the Foreign Exchange (Monitoring and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, which governs foreign exchange transactions and the documentation through which such payments move, while the conversion of proceeds of unlawful activity is an offence under the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022. The allegations remain allegations in an ongoing investigation. Nothing in the court papers records a conviction against FAMFA Oil Limited or against Alakija, who is the executive vice chairman of the family controlled company. FAMFA holds a 60 per cent participating interest in Oil Mining Lease 127, home to the Agbami deepwater field, the asset on which Alakija’s fortune largely stands.
A $42 Billion Revenue Petition Named The Company
According to the counter-affidavit, the investigation began with a petition dated October 17, 2025 from the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission, signed by its chairman, M. B. Shehu. The petition alleged a federation-wide loss of $42 billion from shortfalls in revenue expected to accrue to the Federation Account through under-declaration and under-payment, and it asked the EFCC to investigate the companies identified in the revenue review and ensure the recovery of established liabilities to the government treasury.
That $42 billion was the petition’s figure for the federation as a whole, spread across the entities named in the review. The counter-affidavit separated FAMFA from the total and tied the company only to the sum deposed against it. The petition was approved and assigned to a five-person team in the Foreign Exchange Malpractice Section of the Commission’s Lagos Zonal Directorate 2. Magaji deposed that the petition and its accompanying documents disclosed possible fraudulent foreign-transfer payments, money laundering, non-declaration and under-declaration of transfers, tax evasion and the uttering of documents. The petitioner’s representative adopted the complaint, and while several suspects were invited and most honoured their invitations, the Commission says FAMFA did not.
Two Invitations, No Appearance
The counter-affidavit states that the EFCC first wrote to FAMFA on February 23, 2026, in a letter delivered to the company’s registered address, asking its officers to attend on March 5, 2026. Neither the Managing Director, nor another officer, nor any representative of the company honoured the appointment.
The Commission says it then issued a second and more detailed invitation on March 25, 2026, spelling out the allegations, the documents required and a fresh date for interview. FAMFA’s answer to that second letter was the court action.
Ten Years Of Records Demanded
The March 25 invitation, reference CR:3000/EFCC/LS-2/FEMS/01-26/VOL.1/001, was addressed to the Managing Director of FAMFA Oil Limited at 1 Olawale Dawodu Road, Ikoyi, Lagos, and signed by ACE I Bawa Usman Kalungu, the Acting Director of Lagos Zonal Directorate 2. It stated that the Commission was investigating an alleged case of conspiracy to commit fraud, economic sabotage, tax evasion and money laundering reported by the Presidency through the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission, involving the concealment of undocumented and undeclared foreign transfer payments.
The letter directed FAMFA to release its Director of Finance for an interview with the Head of the Foreign Exchange Malpractice Section at 10:00 a.m. on Thursday, June 4, 2026, in Block C, Room 11, No. 7A Okotie-Eboh Street, Ikoyi, Lagos. The finance director was to bring certified true copies of a schedule itemising every foreign transfer payment and transaction the company made through authorised banks between 2010 and 2019, soft copies of its naira and domiciliary account statements for each bank, and every Form A transaction for the same ten years. The letter also demanded the schedules and receipts for all Value Added Tax and Withholding Tax remitted on foreign-related transactions between 2010 and 2019, records whose concealment or non-remittance, where proved, attracts liability under the Companies Income Tax Act, the Value Added Tax Act and the Federal Inland Revenue Service (Establishment) Act.
The invitation was issued under section 38(1) and (2) of the EFCC (Establishment) Act 2004. It was marked classified, with a warning that unauthorised disclosure could attract prosecution under the Official Secrets Act 1962, and it bore the receipt stamp of MFA Solicitors & Co.
The Company Answered With A Lawsuit
By a letter dated April 9, 2026, MFA Solicitors & Co, in a letter signed by Osenl Enemose, described the second invitation as illegal, unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect, according to the counter-affidavit. FAMFA then filed the fundamental rights action now before the court, asking the court to restrain the investigation. The EFCC deposed that it made no arrest attempt against any officer of the company and that its officers remained civil and direct throughout, asking only for clarification and records so investigators could decide whether any crime had occurred.
EFCC Calls The Suit A Shield
Answering FAMFA’s supporting affidavit, Magaji deposed that the company’s account was “grossly untrue” and calculated to deceive the court into restraining the Commission, and that the action was filed to shield the company from the Commission’s statutory functions. The Commission described the application as an abuse of process brought in bad faith, and asked the court to strike it out and order FAMFA to make itself available for investigation.
The Commission rested its position on sections 6 and 7 of the EFCC (Establishment) Act 2004, which empower it to investigate economic and financial crimes, and on section 38, which empowers it to demand information from persons and institutions in the course of an inquiry. It argued that no infringement of the company’s fundamental rights had been demonstrated and that FAMFA would suffer no prejudice by answering questions and producing the records demanded of it.
