By Erewunmi Peace

The Bauchi State Government has been drawn into controversy following the arraignment of the state’s Commissioner for Finance, Yakubu Adamu, and three others by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) over alleged terrorism financing and financial misconduct.

The defendants were arraigned before a Federal High Court in Abuja on charges bordering on conspiracy, unlawful cash transactions, conversion of public funds, and alleged terrorism financing, involving an estimated $9.7 million.

According to court documents, the EFCC accused the defendants of engaging in financial transactions that allegedly violated Nigeria’s anti-money laundering and terrorism financing laws. The case has since generated widespread political and public reactions.

Governor Reacts as Name Mentioned

Although Governor Bala Mohammed is not listed as a defendant in the case, his name was reportedly mentioned in a court motion connected to the alleged transactions. This development sparked intense political debate, with opposition figures claiming the case is politically motivated.

Reacting to the situation, Governor Mohammed denied any involvement and described the allegations as an attempt to intimidate opposition leaders.

“I am just waking up to an accusation that I am being linked to terrorism as a governor and as the head of the opposition,” the governor said.

He further accused the Federal Government of using anti-corruption agencies to harass political opponents, a claim that has added to the political tension surrounding the case.

EFCC Denies Political Motive

The EFCC, on its part, has rejected allegations of political interference, insisting that its actions are strictly based on investigations and evidence, and not influenced by political considerations.

As of the time of filing this report, the case remains before the court, and no conviction has been recorded. Legal proceedings are expected to continue in the coming weeks.

The development has continued to dominate national discourse, with calls from various quarters for transparency, due process, and restraint in public commentary while the matter is in court.