My attention has been drawn to a statement attributed to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), warning legal practitioners against charging their clients professional fees in foreign currencies and threatening prosecution for doing so. The statement was reportedly made following a meeting between officials of the EFCC Lagos Zonal Directorate 2 and the NBA Lagos Task Force on Illegal Practice of Law.
As Chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association, Anaocha Branch, I consider it necessary to state that the EFCC must distinguish its legitimate statutory mandate of investigating and prosecuting economic and financial crimes from the regulation of the professional remuneration of legal practitioners.
The EFCC is an important law enforcement institution and deserves the cooperation of the Bar in the fight against corruption, money laundering, and economic crimes. Indeed, the EFCC itself recognises the importance of collaboration with the Nigerian Bar Association in relation to anti-money laundering compliance. However, such cooperation cannot enlarge the statutory powers of the Commission beyond those conferred upon it by law.
1. Regulation of lawyers' fees is expressly governed by the Legal Practitioners Act
Section 15 of the Legal Practitioners Act, Cap. L11, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, establishes the Legal Practitioners Remuneration Committee and expressly confers upon that Committee the power to make orders regulating the charges of legal practitioners.
Most importantly, Section 15(3) empowers that Committee to regulate lawyers' charges, including agreements between legal practitioners and their clients concerning professional fees.
That statutory power has been exercised through the Legal Practitioners Remuneration (For Business, Legal Service and Representation) Order 2023, made pursuant to Section 15(3) of the Legal Practitioners Act. The Order regulates remuneration for consultation, legal opinions, incorporation, litigation, property transactions, and other professional services.
The Nigerian Bar Association itself has reiterated that the 2023 Remuneration Order remains the authoritative and enforceable framework governing professional legal fees in Nigeria.
Accordingly, the EFCC cannot, by press statement, administrative warning, or threat of prosecution, assume the statutory functions specifically vested by the Legal Practitioners Act in the Legal Practitioners Remuneration Committee.
2. Charging or receiving a professional fee in foreign currency is not, without more, an economic or financial crime
There is an important legal distinction between:
(a) agreeing or denominating a professional fee in a foreign currency;
(b) receiving foreign currency through lawful banking channels;
(c) refusing to accept the Naira where the law requires its acceptance; and
(d) receiving proceeds of crime, laundering money, or otherwise violating foreign exchange or anti-money laundering legislation.
These concepts should not be conflated.
Indeed, the Foreign Exchange (Monitoring and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act expressly recognises foreign currency derived from “agency commissions, professional fees and other forms of invisible earnings” as a source of foreign currency capable of being sold in the foreign exchange market.
That statutory language is particularly significant. It makes it difficult to sustain a sweeping proposition that the mere receipt of professional fees in foreign currency is, in itself and in every circumstance, a criminal offence.
There is also Nigerian authority recognising foreign currency obligations and awards. In Osun State Government v Dalami Nigeria Ltd [2007], the litigation itself involved substantial claims and awards expressed in United States dollars or their Naira equivalent.
3. The Naira remains legal tender—but that does not automatically criminalise every foreign currency fee arrangement
We acknowledge without reservation that Section 20 of the Central Bank of Nigeria Act 2007 establishes CBN-issued currency as legal tender in Nigeria. Section 20(5) also makes the refusal to accept the Naira as a means of payment an offence, subject to the CBN's statutory power to prescribe circumstances and conditions under which other currencies may be used as a medium of exchange.
That provision must, however, be carefully distinguished from the much broader proposition that every agreement between a lawyer and client which references or involves foreign currency is automatically a crime prosecutable by the EFCC.
The law should not be extended by administrative pronouncement beyond the words enacted by the National Assembly.
There are also judicial decisions that have considered restrictions surrounding foreign currency obligations, including employment arrangements, so this is an area requiring careful legal analysis rather than categorical pronouncements. For example, the National Industrial Court has considered Section 20(5) of the CBN Act in the context of salaries denominated in US dollars.
Consequently, the safer and more accurate legal proposition is not that lawyers possess an unlimited right to insist on foreign currency in every domestic transaction. Rather, it is that the mere fact that a lawyer and client agree upon, denominate, or receive professional fees in foreign currency does not, without identification of a specific statutory prohibition applicable to the transaction, automatically constitute an economic or financial crime.
4. No criminal offence can be created by a press statement
The Constitution is unequivocal on criminal liability. Section 36(12) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) embodies the principle that a person cannot be convicted of a criminal offence unless that offence is defined and the penalty prescribed in a written law.
Therefore, where prosecution is threatened against a lawyer merely because his professional fee is denominated or received in foreign currency, the fundamental question must be:
What specific written law creates the offence, and what provision prescribes the punishment?
A regulatory warning cannot substitute for legislation. Neither the EFCC nor any administrative agency can create a criminal offence through a circular, press release, public advisory, or institutional policy.
5. The Bar supports investigation of genuine financial crimes—not regulation of professional fees by an enforcement agency
For the avoidance of doubt, the NBA Anaocha Branch does not contend that lawyers are immune from Nigerian criminal law.
Where there is credible evidence that a lawyer has received proceeds of crime, participated in money laundering, aided terrorism financing, concealed unlawful transactions, or committed another offence established by written law, the EFCC is entitled to investigate and, where appropriate, prosecute in accordance with due process.
The EFCC and its Special Control Unit Against Money Laundering have legitimate functions relating to AML/CFT compliance and financial crime enforcement.
But investigating criminal conduct is fundamentally different from regulating what a lawyer may charge his client.
The latter is a matter expressly addressed by the Legal Practitioners Act, the Legal Practitioners Remuneration Committee, the Legal Practitioners Remuneration Order 2023, and the applicable Rules of Professional Conduct.
Our Position
The Nigerian Bar Association, Anaocha Branch, therefore, respectfully but firmly rejects any suggestion that the EFCC possesses a general supervisory jurisdiction over the professional fees charged by legal practitioners.
If the Commission contends that charging professional fees in foreign currency constitutes an offence, it should identify the precise statutory provision creating that offence and defining its elements, rather than issuing a blanket threat of prosecution.
The EFCC is a creature of statute and, like every public authority, must operate within the boundaries of the powers conferred upon it by law.
The fight against economic and financial crime is indispensable. Equally indispensable is fidelity to the rule of law.
The Bar will cooperate fully with every lawful effort to combat financial crime, but we must equally resist the expansion of administrative authority into areas which the National Assembly has placed under a different statutory framework.
Professional regulation cannot be achieved by prosecutorial intimidation.
The rule of law binds everyone—including those entrusted with enforcing it.
SIGNED:
Dr Uzoma Charles Dioha, Esq.
Chairman,
Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Anaocha Branch.
14 September 2026.
0 Comments