Actions Taken
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has ordered the withdrawal of cybercrime charges filed against two Nigerians, Maryam Isah Shehu and Abubakar Shuraim Abdulhamad, following their arraignment before a Federal High Court in Abuja.
The EFCC Executive Chairman, Ola Olukoyede, directed that the charges be withdrawn after considering the pleas and apologies made by Shehu’s father as well as appeals from Nigerians for leniency.
The two defendants were arraigned separately on Thursday, August 20, 2026, before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik over allegations bordering on cybercrime and publications the commission said were intended to tarnish its reputation.
The commission, in a statement, said it had considered the alleged offences to be contrary to Section 24(2)(c) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) Act, 2015, as amended in 2024, and punishable under Section 24(2)(c)(ii) of the same law.
However, Olukoyede subsequently ordered that the charges against the two defendants be dropped.
According to the commission, the EFCC chairman “compassionately ordered the withdrawal of charges preferred against Maryam Isah Shehu and Abubakar Shuraim Abdulhamad.”
The commission said the decision followed “the passionate pleas and apologies of Shehu’s father and appeals of well-meaning Nigerians for leniency.”
“To this end, he has directed that charges filed against the two young Nigerians be dropped,” the EFCC said.
The commission, however, warned that it would not tolerate what it described as deliberate attacks on its reputation.
Olukoyede warned that “the EFCC would no longer tolerate any wilful attack on its image in any form, medium or platform.”
The EFCC chairman also assured Nigerians that the commission would continue to operate within its statutory mandate and in the national interest.
“The EFCC’s boss assured Nigerians that the Commission would continue to function in line with its assigned mandate and in the best interests of the nation,” the statement said.
The development came barely a day after the two defendants were arraigned and remanded in separate correctional facilities.
Shehu had faced an amended one-count charge alleging that she used her Instagram account, @maryamshehu, to publish allegations that EFCC officials assaulted one Ahmed Uthman on the instruction of a Zonal Director who allegedly collected N20 million from one Usman Iya Abbas.
Abdulhamad was accused of allegedly fabricating an image designed to resemble an official EFCC arrest placard and publishing it on his X account, @shuraimi.
Both defendants pleaded not guilty to the charges.
Justice Abdulmalik subsequently ordered that Shehu be remanded at the Suleja Correctional Centre in Niger State, while Abdulhamad was remanded at the Kuje Correctional Centre in the Federal Capital Territory.
The court had adjourned the matter until August 31 for hearing of their bail applications and commencement of trial.
Group Had Questioned EFCC's Powers
The EFCC's decision to withdraw the charges came after civic technology organisation MonITNG questioned the legal basis for the commission's prosecution of the two defendants over alleged false information, fabrication and damage to the agency's reputation.
MonITNG had argued that Nigerians deserved clarity on whether protecting the EFCC's reputation through criminal prosecution fell within the commission's statutory mandate.
“We are aware of the EFCC’s arraignment of Maryam Isah Shehu and Abubakar Shuraim Abdulhamad over allegations of cybercrime, false information, fabrication and alleged damage to the Commission’s reputation,” the organisation said.
“But Nigerians deserve to ask a fundamental question: is defending the EFCC’s reputation through criminal prosecution part of the Commission’s statutory mandate?”
The group said the EFCC was established primarily to investigate and prosecute economic and financial crimes.
It acknowledged that false information or fabricated documents could constitute offences under applicable laws but raised concerns where the central issue was allegedly damage to the reputation of a government institution.
“However, where the central complaint is defamation or damage to reputation, Nigerians need clarity on the appropriate legal and institutional avenue,” MonITNG said.
“Defamation is traditionally addressed through the courts, and public institutions should not be able to use criminal proceedings simply because they feel criticised or embarrassed.”
MonITNG also warned that the prosecution could have a chilling effect on journalists, activists and citizens who scrutinise government agencies.
“The bigger concern is the potential chilling effect on citizens, journalists, activists and social media users who raise questions about the conduct of government agencies,” it said.
The organisation had challenged the EFCC to explain how prosecuting the alleged attacks on its reputation fell within its statutory mandate.
“EFCC, Nigerians are asking for clarity: what specific criminal offence is being prosecuted in these cases, and how does prosecuting alleged attacks on the Commission’s reputation fall within your mandate?” MonITNG questioned.
With the EFCC now withdrawing the charges, the prosecution of the two defendants will no longer proceed on the basis of the charges filed before Justice Abdulmalik, subject to the formal steps required to give effect to the withdrawal.
