With particular reference to NAPTIP, it is even clear that Section 4 (1) and (2) of its Constitutive Act, put this matter beyond doubt. On the one hand, Section 4 (1) (supra) assigns the Agency the responsibility for supervision and coordination of activities relating to investigation and prosecution of all offences connected with or relating to trafficking in persons and other related matters in consultation with the Attorney General.
On the other hand, Section 9 (2) assigns its legal department the responsibility for prosecuting offenders under the Act in interpreting the chiaroscuro of provisions of the NAPTIP Act, the lower Court concluded that:
"...that for the purposes of investigation and prosecution of matters, law officers of the Agency are ... under the control and general supervision of the Attorney General and can, in the circumstance, sign processes and charges for and on behalf of the Attorney General of the Federation."
[Page 157 of the record; italics supplied for emphasis]
I entirely, endorse this conclusion as it is tandem with the position of this Court, FRN v Adewunmi (supra); Comptroller, NPS v Adekanye (supra); AG, Kaduna State v Hassan (supra); The State v. Aibangee and Anor (supra); DPP v Akozor (supra); Nafiu Rafiu v Kano State (supra); Osahon and Ors (supra).
In exercise of the powers conferred on him by Section 174 of the Constitution, the Attorney General of the Federation can institute and undertake criminal proceedings against any person before any Court of law in Nigeria, other than a Court – martial in respect of any offence created by or under any Act of the National Assembly. He may also take over and continue any such criminal proceedings that may have been instituted by any other authority or person.
The Attorney General of the Federation or the EFCC have the power to undertake such criminal prosecutions with the former having the upper hand in taking over the prosecution and continuing or discontinuing with the prosecution by entering a nolle prosequi. See:Pharma Deko Plc v. N.S.I.T.F.M.B (2011) 5 NWLR (Pt. 1241) 431: F. R. N. v. Adewunmi (2007) 10 NWLR (Pt. 1042) 399; Nyame v. F. R. N.(2007) 7 NWLR (Pt. 1193) 344. Nyame v. F. R. N. supra confirmed the powers granted to the EFCC in Section 5(1)(k) of the EFCC Act 2004 to co-ordinate, investigate and prosecute cases under the Criminal Code and the Penal Code Laws. It is not necessary for the EFFC to seek consent from the Bureau of Public Procurement or Attorney General of the Federation before it can proceed to investigate or prosecute the appellant under counts 78 and 79.
In exercise of the powers conferred on him by Section 174 the Constitution, the Attorney-General of the Federation can institute and undertake criminal proceedings against any person before any Court of law in Nigeria, other than a Court martial, in respect of any offence created by or under any Act of the National Assembly. He may also take over and continue any such criminal proceedings that may have been instituted by any other authority or person. He also has the power to enter nolle prosequi, at any stage before judgement is delivered, any such criminal proceedings instituted or undertaken by him or any other authority or Person.
The law is trite that the Attorney General of a State is the alter ego of legal representation of the Government in every case the State has interest. It is also the law that the Commissioner of Police, while acting in matters affecting the State, (like fighting crimes), is the agent of the State, he serves.
See the case of COP of Imo State Vs Ekweribe & Anor (2018) LPELR – 43949 CA; Gov. of Imo State & Anor Vs Ogoh & Ors (2015) LPELR 25949 CA, where it was held: “The Government of Imo State is a statutory person, who can only act or operate through human personalities, identified by law as Officer(s) or Official(s) of the Government.
The Governor of Imo State is the alter ego of the Imo State Government, and the Attorney General of the State is the chief law officer of the State, enjoined by law to represent the interests and obligations of the Government of Imo State in all legal/judicial transactions and their roles are constitutional.
See Section 176 (2) of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria, which says: “The Governor of a State shall be the Chief Executive of that State.” Section 195(1) says: “There shall be an Attorney General for each State who shall be the Chief Law Officer and Commissioner for Justice of the Government of that State.” There are several judicial interpretations, to the effect that, Attorney General of a State is a defendant or a nominal defendant in all civil actions which the Government of the State is sued or involved and the act/omission of the Governor of the State and/or any official of the State, when under litigation, the disclosure of the Attorney General of the State suffices to join the entire machinery of the Government of the State, and the government is committed.
See Nigeria Engineering Workers Ltd vs. DENAP (2001) 18 NWLR (pt. 746) 726 at 752; AG Adamawa vs. AG Federation (2006) 1 MJSC 1; AG Anambra State vs. AG Federation (2007) 12 NWLR (pt. 1047) 1. ” PER MBABA, J.C.A.