The non-inclusion of the names of
corrupt Nigerian politicians on the list of recovered loot by President
Muhammadu Buhari may have created distrust in his anti-corruption
campaign, writes JESUSEGUN ALAGBE
Some Nigerians were displeased when the
much-anticipated looters’ list was released by the Federal Government on
Saturday, June 4, 2016.
They said the naming of politicians and
others who had stolen public funds would have strengthened their trust
in the President’s anti-corruption war.
Some said they were “twice disappointed”
because initially, the President had promised to release the
comprehensive looters’ list during his first anniversary speech on May
29, 2016 — only to delay it till June 4, 2016.
“However, when it was finally released,
we still did not see what we wanted to see on the list. I am twice
disappointed,” a policy analyst based in Lagos, Ibrahim Adelakun, said
on Facebook, adding “I wanted to see the names, not only the
recovered amount. Amount is fictitious; it’s not what anyone could
easily relate to. Names are real. There are faces to names. People like
me would have easily reckoned with the list if there were names on it.”
Some Nigerians, including Adelakun, said
they would not have been so anxious about wanting to know the names of
the looters if the President had not raised their hopes high before the
publication was released.
In December, 2015, President Buhari said
during the 15th session of the Anyiam-Osigwe Foundation lecture at the
International Conference Centre, Abuja, that “those who have returned
portions of their loot to the coffers of the Federal Government will
soon be publicly named.”
He added that the Central Bank of
Nigeria was holding on from publishing the list to avoid jeopardising
investigations and further recoveries.
He said, “As I stated recently, a good
number of people who abused their positions are voluntarily returning
the illicit funds. I have heard it said that we should disclose the
names of the people, and the amount returned. Yes, in due course, the
Central Bank of Nigeria will make information available to the public on
the surrendered funds, but I must remark that it is yet early days, and
any disclosure now may jeopardise the possibility of bigger recoveries.
“But we owe Nigerians adequate
information, and it shall come in due course. It is part of the
collective effort to change our land from the bastion of corruption it
currently is, to a place of probity and transparency.”
On May 13, 2016, at the Anti-Corruption
Summit in London, the President had again assured Nigerians — and the
international community by extension — that he was going to publish a
comprehensive report of recovered funds and looters.
“So far, what has come out, what has
been recovered in whatever currency from ministries, departments and
individuals, I intend on the 29th (of May) to speak on… We want to make a
comprehensive report on the 29th,” he said.
Whether the names of those indicted
would also be published, President Buhari had replied in the
affirmative, though with a tone of caution.
“Yes, eventually, it has to be done
because we want to successfully prosecute them. But you know you cannot
go to the court unless you have documents for prosecution,” he said.
In addition to the President’s
assurances, the Minister of Information and Culture, Lai Mohammed, also
said on August 16, 2015, while lamenting that looters were sabotaging
Buhari’s effort, that they deserved nothing but “public opprobrium.”
But in a twist last Saturday — in a
statement released by Mohammed — the President disclosed the total
amount recovered from looters between May 29, 2015 and May 25, 2016, but
failed to name those the monies were recovered from.
On the list, the Buhari administration
said it had recovered a total of N115.7bn cash, while assets worth over
N1.9tn had been frozen in one year.
The government gave the breakdown of the loot as N78,325,354,631.82; $185,119,584.61; £3,508,355.46 and €11, 250.
The Chairman, Presidential Advisory
Committee Against Corruption, Prof. Itse Sagay, disclosed that an
account had been set up for the funds.
However, while the news of recovered
funds was hailed in some quarters, it also received a healthy dose of
skepticism from many Nigerians who had expected that the names of
persons and officials the assets were recovered from would be released
as promised by the President.
For instance, the Nigerian Bar
Association condemned the non-publication of the names of looters
alongside the recovered funds list, urging the President to keep his
promise.
The NBA President, Mr. Augustine Alegeh
(SAN), said the only instance where the President could withhold the
names was if there was a legal obstacle, particularly on certain
transactions with confidentiality clauses.
He said, “For us, it is always important
that the promises our leaders make to the people are kept. I believe
that if there is any legal impediment that prevents the President, who
is a forthright person, from keeping a promise he has made to the
Nigerian people, he should let Nigerians know.
“It is also important that we know the
quantum of recoveries made from various persons so that it will be
something that is known to every Nigerian and there would be no
challenge. How did you arrive at the figures that are out there if you
don’t put not just names but reasons (to the recovered loots)?”
Likewise, a South-West socio-political
body, Afenifere, said there was nothing revealing in the information the
government published since it did not contain the looters’ names.
The group’s Publicity Secretary, Mr.
Yinka Odumakin, went as far as alleging that the amount released as
recovered loot was less than the total amount of figures bandied about
by the Federal Government and its agencies since the anti-corruption
campaign began.
He said, “As far as we are concerned,
there is nothing new on the list shown to Nigerians. Anybody can just
put figures together. Where are the particulars of the recovery? From
who were they (the loot) recovered?
“In the last one year, different rumours
have been flying about with regard to those who refunded billions of
naira and dollars. The figure they have released now is too opaque; it
is not transparent and does not lend credence to their claims. Anybody
can just write anything and throw it out (to the public).”
Also, a human rights lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana, said the figures released were not true.
“That list is not correct. I know that
the EFCC has recovered about $3.1bn. I think this is just the report
from a department; it is not a comprehensive one,” he said.
In a similar vein, the Ijaw National
Congress suggested that the inability of Buhari to mention the names of
the country’s treasury looters suggested cowardice.
“On the amount recovered as loot, many
figures were mentioned but we have virtually nothing. If the President
promised to name the looters and at the end, he could not do so, it
means he has succumbed to the pressure from the looters,” the group’s
spokesperson, Mr. Victor Burubo, said.
Several other groups and individuals in
the country, including the Ohanaeze Youth Council; the Coalition Against
Corrupt Leaders; the National Association of Nigerian Students; the
presidential candidate of the KOWA Party in the 2015 election, Prof.
Remi Sonaiya; and a former Vice-President of the Nigeria Labour
Congress, Mr. Issa Aremu, had also demanded full disclosure of the names
of looters.
On Monday, June 6, 2016, Vice-President
Yemi Osinbajo said the Federal Government, after seeking legal counsel,
refrained from publishing the looters’ names in order not to jeopardise
investigations.
However, political analysts said that
the only way for Buhari to pass the integrity test in his
anti-corruption campaign is to release the names despite whatever could
be at stake.
If the Federal Government could label
people like Colonel Sambo Dasuki and Olisa Metuh as “thieves” without
them concluding investigations yet, analysts say nothing stops it from
naming those from whom the loot had been recovered.
A lawyer and social commentator in
Lagos, Bisoye Odubona, said, “There is now a loophole in the President’s
anti-corruption war. You don’t just back down on something without
giving tangible reasons.
“We were promised twice that the
President was going to release the looters’ names. We were all eager.
Not to keep this promise is corruption. Corruption is not only when a
person steals, but also when a person lies, when they don’t do what they
said they would do.
“Before the President went on daring all
of the looters in front of the whole world that he was going to shame
them, he should have sought legal counsel. You don’t back down at the
last minute. How does he want Nigerians to perceive the anti-corruption
war now? This is a big issue he has to address so he can regain our
trust.”
A Lagos-based lawyer, Mr. Festus Keyamo,
during the week slammed those criticising President Buhari for not
publishing the looters’ names, stating that those faulting the President
were both friends and families of the looters or their political
associates.
He said on Twitter that he expected that the recovery of the loot would generate appreciation rather than condemnation.
However, Odubona said, “There cannot be
full appreciation of a flawed process. It’s like someone promising and
boasting to the whole world that he would give you N1m, but eventually
he gave you N100, 000. Tell me, are you going to fully appreciate the
person, even when the money is for free?”
A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mr. Tayo Oyetibo, told Saturday PUNCH that the President had been making a misnomer right from the outset by tagging the recovered funds list as “looters’ list.”
In legal parlance, he said the word “looter” means a person who has been convicted by the court for stealing money.
Hence, Oyetibo said the appropriate word
the President should have been using is: “Missing funds list” or
“Misappropriated funds list.”
Be that as it may, the legal
practitioner added that it was wrong for the Federal Government to have
been unduly arousing nervousness among Nigerians, especially as regards
the anti-corruption war.
He said, “The list could have merely
been a way of showing that the government is working. I believe that’s
the purpose. It was wrong in the first place to have released any list
when convictions had not taken place. We cannot call it a looters’ list.
A looter is someone who has been convicted by the court.
“We have to fight corruption, but we
should not lose our head in the name of anti-corruption war. Calling it a
looters’ list is a misnomer. These are the ills in the process. It is
also important to know that the government should not spend any funds it
has recovered in the process of recovering missing funds if no one has
been convicted. The monies recovered so far are exhibits.
“It’s just like the case of the police
selling a car they recovered from a suspected robber and using it to buy
things when the suspect has not been convicted. The place of the law
should be recognised properly in the anti-corruption war.”
A lawyer and leader of the Committee for
Defence of Human Rights, Malachi Ugwummadu, also advised the President
to be cautious in raising the hopes of Nigerians on subsequent matters.
On whether the President should have or
should not have named the looters’ on its list of loot recovered,
Ugwummadu said it was a two-edged issue.
He said, “I think everyone’s
anticipation was high. But the presumption of innocence is a fundamental
human rights. We all need to be circumspect in ascribing guilt to any
person. Within the context of the Nigerian political landscape, our
circumstances have become so convoluted. Naming the looters could have
been seen as discriminative since they have not been convicted in the
first instance.
“Most of the funds were being
investigated and the government could be accused of prejudice if it had
published the names. Some of the figures were lumped together, even some
that were not taken from the Federation Account. I am in support of
this government in fighting corruption, but next time, it should weigh
its statements carefully before raising the hopes of Nigerians.”
No comments:
Post a Comment