The US-based Nigerian is seeking answers over the reported pause in an EFCC petition involving alleged identity theft and fraud

United States-based Nigerian Oluwasegun Elusoji has urged the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission to clarify the status of an investigation arising from his petition on alleged identity theft, fraud and related offences, while calling for executive intervention and legislative oversight.

Also read: EFCC Arraigns Man Over Alleged N7.8m Car Fraud

Elusoji made the appeal in an open letter addressed to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, EFCC Chairman Olanipekun Olukoyede, the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, as well as relevant National Assembly committees.

The matter centres on EFCC Petition No. EFCC/PET/HQR/1656/2025, which documents made available to the media show was submitted through W.K. Shittu & Co. and acknowledged at the EFCC headquarters in Abuja on April 28, 2025.

The petition was titled “Urgent request for investigation and legal action regarding identity theft and fraud”.

Elusoji said a formal reminder was submitted to the EFCC on June 17, 2025, and was also acknowledged. According to him, investigative activities initially continued for several weeks before allegedly stopping, without a subsequent explanation about the status of the matter.

The names contained in the petition include Adeseye Joseph Famojuro, Ayodele Sunday Adekanmbi, Funmilayo Tosin Oyawale, Bimbo Arike Dairo, Omotoke Adetola Ogunniyi, Oluwaseun Olufade, Oriyomi Olounwa Ladigbolu, Ayo Alatise, Ayobami Adebayo and Olugbenga Joseph Damola Adebayo, also known as Frayo.

The allegations contained in the petition have not been established by a court, and those named should be presumed innocent unless proven otherwise.

Elusoji’s latest intervention comes against the backdrop of a wider legal dispute involving him and Famojuro.

Publicly available court records show that Famojuro filed a civil case against Elusoji and another defendant in Montgomery County, Texas, in 2024, including proceedings concerning a Mercedes-Benz vehicle and real property. (trellis.law)

Separately, Nigerian authorities have pursued allegations against Elusoji.

In March 2026, The Nation reported that the Federal High Court in Lagos issued a warrant for his arrest in connection with an alleged N1.207 billion fraud case brought by the Police Special Fraud Unit.

The allegations relate to claims that money was obtained under false pretences for the purchase of a vehicle and real estate. (The Nation)

In August, the same newspaper reported that another Federal High Court judge dismissed Elusoji’s bid to nullify the police decision declaring him wanted, holding that the court lacked jurisdiction to set aside an order previously validated by a court of coordinate jurisdiction. (The Nation)

Elusoji has denied the allegations against him. His lawyers previously said he was defending himself through courts in Nigeria and the United States and was not evading justice. (PM News Nigeria)

Against that background, Elusoji is now asking the authorities to explain how his EFCC petition has been handled and whether the investigation remains active.

He questioned whether political relationships or influence could affect the progress of investigations, although he stressed that his concern should be addressed through evidence, transparency and established institutional procedures rather than assumptions.

In his letter, Elusoji referred to media reports describing Famojuro as an associate of Oyo State Governor Seyi Makinde. He also acknowledged that reports alleging familial connections between some of the individuals have not been independently established through official government records.

The petitioner maintained that the identity or political standing of anyone named in a complaint should not determine whether law-enforcement authorities examine the allegations.

The Elusoji EFCC probe therefore raises questions not only about the allegations contained in the petition but also about the procedures governing the handling and communication of complaints submitted to anti-corruption agencies.

He called on President Tinubu to ensure that federal anti-corruption institutions operate independently and without political interference.

Elusoji also asked the Attorney-General to review the administrative handling of the petition and ensure that relevant legal and institutional obligations are followed.

For the EFCC chairman, he sought a written update on Petition No. EFCC/PET/HQR/1656/2025, an explanation for the alleged halt in investigative activity and, where appropriate, the resumption of the investigation.

He further urged the National Assembly committees responsible for anti-corruption matters to exercise their oversight powers, particularly where petitions involve individuals who may be perceived as politically connected.

The appeal comes at a sensitive time for the EFCC, which continues to face public scrutiny over how it exercises its investigative and prosecutorial powers.

For Elusoji, the central issue is whether a formally acknowledged petition should receive a transparent response regardless of the identities or connections of the people named in it.

“Nigerians deserve transparency,” he said, arguing that the credibility of anti-corruption institutions depends on their ability to demonstrate that complaints are handled fairly and in accordance with due process.

The EFCC has not, in the material reviewed for this report, publicly confirmed that the investigation arising from Petition No. EFCC/PET/HQR/1656/2025 has been formally suspended, nor has it publicly set out its current status.

Until the agency responds, the allegation that investigative activity was halted remains Elusoji’s account rather than an established finding by the commission.

The immediate question, therefore, is not whether the allegations in the petition are proven, but whether the relevant authorities will provide a clear account of what happened to a complaint formally submitted to Nigeria’s leading anti-corruption agency.

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

A transparent response could help establish whether the matter remains under investigation, has been closed, or requires further action, while allowing any allegations against the named individuals to be tested through due process rather than public speculation.