The Nigeria Association of Auctioneers alleges that the anti-graft agency’s proposed platform could compromise transparency and due process in forfeited asset disposal

The Nigeria Association of Auctioneers has challenged the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission over its proposed auction of seized vehicles, warning that allowing the anti-graft agency to manage the sale of forfeited assets through its own platform could undermine transparency and due process.

Also read: EFCC Prosecutes 10 Major Companies in 2026 Financial Crime Cases

The association’s criticism centres on the EFCC’s proposed role in managing the disposal process after investigating financial crimes, seizing suspected proceeds of crime and retaining custody of the recovered assets.

Speaking in an interview on Tuesday, the President of the Nigeria Association of Auctioneers, Benjamin Isibor, argued that the arrangement created a potential conflict of roles and could weaken public confidence in the management of recovered assets.

Isibor said the association had raised similar concerns during the tenure of former EFCC Chairman Ibrahim Magu, when the commission was reportedly considering the involvement of foreign operators in the sale of recovered assets.

“The EFCC is now trying to act as a custodian and seller of assets, which is totally unlawful,” Isibor said.

He added, “The EFCC are the ones who prosecute, seize these assets, and now want to play as custodian of the assets. They have seized these items as proceeds of crime, and at the same time, you still want to be the one to set up these platforms that would sell off these assets.”

The association maintained that independent, certified auctioneers were better positioned to provide the separation and accountability required in the disposal of forfeited property.

“We are completely against this process, and it should not be done when there are reputable and certified auctioneers who are on the front line to do this job for you,” Isibor said.

“This is exactly our position. We would stand in the gap for our government and the general public to ensure that the process is seamless and transparent.”

The controversy comes as the EFCC prepares for a proposed auction involving seized vehicles, although the exact number of vehicles to be offered has not been publicly established.

The association said the vehicles may include a fleet linked to businesswoman Aisha Achimugu, which the EFCC recently took possession of as part of an ongoing investigation. The commission has not publicly disclosed the total value of the vehicles or confirmed whether all or some of them will form part of the planned auction.

Isibor also questioned the rationale behind the EFCC’s reported decision to develop and manage its own auction platform, noting that licensed auctioneers had previously invested significant resources in digital systems after being engaged for similar exercises.

“We don’t know the number of cars they want to auction, but we have done this process with them in the past where they engage the services of auctioneers,” he said.

“Actually, they have had a contractual agreement with some auctioneers in the past to build portals, and the auctioneers have spent lots of money to build portals and the system that would work.”

He argued that the reported shift in approach had left industry stakeholders questioning the fate of previous contractual arrangements and the resources invested by auctioneers.

The association’s president further contended that the proposed arrangement was inconsistent with existing legal and procurement principles governing the disposal of recovered assets.

“It is against the principles of even natural justice. It is against the law, the Due Process Act, and even the POCA law that was claimed by the EFCC,” Isibor said.

“The POCA law doesn’t say the commission should sell by themselves. The Due Process Act and other laws do not say the commission should sell by themselves. So why would they want to sell by themselves? That is our challenge and question.”

The association also questioned why previous contractual relationships with auctioneers appeared to have been discontinued without clear explanations.

Isibor said certified auctioneers had committed financial and logistical resources to support earlier asset disposal exercises, including developing online platforms and travelling across the country to facilitate auctions.

“We saw the advert for the auction, and we are concerned as stakeholders that due process must be followed irrespective of whose ox is gored,” he said.

“And the agency that should protect the law shouldn’t be the one to go against it. That’s our stand.”

A former National President of the Nigeria Association of Auctioneers, Alhaji Musa Kurra, also acknowledged concerns within the industry over the proposed exercise.

“Yes, I have heard issues and complaints about the latest auction announced by the EFCC,” Kurra said, while noting that concerns had emerged over attempts to circumvent established processes.

The EFCC has historically disposed of forfeited assets, including houses, vessels and vehicles, through public auctions conducted by appointed auctioneers after securing final forfeiture orders from the courts.

The process is intended to ensure that recovered assets do not lose value or deteriorate while legal proceedings continue, with proceeds from their eventual disposal remitted to the Federal Government in accordance with applicable procedures.

The latest dispute, however, has brought renewed attention to the question of who should control the sale of recovered assets.

At the centre of the disagreement is whether the EFCC should directly manage the auction process through a platform under its control or continue to engage independent, licensed auctioneers to handle the sales in accordance with established procurement and asset disposal procedures.

For the auctioneers’ association, the separation of investigative, custodial and disposal responsibilities is essential to maintaining public confidence in the asset recovery system.

The controversy also comes at a time when the EFCC’s management of forfeited property is receiving increased public scrutiny, particularly over the need to demonstrate that recovered assets are disposed of through open, competitive and verifiable processes.

As of the time of filing, the EFCC had not publicly responded to the concerns raised by the Nigeria Association of Auctioneers.

The commission’s spokesperson, Dele Oyewale, reportedly did not respond to calls, text messages or WhatsApp messages seeking clarification as of 7:26 p.m.

Until the EFCC provides its position, questions will remain over the legal basis and operational framework for the proposed EFCC vehicle auction, as well as whether the process will involve independent auctioneers or be managed directly by the commission.

The emerging dispute ultimately underscores the importance of transparency in the disposal of assets recovered from suspected financial crimes.

Also read: EFCC Arraigns Ex-Refinery Boss Over N1.32bn Fraud

With potentially valuable property involved, stakeholders are calling for a process that is not only lawful but also sufficiently open to withstand public scrutiny.