“I Was Warned Not to Contest Tinubu, Then EFCC Reached Out” – Makinde Reveals

Oyo State Governor, Seyi Makinde, has alleged that a chieftain of the All Progressives Congress (APC) warned him against contesting the 2027 presidential election against President Bola Tinubu shortly before the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) requested extensive financial records from his administration.

Naija News reports that Makinde disclosed this in his July 2026 monthly newsletter, while reacting to Wednesday’s judgment of the Federal High Court sitting in Ibadan, which restrained the EFCC from proceeding with aspects of its planned investigation into the finances of the Oyo State Government.

According to the governor, the warning came on June 1, 2025, after Tinubu had been endorsed by the APC as its sole presidential candidate for the 2027 election.

Makinde said the EFCC, a day later, requested details of contracts and payments made by the state government from 2021, without identifying any specific contractor, transaction, company or alleged offence.

He said, “An APC chieftain warned me on June 1, 2025, against contesting the 2027 presidential election after President Bola Tinubu was endorsed as the APC’s sole candidate.

“A day after the warning, the EFCC requested copies of all Oyo State Government contracts and payments to contractors from 2021, without identifying any contractor, company, transaction or alleged offence.”
Court Faults Broad EFCC Request

The Federal High Court had delivered judgment in suit number FHC/IB/CS/61/2025, filed by the Oyo State Government.

According to a statement by Makinde’s Special Adviser on Media, Sulaimon Olarenwaju, the court acknowledged the EFCC’s statutory powers to investigate financial crimes but held that such powers must be exercised in accordance with the Constitution and the rule of law.

The statement said the court found that “The EFCC’s proposed investigation into Oyo State’s finances, particularly the demands contained in its letter of 2 June 2025, was speculative and amounted to a fishing expedition.

“His Lordship noted that the constitutional rights of the plaintiffs to fair hearing could not be trampled upon under the guise of investigation.”

Makinde said his administration did not attempt to stop the anti-graft agency from carrying out a legitimate investigation.

Rather, he said the state government asked the commission to identify the contractors, transactions or allegations being investigated so that the relevant documents could be supplied.

“The EFCC did not respond, prompting the Oyo State Government to seek judicial interpretation of whether such a broad request was lawful,” he added.

According to the governor, the court affirmed the EFCC’s constitutional authority to investigate financial crimes but maintained that the exercise of such power must remain within legal and constitutional limits.

Makinde said the court described the commission’s demand as “speculative” and a “fishing expedition,” maintaining that requests for information should be linked to identifiable allegations.

He said he would not speculate about the timing of the commission’s letter, adding that members of the public could draw their own conclusions.

Makinde stressed that his administration was not opposed to accountability or legitimate scrutiny.

He maintained that no government should be shielded from investigation but argued that such probes must be based on identifiable facts.

“Accountability must be evidence-based,” he said, warning against broad investigations conducted merely in the hope of discovering wrongdoing.

Makinde described the court’s judgment as “a victory for the rule of law, not against the EFCC.”

According to him, the ruling reinforced the principle that government institutions, including law enforcement agencies, must operate within established constitutional and legal boundaries.