EFCC E-Auction: Auctioneers Query Commission’s Dual Role In Disposal Of Forfeited Vehicles

The Nigeria Association of Auctioneers (NAA) has questioned the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission’s (EFCC) decision to conduct an electronic auction of forfeited vehicles, arguing that the anti-graft agency should not serve as both custodian and seller of seized assets.

The EFCC recently announced an electronic auction of abandoned vehicles forfeited to the federal government, inviting interested members of the public to inspect the vehicles and submit bids through its designated online platform.

The Commission said the exercise is being conducted in line with the provisions of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act, 2004, the Public Procurement Act, 2007, and the Proceeds of Crime (Recovery and Management) Act, 2022.

However, speaking at a press conference at the Association’s national secretariat over the weekend, the National President of the NAA, Auct. Engr. Benjamin Abhulimen Isibor, expressed concern over what he described as the Commission’s assumption of the role traditionally performed by licensed auctioneers.

According to him, the Association was engaged by the EFCC in previous disposal exercises and recorded successful outcomes, with several winning bids exceeding the reserve prices.

“We were appointed by the Commission in previous exercises, and we delivered commendable results. In many instances, the winning bids significantly exceeded the reserve prices. However, that auction process for some of the auctioneers remains inconclusive because many of the vehicles were never released to the successful bidders,” he said.

Isibor questioned why another disposal exercise was being initiated without concluding the previous one.

“We are surprised that, without concluding the process already initiated through licensed auctioneers, the Commission has embarked on another auction exercise,” he stated.

He further argued that the current arrangement raises questions over the separation of responsibilities in the custody, management and disposal of forfeited assets.

“What auctioneers observed from the EFCC advertisement and the information published on its website is that the Commission appears to be assuming the functions of professional auctioneers by directly conducting the sale of assets under its custody,” he said.

The NAA president maintained that while the Association supports the lawful disposal of forfeited assets, the process should comply with established legal and professional standards to ensure transparency, accountability and competitiveness.

“We are not opposed to the disposal of forfeited assets. Our position is simply that the process must be transparent, competitive and conducted in strict compliance with the relevant laws,” he added.

Isibor also disclosed that the Association had received reports alleging that some vehicles were previously allocated outside an open and competitive bidding process, warning that such claims, if established, could erode public confidence in government asset disposal.

He stressed that the Association’s intervention should not be interpreted as an attack on the EFCC but as a professional call for strict compliance with due process and internationally accepted best practices.

He urged the Commission to provide greater clarity on the legal framework guiding the electronic auction and ensure that all prospective bidders have equal access to a transparent, verifiable and competitive process.

Meanwhile, the EFCC has maintained that the e-auction is being conducted in accordance with the EFCC (Establishment) Act, the Public Procurement Act and the Proceeds of Crime (Recovery and Management) Act. The Commission said interested bidders could inspect the vehicles and participate in the exercise through its online auction platform.

The development has sparked debate within the auctioneering industry over the interpretation of the relevant laws and the respective roles of government agencies and licensed auctioneers in the management and disposal of forfeited assets.

Isibor said, “Public assets must be disposed of through a process that is transparent, competitive and above suspicion. The federal government deserves to obtain maximum value from every asset sold, while Nigerians deserve complete confidence in the integrity and fairness of the disposal process.”