Power grab

Editorial 

Expectedly, opinions have remained divided on the inauguration, by the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, of a 22-member inter-ministerial committee to dispose of the assets forfeited to the Federal Government. It is a reflection of how far the issues are far from settled. It also throws up what appears to be a lacuna in the current framework for the management of the assets, and with it the grave charge of ministerial overreach.

The minister had, at the inauguration, claimed that the initiative was a follow-up to the president’s directive in October 2018, and this flows from the recommendations of the Presidential Audit Committee on Recovery and Management of Stolen Assets, and the need for efficient management of the assets.

“It is aimed at ensuring proper coordination of the disposal of the Federal Government’s assets and for promoting a uniform, harmonised and transparent procedure to safeguard the assets recovered by the relevant agencies in line with the anti-corruption drive of this administration,” the minister had stated at the occasion.

The committee, with Dayo Apata, Solicitor-General of the Federation as chairman, has its membership drawn from the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President, Federal Ministry of Justice, Federal Ministry of Finance, Budget and National Planning; Federal Ministry of Works and Housing, Auditor-General of the Federation, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Independent Corrupt Practices (and other related offences) Commission, Nigerian Army, Nigerian Navy, Nigerian Police and the Nigerian Security and Civil Defence Corps.

Also included are personnel of the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency, Department of State Security, National Oil Spillage, Detection and Response Agency, Bureau of Public Procurement, Department of Petroleum Resources, representatives from the civil society organisations, representatives of the youth, media and any other Nigerian with exceptional expertise that could add value to the committee as deemed fit by the AGF.

We agree with the minister on the need to ensure proper coordination of the disposal of the assets, and for a transparent procedure to be in place. If experience under which recovered assets ended up being re-looted by officials charged with keeping them is anything to go by, a body to oversee assets disposal would seem long overdue. The issue is whether a committee appointed by, and under the direction of the AGF whose turf wars with the EFCC is not only legendary, but has shown inclination to cut the agency to size – is what is needed at this time, to fix the problem.

Did the president actually authorise the constitution of the inter-ministerial committee? That, of course, is the million-Naira question. At this point, we can only take the minister’s word for it. But then, whereas it would have ordinarily sufficed for the minister to have so simply stated that the president so decreed; he would go on to give other reasons for the action.

First, he claims Section 43 of the EFCC Act gives the AGF the authority to “make rules or regulations with respect to the exercise of any of the duties, functions or powers of the commission”. Furthermore, he says that: “A community reading of the provisions of Section 31(1-4) and Section 43 of the EFCC Establishment Act 2004 will not only justify the action of the minister but also clear doubts on the misconceived and shallow legal analysis in the public space on the legality or otherwise of the committee”.

At this time? Nigerians are not fooled. They understand the game at play. A case of “power grab” not only adorned in public interest robe but dyed in specious, pretentious legalism. The real intent is to further whittle down the powers of the EFCC, while doing nothing to enhance the transparency of the process.

The National Assembly should step in to halt the power grab by AGF Malami. A legislation to address the issue of forfeited assets has become very urgent.