Category: Femi Macaulay

Tomorrow is World Tourism Day 2022. It has been celebrated on September 27 each year since 1980.  The theme of the celebration this year is “Rethinking Tourism.”

It is a thought-provoking theme, particularly for Nigeria, which continues to pay lip service to the development of the tourism sector and faces serious challenges that impede the growth of tourism.

This year’s theme, according to the United Nations (UN), “aims to inspire the debate around rethinking tourism for development.” It said: “World Tourism Day will be celebrated as the shift towards tourism is being recognised as a crucial pillar for development.”  Significantly, the United Nations General Assembly, in May, for the first time held a special debate on tourism, illustrating the relevance and importance of the sector.

It is noteworthy that the United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) defines tourism as “Activities of persons travelling to, and staying in places outside their usual environment; not more than one consecutive year for leisure, business, and other purposes.” This shows that tourism involves travel, and consumption of goods and services.

So, tourism suffers when a security crisis makes travelling problematic, and an economic crisis complicates consumption of goods and services.   Indeed, Nigeria’s tourism troubles are compounded by insecurity and inflation. Poor infrastructure remains a huge challenge, but the issue has been overshadowed by more potent problems.

Many parts of the country have become increasingly unsafe. The 2022 Global Terrorism Index ranks Nigeria third among countries most impacted by terrorism in sub-Saharan Africa, and sixth most impacted country in the world.

Figures from SBM intelligence show that 2,371 people were kidnapped in the first six months of 2021 (2020: 2,860) while 10,366 people were killed in the same year (2020: 7,063).

This year, at least 7,222 people have been killed and 3,823 abducted. There have been 2, 840 incidents related to insecurity in the country from January to July.

Also, data from the Nigeria Security Incidents Tracker show that no fewer than 1,499 people were injured in various attacks in 505 local government areas in the country.

None of the country’s six geopolitical zones is outside the orbit of insecurity.  The Northeast recorded 777 incidents in which 2,052 people were killed and 344 kidnapped. In the Northwest, 519 incidents occurred, leading to the death of 2,229 people while 1,989 were abducted. In the North-central, there were 494 incidents in which 1,748 people lost their lives and 950 were kidnapped.

The Southwest recorded 420 incidents, which led to the death of 386 people, and 195 were abducted.  At least 310 incidents occurred in the Southeast; 420 people were killed and 157 kidnapped. In the South- south, 278 incidents have so far been recorded; 386 individuals were killed and 195 kidnapped.

Against this backdrop, not surprisingly, many Nigerians are unwilling, even afraid, to travel within the country for touristic purposes. So, domestic tourism suffers. If domestic tourists are scared, it is predictable that international tourists would be even more so.

Read Also: Healthcare investments will curb medical tourism, says monarch

Inflation helps insecurity, and they both act against the country’s tourism sector. There is no doubt that the relentless rise in the prices of goods and services in the country discourages domestic tourism in particular. According to Trading Economics, based on information from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), Nigeria, “The annual inflation rate in Nigeria accelerated to 20.52 percent in August of 2022 from 19.64 percent in the previous month, above market expectations of 20.25 percent and remaining at the highest since September 2005.”

The source added: “Food inflation quickened to 23.12 percent from 22.02 percent in July amidst higher prices for staples including rice and bread. Also, a weakening naira continued to pressure the cost of imports up. On a monthly basis, consumer prices rose 1.77 percent, following a 1.82 percent increase in July.”

Though the naira is weak and poor, this does not necessarily encourage international tourists who will benefit from having stronger currencies to spend. This is because of the spectre of insecurity.

Nigeria is blessed with tourist attractions. The Sukur Cultural Landscape in Adamawa State and the Osun-Osogbo Grove in Osun State are United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Sites.

Nigerian sites on UNESCO’s tentative list include Benin Iya/ Sungbo’s Eredo, Old Oyo, Kwiambana and/or Ningi, Oban Hills/Korup, Niger Delta Mangroves, Gashaki-Gumpti National Park, Oke Idanre (Idanre Hill), Arochukwu Long Juju Slave Route (Cave Temple Complex).

Others are: Ancient Kano City Walls and Associated Sites, Surame Cultural Landscape, Alok Ikom Stone Monoliths, Ogbunike Caves, Cross River – Korup – Takamanda (CRIKOT) National Parks, Lake Chad Cultural Landscape.

In addition, the Director General of the Nigerian Tourism Development Corporation (NTDC), Folorunsho Coker, recently listed “five spots being considered as World Islamic Heritage Sites in Nigeria.” According to him, these include ”Hubbaren Shehu, which is Sheikh Usman Danfodio’s house in Sokoto State (an outstanding example of Islamic traditional architecture). There is also the Gobarau Minaret in Katsina (a unique structure of its kind), the Sheikh Alimi Mosque complex in Ilorin, the Mbormi Battle Ground in Gombe and Fanisau Palace Mosque Kano.” He said these sites had been proposed to the World Islamic Heritage Committee for official recognition

But what is the use of having tourist attractions that cannot attract tourists because of poor infrastructure, insecurity and inflation, among other factors?

Ironically, Nigeria is billed to host the UNWTO  2022 conference scheduled to hold in Lagos from November 14 to 16. Delegates from 166 countries are expected to participate in the event. Minister of Information and Culture Lai Mohammed said “This will mark the fifth time that Nigeria will be hosting member states of the UNWTO.’’

The minister also said the country would use the event to “market and highlight its diverse and unique assets in the areas of tourism, culture and the creative industry.” He added: “It is our collective and individual responsibility as Nigerians to ensure that we host a world class event in a safe and secure environment.”

This may be regarded as a subtle reference to the country’s security crisis. Indeed, that may well explain the choice of Lagos as the venue of the conference, given the state’s relative safety.

Ultimately, hosting the UNWTO conference looks like image laundering. It may help to make the country look good, but it doesn’t change the ugly realities.

It’s thought-provoking that Tukur Mamu is now alleged to be a co-conspirator and terrorism enabler. He had been known as a negotiator working for the release of multiple train passengers abducted by terrorists on the Abuja-Kaduna route on March 28.

The Department of State Services (DSS) claimed that Mamu “was intercepted by Nigeria’s foreign partners on his way to Saudi Arabia for a clandestine meeting with commanders and top leaders of terrorist organisations across the globe.” The security agency added that his home and office in Kaduna State were searched following his repatriation to Nigeria, and “various exhibits and items to establish his complicity with terrorists were recovered.”  It also accused him of being a logistics supplier, aiding and abetting acts of terrorism, as well as terrorism financing.

Mamu, who is the publisher of Desert Herald, was said to have “used the cover of his profession as a journalist to aid both local and international terrorist groups.” The DSS alleged that he had supplied information to bandits and terrorists that escalated terrorism in the country, leading to the deaths of several security personnel in Northcentral and Northeast parts of Nigeria.  His activities, the agency said, constitute a potent threat to unity and peace in the country.

According to the DSS, investigation of his activities is ongoing. So, the agency, on September 12, obtained permission from the Federal High Court (FHC) in Abuja to further detain him for 60 days, in the first instance, pending the conclusion of the investigation. He was arrested by foreign security agents on September 6, in Cairo, Egypt, with his two wives, en route to Saudi Arabia for Umrah (lesser Hajj).  The DSS contradicted the said purpose of the trip.  They were deported, and arrested by security operatives on arrival in Kano.  Mamu was caged, but his wives were released.

It is striking that DSS spokesman Peter Afunaya had, in a statement, described the “outcomes” of the agency’s investigation as “mindboggling.” The story of Mamu’s arrest in Egypt and Nigeria, the accusations against him, and his detention, is still developing, and it remains to be seen how it would end.

There are 23 people still being held by the terrorists who attacked the Kaduna-bound train. They have spent about six months in captivity.   Predictably, their families are more troubled because of Mamu’s detention. In his role as a negotiator, he had helped to get abductees released. Some of the captives were freed after payment of ransom to their captors.

His intervention, it must be noted, was prompted by the inaction of the authorities. It is uncertain what will happen to the remaining captives now that the negotiator has been caged, and the federal government is still inactive.

Speaking for the concerned families, Aminu Uthman was quoted as saying to a reporter: “You are aware of what happened to the person who is in charge of the negotiations. So, nobody even knows what is happening.”

A notable incident in June, three months after the train attack, highlighted Mamu’s concern about the federal government’s inaction. There was bad news that one of the abductees, identified as Mohammed Al’Amin, was shot and injured. Mamu had explained that the shooting occurred during “friendly exchanges of fire at the forest between the abductors that are guarding the victims and preventing them from possible escape.” However, he added, “it could also be intentional from them for the purpose of sending a message.”

He also said: “Killing of their victims is something we know they can do. They have threatened to do that before. This is why the authorities must take action to ensure that none of the captives is killed. The government has the power to bring this to an end within three to four days…Cases of emergency such as this do not require unnecessary bureaucracy.”

He didn’t sound like a collaborator, which is how the DSS has now painted him. How did he get involved in negotiating with the train attackers and abductors in the first place? Why did the federal government allow him to play the role of a private negotiator, which resulted in the release of some of the hostages? When did the authorities become suspicious of him?

Lamentably, the federal government’s inaction continues to give the impression that it is unable to rescue the kidnapees and unwilling to negotiate their release. This is why Mamu’s role was useful.

Interestingly, the DSS, in a statement on reactions to Mamu’s arrest, said the public should “desist from making unguarded utterances and await the court proceedings.” That’s all well and good, but how long will the public have to wait?

There’s something curious about the treatment of Mamu’s matter, especially when compared with the treatment of the 400 alleged Boko Haram sponsors that the federal government announced it had arrested in April 2021. At the time, the said arrests suggested a new level of seriousness in the fight against terrorism.

The arrested alleged financiers of the Islamic terrorist group were said to be businessmen, including bureau de change operators. They were arrested in Kano, Borno, Lagos, Sokoto, Adamawa, Kaduna and Zamfara states, and Abuja.

The arrests were said to have been carried out following investigations involving the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA), the Department of State Services (DSS), Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU), and the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN). The suspects were expected to be prosecuted without delay.

More than a year after the said arrests, the public is still expecting the trial of the unnamed suspects. It is unclear why they have not been prosecuted, and whether they will eventually face trial.

Mamu’s identity is not hidden, possibly because his activities as a negotiator were not hidden. But the federal government has not revealed the identities of the arrested 400 alleged sponsors of terrorism in the country.  Also, the authorities seem determined to prosecute Mamu.  But they have not shown any determination to arraign the 400 suspects.

The Terrorism (Prohibition and Prevention) bill, 2022 signed into law by President Muhammadu Buhari, stipulates a range of sanctions, including life imprisonment and death sentence, for anyone convicted of terrorism-related activity. The legislation, which comes after previous ones in 2011 and 2013, seeks to “provide for an effective, unified and comprehensive legal, regulatory and institutional framework for the detection, prevention, prohibition, prosecution and punishment of acts of terrorism, terrorism financing, proliferation and financing of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in Nigeria; and for related matters.”

Boosting the anti-terrorism effort may require legislation, but it also demands prosecution of arrested suspects based on extant law, without which stipulated sanctions cannot be applied.

The public awaits Mamu’s trial. He should not be detained without trial, and should be tried without delay.  The public had awaited the trial of the 400 suspects, which has not happened. It is unclear if they are still in detention after more than a year since their arrest.

It amounts to double standards that the authorities are playing up Mamu’s matter, and downplaying the issue of the arrested 400 alleged terrorism enablers.   

 

 

On his 74th birthday, on August 15, Dr Peter Odili, a former two-term governor of Rivers State, got an attention-grabbing gift from the incumbent governor of the state, Nyesom Wike. Odili, a member of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), governed the oil-rich state from 1999 to 2007.

The birthday gift was described as a multimillion-naira mansion, located in Old Government Residential Area, Port Harcourt. Wike’s media aide, Kelvin Ebiri, in a statement, supplied information on the house, saying it was built and donated to Odili by the Rivers State government.

Wike’s words at an event the state government organised to celebrate Odili’s birthday suggested that the gift was a payback. He was chairman, Obi Akpor Local Government Area of the state during Odili’s tenure as governor.

“There was a time every political class abandoned Dr Odili,” Wike said.  ”This is a man who gave us everything. Some people called him Mr Donatus. There was no abuse he did not get. Everybody he tried to help their families, at the end of the day, all betrayed him.

“For us, we have used him as a school and we thank him for making himself available for us to use him to learn so that we won’t be shocked by whatever is going to happen.”

When Odili turned 70 in 2018, Wike was approaching the end of his first term as governor. The ex-governor had promoted the incumbent during a special mass to mark his landmark birthday at Our Lady of the Holy Rosary Chaplaincy (CIWA), Port Harcourt.

Odili had said to the congregation: “Let me use this opportunity to request our people, all Rivers men and women, our chiefs and the entire political class, everybody that is proud to be identified and called a Rivers man or woman, to give total support to this governor.

“This is because with his leadership, we can achieve total cohesion and unity of our people. I have been a governor; I have worked under governors and I have seen governors after me. But this man is unique.”

So, the giving and receiving that happened when Odili turned 74 was in tune with their mutual admiration. But by using government funds to do the giving, Wike showed that he was out of tune with the people, who demand that government funds should be used for purposes beneficial to the people. Wike’s sense of indebtedness to Odili is personal. If he was enthusiastic about a payback, perhaps he should have used his personal money.

It is unclear how much the governor spent from government coffers to build the house he gave the ex-governor. Transparency demands full disclosure. Predictably, the state government is unlikely to state the figures.

The money spent on the project could, and should, have been spent on other projects that would have been beneficial to the public. In this case, the project was for the benefit of an individual who had been accused of corruption when he was governor.

It is thought-provoking: corruption allegations against Odili have remained allegations 15 years after his governorship. In January 2007, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had released a report alleging, among other things, that over N100b of Rivers State funds had been diverted by the then outgoing Governor Odili.

In February 2007, the then Rivers State Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice had filed a suit challenging the powers of the EFCC to investigate the finances of the state, and claiming that the agency’s activities were prejudicial to the smooth running of the government of Rivers State.

In March 2007, Justice Ibrahim Buba of the Federal High Court, Port Harcourt, had ruled that the EFCC investigation was invalid, unlawful, unconstitutional, null and void. He also granted an injunction restraining the EFCC from publicising the report of the investigation; and an injunction restraining the EFCC from any further action regarding the economic and financial crimes allegedly committed by Odili.

The matter climaxed with the ruling of Justice Buba in March 2008, in which he declared that “The subsisting judgment of March 2007 by this court is binding on all parties. Therefore, there is a perpetual injunction restraining the EFCC from arresting, detaining and arraigning Odili on the basis of his tenure as governor based on the purported investigation.”

The situation has not changed since this controversial “perpetual injunction,” restated and reinforced 14 years ago. It has been described as “an injunction against the people” because it is not in favour of the people, who have been shortchanged by the alleged corruption of the beneficiary of the injunction. Significantly, it sets a bad precedent, which could encourage political corruption not only in Rivers State but also in other states. It could also encourage others to seek such protection.

It is unclear why the situation remains unchanged. Is it changeable? What should be done to change it?

Interestingly, Justice Buba was reported to have denied that he granted a perpetual injunction in Odili’s favour. In his response to a query by the National Judicial Council (NJC) following a petition by a UK-based lawyer, Osita Mba, in November 2009, he argued that since the commission didn’t appeal the nullification of the investigative report, the judgement was deemed subsisting. He also wondered why the anti-graft agency had not deemed it fit to appeal any of the two judgements.

But the EFCC was reported to have appealed the ruling against its investigation at the Court of Appeal in 2008. It is unclear what happened.

The NJC considered the petition in February 2010. In its response to the petitioner, in March 2010, the council said it found the petition “unmeritorious and consequently had absolved Justice Buba of the allegations therein.”

Again, two years ago, Odili was reported to have asked the Federal High Court, Port Harcourt, for a restraining order as the EFCC began investigating him for alleged diversion of over N100b belonging to Rivers State.

In the suit numbered FH/PHC/C3/26/2020 and dated February 20, 2020, the ex-governor sought an order of interlocutory injunction restraining the anti-graft agency from arresting, arraigning and prosecuting him in any court pursuant to any investigation that borders on any alleged financial impropriety during his tenure as governor of the state between 1999 and 2007.

It is against this backdrop that Wike insensitively built a private mansion for Odili with public funds, and publicised the gift.

The twists and turns have not helped matters. In the end, the people bear the brunt of the unresolved matter.

Powerlessness is weakness in a situation that not only demands power but also the effective use of power. Nigeria’s security crisis continues to expose the Federal Government’s incapacity, and many Nigerians are wondering what is happening.

Two recent striking incidents illustrated this lack of power.  The Kuje prison attack and jailbreak on the night of July 5 was a national nightmare. The chairman of the House of Representatives’ Committee on Correctional Service, Edwin Anayo, said the Nigerian Correctional Service (NCoS) had recaptured 421 inmates who fled the custodial facility in Kuje, but 454 were still at large.

During an oversight visit to the facility on July 14, he said the committee had summoned Minister of Interior Rauf Aregbesola and Comptroller-General of the NCoS Haliru Nababa to appear before it following the terrorist attack on the Kuje Custodial Centre, Abuja. The committee had also invited the Commander of the Nigerian Army Platoon on duty on the night of the attack, he added.

Many Boko Haram members were among the escapees.  The Islamic State in West Africa Province (ISWAP) claimed responsibility for the raid on the prison. The release of terrorists by terrorists was disturbing.

Contradictory responses from two ministers did not help matters. Police Affairs Minister Maigari Dingyadi said the defenders were overpowered because the attackers were more in number and better armed, while Aregbesola said the protectors were enough in number and adequately equipped.

Aregbesola, whose ministry is in charge of correctional centres across the country, said: “I am disappointed by the level of defence by the team that was put here to protect the facility.

“We have enough men and officers to protect this facility but unfortunately they could not hold their position effectively for defence and that was the reason for the breach.”

According to him, “If fortification for security is determinant of whether it is medium or maximum, it is medium by size but maximum by the security provided.

“We have a platoon of military officers and men deployed here…that’s the fighting wing of the army in the most sophisticated battle. So what are you talking about? We have here the highest grade of military, police and other security forces for deployment for protection.”

The authorities failed, and had a lot of explaining to do. But explanations will never be enough. The situation demands action.

Another nightmarish incident followed.  It was predictable that terrorists in the country would at some point aim for the sky if they are allowed to continue their terroristic activities.

The terrorists who threatened to kidnap President Muhammadu Buhari demonstrated their lack of respect for the country’s security agencies. Their threat was the ultimate statement on the scale of insecurity in the country and the impotency of its security system.

The threat was part of a disturbing video released by the terrorists who abducted more than 60 train passengers on the Abuja-Kaduna route on March 28.

The new video showed the terrorists flogging some of the abductees still in captivity. One of them said:  “This is our message to the government of Nigeria and just as you have seen these people here, by God’s grace, you will see your leaders; your senators and governors will come before us. These ones you are seeing here, we will keep some as our slaves and sell them off just as our Imam told you in the past.”

He added: “Just like the Chibok girls that were sold off, we will equally sell these ones as slaves. If you don’t adhere to our demands, we will kill the ones we need to kill and sell the remaining. By God’s grace, El-Rufai, Buhari, we will bring you here.”

The speaker spoke in Hausa and sounded serious.  His words suggested that the terrorists were targeting Buhari, who is also Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Nigeria, and Governor of Kaduna State Nasir El-Rufai.

By declaring their intention to kidnap the president, and also governors and senators, the terrorists showed that they want to take terrorism to a new level in the country.

It is noteworthy that suspected terrorists had, on July 5, attacked President Buhari’s advance team of security guards, protocol and media officers. “The attackers opened fire on the convoy from ambush positions,” said Buhari’s spokesman.  Two policemen were killed. The incident happened near Dutsinma, Katsina State. The team was travelling to Daura ahead of Buhari’s trip to his hometown for Sallah.

In a reaction to the video and the threat, the Senior Special Assistant to the President, Garba Shehu, said in a statement: “The country’s security and defence forces are not clueless or helpless. They have their plans and ways of doing things… It suffices to say that the security forces are not relenting. They are acutely aware of their duties, responsibilities and what the nation expects of them.”

It was a routine reaction. Talk is cheap. The situation demands action.

It was ridiculous that after a National Security Council (NSC) meeting on July 28, National Security Adviser (NSA) Maj. Gen. Babagana Monguno indirectly accused the people of inaction.

He said: “The council has seen it necessary to inform the general public that fighting in this type of asymmetric conflict is a collective effort, it’s not something that should be confined to only the security, intelligence and law enforcement agencies.”

He even blamed the killing of Guards Brigade personnel in Bwari in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) on alleged failure of the people on security. “A few days ago, troops of the Guards Brigade were ambushed and decimated,” he observed.  “Had there been a collective effort by way of just snippets of information, we might have averted that incident. That is not to say that the responsibility is for those outside the security domain, it’s a collective responsibility.”

His definition of “collective responsibility” abnormally redefined public responsibility regarding intelligence gathering. It absurdly shifted the burden of security from the security agencies to the people. Also, collecting intelligence is one thing and acting on it is another thing. In other words, intelligence gathering without action is worthless. The situation demands action.

Nigerian Army spokesman Brig. Gen. Onyema Nwachukwu, who announced the redeployment and appointment of some officers last week, said the Chief of Army Staff “has directed all the newly appointed senior officers to redouble their effort and commitment to duty in tackling the security challenges bedeviling the nation.”

It remains to be seen whether this move will have any positive effect on insecurity in the country. The situation demands action.

There were people who saw the country’s fight against Covid-19 as a corruption opportunity, and seized the opportunity.  This was predictable, considering the corruption problem in the country, which the President Muhammadu Buhari administration claims to be fighting.

The Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) gave an insight into Covid-19 corruption.  Its chairman, Prof. Bolaji Owasanoye, said:  “The commission had observed discrepancies and infractions in the procurement and payments made by some ministries and agencies after the released and appropriate disbursement of Covid-19 funds.

Some implicated MDAs refused the monitoring team access to their records thereby impeding the successful inquiry into their activities. These MDAs are flagged and will be investigated for breaches and infractions of the law and Covid-19 intervention funds guidelines and other procurement abuses.”

He supplied the information in the context of the African Anti-Corruption Day 2022, which focused on “Strategies and Mechanisms for the Transparent Management of Covid-19 Funds.”  The African Union (AU) designated July 11 as the African Anti-Corruption Day.

The AU said: “Since the pandemic started, the media has been awash with news of corruption, theft and mismanagement of funds as governments responded to Covid-19. These were related to lack of adherence to transparency and accountability measures in procurement processes, instances of waste, mismanagement in procurement of Covid-19 supplies and other reliefs such as safety nets and cash transfers.”

The AU also said: “The neglect of transparency and accountability norms may have impacted on countries that were already facing governance challenges thereby contributing to the further weakening of the fight against corruption.”

The focus on the management of Covid-19 funds is appropriate. Since the beginning of the pandemic in 2020, there have been reports of huge funds raised towards fighting it. For instance, the Nigeria Private Sector Coalition Against COVID-19 (CACOVID-19) Relief Fund had more than N27b as at April 2020.  The group’s target was to raise N120b  to provide medical equipment and materials, and also palliatives to the poor and vulnerable in the country.

Management of Covid-19 funds should be transparent. It is curious that some Ministries, Departments and Agencies of Government (MDAs) refused to cooperate with the ICPC. Perhaps they have something to hide. The commission’s plan to carry out an investigation is commendable.

It is important to ascertain how MDAs managed Covid-19 funds, and expose those who mismanaged the funds as well as those who stole the funds. Those implicated in wrongdoings should be prosecuted.

The ICPC also observed that “in some instances the distribution of relief materials or palliatives was chaotic, disorderly and uncoordinated.”  In addition, the commission noted that “hoarding and diversion of materials were also common warranting the raids by people in some situations, facilities or locations warehousing palliatives. Some of such also created widespread violence.” Owasanoye also highlighted media reports of irregularities in the allocation and distribution of palliatives.

These observations are correct. The coronavirus crisis had caused hardship that was compounded by a dangerous and combustible combination – extreme poverty, extreme hunger and extreme anger in the land.

That had triggered looting by the extremely poor, extremely hungry, and extremely angry who looted warehouses containing Covid-19 lockdown relief items. There was a lot to loot in several states, which gave rise to the allegation that those who should have distributed the relief items had hoarded them.

There was a need to explain why relief items that should have been distributed to the needy were seen in abundance in warehouses. The looters had demonstrated that those in charge of the distribution had failed to grasp the depth of their deprivation, which required swift remedial action.

Swiftness mattered. But it was lacking.  That was why the private sector-led CACOVID and the Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF) had a lot of explaining to do.

At the time, CACOVID spokesman Nwanosiobi Osita had explained: “The very large size of the order, and the production cycle required to meet the demand caused delays in delivering the food items to the states in an expeditious manner; hence, the resultant delay in delivery of the food palliatives by the state governors.”

Also, NGF spokesman Abdulrazaque Bello-Barkindo was reported saying “no state has been involved in or has hoarded any palliatives,” explaining that about 10 states had delayed the distribution of the relief items because “the items meant for distribution in these states had not been completely received from CACOVID.”  But the concerned states should have distributed the items they had received.

He added: “Some other states that still had palliatives in their warehouses chose to keep a strategic reserve ahead of a projected second wave of Covid-19.”  But the items they had should have been distributed.

He also attributed the situation to the claim that “some states were still receiving palliatives from the Federal Government through the Federal Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs, Disaster Management and Social Development.” Received items should have been distributed.

These efforts to rationalise the delay in distributing the relief items, and their abundance in warehouses in several states, suggested that CACOVID and several governors had failed to act with a sense of urgency. It was inexcusable that items meant to alleviate hardship were not supplied and distributed promptly.

Those who were supposed to get the relief items needed immediate relief. They were faced with an emergency.  But those who were supposed to deal with the situation lacked a sense of urgency.

Sadly, the theme of the African Anti-Corruption Day 2022 brought up the issue of corruption in the country yet again. There had been public concern that Covid-19 funds might be diverted, which reflected the unimpressive result of the war against corruption. There was the question whether the Federal Government could ensure that such funds did not end up in the pockets of corrupt government officials and their collaborators.

The ICPC’s disclosure not only shows that there was room for corruption in the fight against the coronavirus but also that there was corruption.  Opportunists who saw the coronavirus crisis as a corruption opportunity, and seized the opportunity, should not be allowed to get away with corruption.

Have Nigerians lost interest in whistleblowing?  Or they just lost faith in the whistleblowing policy?  Or maybe they are simply confused about its implementation? Or perhaps they are wondering what has been done with money recovered as a result of the policy?

The chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Abdulrasheed Bawa, prompted these questions following his observation at an event, on June 30, in Awka, Anambra State, organised by the Africa Centre for Media and Information Literacy (AFRICMIL) on the whistleblowing policy designed to increase exposure of financial crimes.  He noted that “enthusiasm for the policy appears to have waned a bit.” Bawa was represented by the zonal commander, EFCC, Enugu, Oshodi Johnson.

The Federal Government introduced the whistleblowing policy in December 2016 as a weapon to fight corruption.  Bawa said: “It was heralded by a frenzy of sorts with a deluge of information by informants, some of which led to the recovery of humongous sums of money by the EFCC.”

Indeed, in mid-2019, Information, Culture and Tourism Minister Lai Mohammed boasted that the whistleblowing policy had checked corruption, and helped the government to recover looted funds. He added that the government had recovered billions of naira and about $53m through the policy. Also, in the same period, the Minister of Finance, Zainab Ahmed, boasted that the government had recovered N605b through the whistleblowing policy.

According to the EFCC boss, “Two of the landmark recoveries from whistleblowers’ information were the $9.8m recovered from a former managing director of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, Mr Andrew Yakubu, and the $11m recovered at an apartment in Osborne Towers, Ikoyi, Lagos.”

Nigerians had responded to the policy with amazing enthusiasm. In the first 10 months, according to then secretary of the Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption, Prof. Bolaji Owasanoye, “over 5,000 whistles had been blown and about 75 per cent of that came from phone calls.” He advised that the public could report on the website, by email, text message or phone call.

The various whistleblower communications, he said,  covered contract inflation, ‘ghost workers,’ payment of unapproved funds, embezzlement of salaries, diversion of excess crude funds, improper reduction of financial penalties, diversion of funds meant for people, placing money in a commercial bank, non-remittance of deduction of pensions or NHIS and failure to implement projects.

Others, he added, were embezzlement of funds received from donors, embezzlement of payment meant for personnel emoluments, violation of TSA which is the highest, violation of FIRS regulations, non-procurement of safety equipment, money laundering, illegal sale of government assets, diversion of IGR which is the second largest, financial misappropriation, concealed bailout funds, mismanagement of micro-finance banks and illegal recruitment.

At the time, there was a need to clarify the policy following some controversial cases.  Owasanoye had explained: “If you blow the whistle and the government recovers cash, you are entitled to between 2.5 per cent and five per cent. The maximum limit is five per cent. According to the policy, if you blow the whistle and it is below N500m, you get four to five per cent because the higher the amount that is recovered, the lower the percentage that is given. This is the global best practice.”

His explanation showed that the public was given inadequate information about the policy when it was launched.  He gave further details: “If the recovery is between N500m and N1b, you get three to four per cent (commission). If it is N1b and above, it is 2.5 per cent. Indeed, there is a clause that we included in the policy to say that the government may determine the amount to be awarded based on other criteria provided that the amount to be awarded doesn’t exceed five per cent. In other words, the government may actually pay less than 2.5 per cent but nobody can be paid more than five per cent.”

It is unclear how many people understand how the policy works, and what effort the government has made to make it clear to as many people as possible.

The EFCC head observed that the “most obvious” factor undermining the policy’s effectiveness “is lack of adequate understanding of the legal and administrative frameworks of the policy and the difficulties of navigating the labyrinth of bureaucratic processes for claiming the advertised incentives.”

There have been times delayed payment of commission to whistleblowers was an issue. For instance, the whistleblower that provided information leading to the discovery of $43.5m , £27,800 and N23.2m at No. 16 Osborne Road, Ikoyi, Lagos, in April 2017, was not paid his commission until December that year, after the media had highlighted the delay in payment.

Bawa also observed that “the few false informants who were prosecuted” might have “unnerved some other would-be informants.” This argument is weak because serious informants would be interested in the reward, and unlikely to be discouraged by the experience of so-called false informants.

Bawa’s call for “a fresh awakening to sustain the flow of critical intelligence to Nigerian law enforcement agencies” suggests over-reliance on whistleblowers.

He had notably drawn attention to the UK’s Unexplained Wealth Order (UWO) when he appeared before the Senate for confirmation of his appointment in February 2021. According to him, “There are certain provisions in the EFCC establishment Act that more or less gave us these powers.”

He explained: ”Section 7 , subsection 1b of the Act says the ‘commission has the power to cause investigation to be conducted into the properties of any person that appears to the commission that the person’s lifestyle and the extent of the properties are not justified by his source of income.’

“This means without any complaint, if it comes to our knowledge that you have amassed so many properties that are not justified by your source of income, the EFCC can ask questions.”

Bawa also explained how UWO works in the UK: “If you have this property, the UK will ask you – what is this property for? If you explain that this is how you earned it; so be it. If you do not explain, then they can further their investigation to determine how you acquired it.”

It is unclear how the EFCC uses its power to demand explanations concerning unexplained wealth.  It is useful to have such power. But is the agency using it effectively?

The point is that the observed whistleblower apathy should not be an impediment to the war against corruption.

There has been a lot of talk, and apparently little action; but the situation demands less talk and more action.

The ineffectual talk continued as the Federal Government blamed a terrorist group, the Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP), for the horrific Sunday church killings in Owo, Ondo State, on June 5.

It’s unclear how the National Security Council identified the perpetrators. Minister of Interior Rauf Aregbesola, who provided the information following a meeting of the council chaired by President Muhammadu Buhari, said the authorities “are zeroing in on” ISWAP.  It remains to be seen when arrests would be made in connection with the crime, and who would be arrested.

But Ondo State Governor Rotimi Akeredolu’s response called into question the conclusion that ISWAP was responsible for the attack. “The statement is too hasty,” he observed.  “I take their conclusion with a pinch of salt. ISWAP doesn’t hide its attacks. If they had done it, they would have owned up.”

The truth is that the identities of the attackers and killers cannot be ascertained unless and until they are arrested.

The Director of Social Communication at the Catholic Diocese of Ondo, Rev. Fr. Augustine Ikwu, in a statement, gave the context and scale of the tragedy: “It is Pentecost Sunday, a time every Catholic is expected to be in Church to commemorate the solemnity. It is so sad to say that while the Holy Mass was going on, men of unknown origin, wielding guns attacked St. Francis Xavier Catholic Church, Owo, Ondo State.

“Many are feared dead and many others injured and the Church violated. The identity of the perpetrators remains unknown while the situation has left the community devastated.”

According to the state Commissioner for Health, Dr Banji Ajaka, there were 127 victims and 40 died.

President Buhari, in a release issued by his media adviser, Femi Adesina, said “eternal sorrow awaits the perpetrators of the bad act both on earth here and ultimately in the hereafter.”  He added: “No matter what, this country shall never give in to evil and wicked people, and darkness will never overcome light. Nigeria will eventually win.”

Governor Akeredolu, in a statement issued by his chief press secretary, Richard Olatunde, had described the mysterious attackers as “the enemies of the people.” “We shall never bow to the machinations of heartless elements in our resolve to rid our state of criminals,” he declared.

The Ondo State Police Command, in a statement by its public relations officer, Funmilayo Odunlami, said “all efforts are being intensified to arrest those who perpetrated this evil.”

A lot of talk, but talk is not enough.  It is good and proper to condemn the blood-curdling attack on innocent worshippers. But condemnation is certainly not enough. The perpetrators must be caught and punished.

Notably, the expression “unknown,” used to describe the assailants, surfaced in various narratives.  Again and again, the agents of evil carry out devilish acts, and it seems nobody can identify them. Indeed, it seems they are unidentifiable.

But those who carried out the horrifying killings are not spirits. They were likely under the influence of evil spirits, but they are flesh and blood. This means they should be identifiable.

If they are identifiable, then the criminals should be identified and brought to justice. It is the role of law enforcement to identify, catch and prosecute them.

The yet-to-be-identified gunmen that assaulted the country’s psyche by the horrendous Owo killings must not be allowed to get away with murder.

The Federal Government’s attribution of the killings to ISWAP is disturbing.  If that conclusion is true, it evokes the alarm by Borno State Governor Babagana Zulum in January.

During his interaction with members of the Senate Committee on Army, when they visited him at the Government House in Maiduguri, he had highlighted “the growing presence” of ISWAP in the southern part of Borno, stressing that this would likely worsen the country’s terrorism problem.

Increased activities by terrorists can only mean increased insecurity in the country. Zulum had observed that “If nothing is done to check and tackle the growing presence of ISWAP fighters who are better armed, better equipped, more deadly, more sophisticated and receive more funds than Boko Haram, it will be disastrous not only to Borno State but the country in general.” The alarm was loud enough.

ISWAP is believed to have about 3,500 – 5,000 fighters, and has carried out many attacks in Nigeria since it was formed in 2015 following collaboration between Boko Haram and the Islamic State (IS). However, the union of terrorists collapsed a year later, and Boko Haram and ISWAP began to operate separately.

It is relevant to look at some of ISWAP’s recent terrorist activities in the country.  For instance, a report said its fighters burnt four vehicles, including a petrol tanker, during an attack in Kaga Local Government Area of Borno State, on June 6.

The group, in April, claimed responsibility for the attack on a police station in Adavi, Okene Local Government Area of Kogi State. Five people were killed in the raid.

In January, the group released video of its fighters attacking Tukur Yusuf Buratai Institute for War and Peace (TBI), a research institute of the Nigerian Army University, located in Buratai Village, Biu Local Government Area of Borno State. Two civilian members of staff were killed.

A Nigerian Army general and three soldiers were killed, in November 2021, during an attack by ISWAP in Borno State’s Askira Uba Local Government Area.

The group’s history shows that its activities were in the northern part of the country. The Federal Government’s allegation that the group was responsible for the Owo attack and killings suggests it may have extended its operation to the Southwest.  But the authorities need to substantiate the claim by bringing the Owo killers to justice. Then their identities would be beyond doubt.

ISWAP has not claimed responsibility for the attack, which does not necessarily mean that it is innocent. But the accusers need to prove the group’s guilt.

Also, blaming the group for the attack suggests that the incident had a religious and ethnic complexion.  It is contradictory that the minister was reported saying “It is not an ethno-religious thing.”  This aspect is an important reason the authorities should thoroughly investigate the attack, and ensure that the actual culprits are caught.

So far, it looks like a case of baseless blame. The government should not encourage jumping to conclusions when crime is committed.