The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Anti-graft

Onaiyekan advises Buhari to tread softly on anti-graft probe

The Catholic Arch-Bishop of Abuja, John Cardinal Onaiyekan, on Tuesday night advised President Muhammadu Buhari to go slowly on his anti-corruption drive so that his actions are not seen as ‘persecution’.

He spoke during an evening dinner organised for Catholics in Politics at the Church of the Assumption, Asokoro, Abuja.

Pointing out that fighting corruption goes beyond making a ‘few arrests here and there’ he urged President Buhari to carry out his anti-corruption fight in a way that would not be seen as selective.

He also said the fight against corruption can only succeed where there is transparency, justice and honesty.

“This challenge, obviously lies squarely on those who now have the power to rule our nation. I want to beg them, and I am glad the chairman of the ruling party is here, to resist the temptation to rub in the plagues of defeat on the losers and try to avoid policies of persecution, some even talk of execution of losers.

“We have to tackle dishonesty and I believe we need to retrieve stolen goods, especially those that are just piling up other people’s money. While we do that, it is my strong feeling that we should try to avoid as much as possible humiliating or disgracing people who may indeed have tried their best to serve the nation.

“How to do this and keep these two elements together requires a lot of sagacity and clear mindedness. But we should pray for our leaders to be granted the grace.

“We must be clear-minded on this matter and not allow ourselves to be naïve thinking that it is just enough to make a few arrests here and there and the matter is settled. Let us pray that God will guide our nation.”

On insecurity, he said Nigeria needs to go beyond arms and ammunition in order to reconcile minds and hearts for genuine peace.

The time, he said, has come for all to link hands and seriously tackle the problems facing the country.

“The problems of Nigeria can only be resolved if we all link hands across political, ethnic and religious lines.”

July 23, 2015
An anti-graft war advisory

Poor Sule Lamido. After an eight-year remarkable tenure as governor of Jigawa State, which he, by sheer grit, transformed from a rustic community of farmers, building roads, schools and a beautiful airport, he has been arraigned before a court for alleged corruption. His fans- and foes- are wondering how and when he crossed the line – if the allegations are, indeed, true.

He was asked to be remanded in prison custody. Apparently exasperated by it all, Lamido exclaimed: “So I’m now a prisoner?” The Jagoran Talakawa (friend of the poor) is, thankfully, now on bail.

Lamido is not alone. Former Imo Governor Ikedi Ohakim, former Head of Service Steve Oronsaye and former Adamawa Governor Murtala Nyako have all just returned from the court.

Apparently scared that this could be their lot, considering the reconnaissance of the Dr Goodluck Jonathan administration by the tactful Muhammadu Buhari presidency, many dignitaries have bombarded “Editorial Notebook” for a confidential advisory on how to go through it all. It will, in my view, be unfair to make such a critical document secret, considering the sheer number of our compatriots who will soon find it exceedingly useful.

Here we go: Merely taking you before the court – if you fail to get a perpetual injunction against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), its agents, privies, officers, operatives or whatsoever called, who may wish to investigate you from so doing – does not make you a prisoner. Be ready to shell out a fortune – obviously a small fraction of the cash they claim you have stolen – to get a damn good lawyer, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN). There are many of them in town nowadays. Your adversary, the tempestuous EFCC, cannot afford them.

When you are remanded, don’t panic and give your traducers a chance to say: “Oh; he’s finished.” Remember, the offence, no matter how huge the cash involved, is bailable. In fact, the charges may be as long as the Lagos-Ibadan Expressway. Never mind; as the case progresses, they may be withdrawn, amended or consolidated into one or two.

Bail will come in very liberal terms: N400m and a surety who must be a senior civil servant. He or she must own a property in Abuja (Is there any senior government official worth his seat who doesn’t own a choice property in that seductive city?) or be a National Award recipient– there are all manner of people (leaders and looters) who are proud honorees, you know. If the judge is the liberal type, he may just let you go on self-recognition.

When the case proper begins, your lawyer will tell the judge he has no jurisdiction to entertain the matter. The judge could be stubborn. He may fix a date to determine his jurisdiction and, in actual fact, rule that he is fit to hear the matter. Don’t fret. Your lawyer will simply head for the ever-busy Court of Appeal. This, no doubt, will take months to resolve. The appeal may be decided, most likely against you. Be strong; it is a temporary setback (if you see it as a setback o). Remember, it is basic in law that you are innocent, until proven guilty. In fact, your lawyer should tell you that Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea (The act does not make a person guilty unless the mind is also guilty).

Another judge will naturally take over the case. A plea is taken – “Are you guilty or not?” Be firm in replying: “Not guilty at all, my Lord.” Your SAN will then raise a preliminary objection, saying again that His Lordship has no jurisdiction to hear the matter. “The offence was not committed in Abuja,” he will tell the court, “and the money involved is, after all, not the Federal Government’s.” Besides, no prima facie case has been established against you, the lawyer will say confidently.

As the case wends its way through, never forget you’re a politician, not a criminal. Never. Fight for your party’s ticket to run for governor (don’t mind the cost). If you win the election, the case automatically goes into the cooler for at least the next four years. If you are the considerate type, you can listen to the pleas of the good people of your dear state to serve for four more years. By the time you finish – you can run for Senate o – the case file would have been missing. Don’t arrange for the judge to get beaten up and his robe torn and the court documents shredded and the court premises shut down. No need for all that as people will call you, a honorable man, names.

If the authorities dare to revive it all, your lawyer will simply make a no-case submission, insisting that the prosecution has no case against you and that you, ipso facto, should be compensated for the ordeal of being brought before the court.

If your lawyer is the theatrical type, he can muddy the waters. He will spring up to his feet, adjust his gown, frown, gesticulate like a Nollywood wannabe and tell the judge: “Objection, my Lord. I have an objection. We have filed a motion, which is fundamental to the very essence of this case, from which we believe you should excuse yourself. We can smell some bias, with due respect, my Lord.”

Shocked, the judge will begin to put up a defence. “Me, biased? How?” He will then fix a long adjournment date. Again, you have been saved by the bell. When the date comes, his lordship will simply announce that since your lawyer has raised the issue of bias, he has returned the file to the Chief Judge for reassignment. Go home and relax as the court, which has its hands full of urgent matters, will not give a date so soon.

Outside the court, your supporters will bear big placards attesting to your integrity and notifying the world that you are being persecuted because of your political beliefs. Some of the placards will read: “Leave our hero alone. He is not a thief”; “EFCC, is your money missing?”; “Our man is not guilty. This is politics taken too far”; “It is better for 1000 criminals to go free than to have an innocent man punished”.

Of course, an army of television cameramen and newspaper photographers will be there to record the scene for all, especially your supporters who may not be able to join the solidarity bus to Abuja and those political enemies of yours who pray fervently for your downfall.

As the case progresses (with another judge taking charge), if your lawyer perceives that it could be against you, he will so inform you. “Be strong and courageous. Do not be petrified, do not be discouraged.” Isn’t that what the holy book demands of us? Besides, there is a way out.

Your lawyer will seek your permission to go into settlement talks with the prosecution. It is called plea bargain. An agreement will be drawn up. You will be required to give up some of the property you have acquired in exchange for your freedom. A filling station here, a mansion there and a shopping complex in the heart of the city. Just a few.

The judge may also ask you to pay a fine, usually the kind of cash you can easily ask your driver to whip out of the car trunk. Your detractors will call it a slap on the wrist, never mind; that’s their problem.

Freedom–at last. Get some rest and at the weekend storm your hometown in a long motorcade of exotic vehicles. A grand reception should be awaiting your arrival, with the community’s best musician on the band stand. Push the boat out. Flood the gathering with choice drinks. Let there be plenty of food as if it is Christmas Day. Remember the sumptuosity of it all is a reflection of your status.

Deliver a moving speech, thanking your people for standing by you all the way. All are not thieves whom the dogs bark at, you will say in an emotional voice. To your opponents, be magnanimous. Tell them you have forgiven all, that you harbour no malice against anyone and that you see your ordeal as the price you needed to pay for agreeing to serve your people. I assure you there will be a deafening ovation from the appreciative crowd of youths, elders and common folks.

On Sunday, storm the church with your army of supporters for a welcome/thanksgiving service. The sermon is quite predictable. The man of God will admonish the congregation to always embrace truth and service, adding that no matter how rough things are, the truth will surely prevail.

When it is time to dance up to the alter for the priest’s blessings, you can request for a popular local song, something like this: “O ti mu mi gbagbe o, ibanuje igba kan, A se were ni’se Oluwa, oba ti mo pe t’onje. A se were ni’se Oluwa, oba ti mo pe t’onje.” (He has made me to forget the sadness of the past. God’s work is timely. He is the king that I call and he answers.)

To shame those who mocked you, you can then request to have that chieftaincy title you shunned because of your modesty.

All rights reserved. No part of this advisory may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission of the copyright holder.

July 23, 2015
Re-invigorating anti-graft war

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Related Offences Commission (ICPC) have stepped up their anti-corruption battle. Assistant Editor LEKE SALAUDEEN examines why the anti-graft war is on the rebound and highlights the impediments to the crusade.

In a renewed onslaught against former public officers involved in misappropriation of public funds, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) have arraigned three ex-governors in court. Nigerians, who had lost faith in the capability of the EFCC to effectively fight corruption, were taken aback.

Observers have criticised the tardiness and the shoddy manner the agency has been handling some cases. Some of the cases have remained in court for over seven years. Those accused of looting the treasury have been granted bail and some of them have found their way back in public office as governors or senators. What is responsible for the renewed enthusiasm in the war against corruption by the EFCC?

The general impression is that the recent moves by the EFCC is to impress the new administration and escape President Muhammadu Buhari ‘s sledge hammer. Nigerians are not impressed because many of the cases filed by the EFCC over the years are still dragging in court. They note that, apart from the conviction of the former Inspector General of Police, Mr. Tafa Balogun, former Board Chairman of the Nigeria Ports Authority (NPA) Chief Olabode George (he was pardoned) and former Bayelsa State Governor Mr. Diepreye Alamieyesigha, the anti-graft agency has not recorded any other landmark judgment.

A lawyer, Mallam Yusuf Ali (SAN), said the apprehension over the fate of the corrupt cases filed by the EFCC was not misplaced. He observed that the cases had dragged on for too long. Ali identified major reasons for the protracted litigations. He doubted if the EFCC had qualified people to handle its investigation. He said, if investigations were not thoroughly done, the case would suffer series of adjournments. The question is: Has the EFCC done its assignment properly before heading to court?

Ali said: “The defendants often fight back through their lawyers who capitalize on the loopholes in the charges preferred against them and apply for frequent adjournment. The EFCC prosecution needs specialised training so that they could file the charges properly and appear at every hearing.

“The attitude of Nigerians to cases of corruption is not helpful. There is no pressure on anybody to do the right thing. The judiciary must be well equipped to perform. Our judges still record court proceeding in long hand which prolongs trial of cases.”

Another lawyer, Dr Fred Agbaje, said the EFCC must do away with lawyers, who are more interested in collecting huge money without showing any seriousness as the prosecution. He said: “There are lawyers on the EFCC payroll who, after collecting what we lawyers collect as ‘fat brief’, cannot secure at least a conviction. Or how do you rationalise a situation where out of 48 or 50 charges, a lawyer cannot secure a conviction of at least 10 of those charges and the accused is ultimately left off the hook, by being discharged and acquitted.”

Lawyer and human rights activist Edwin Ogbuagu blamed the slow dispensation of justice on the EFCC’s shoddy investigation and the penchant for filing amendment charges against accused persons after their arraignment. “The defendants’ counsel always seizes that opportunity to ask for adjournments to enable them study and respond to the new charges,” he added.

The human rights activist observed that lawyers hired by the EFCC have contributed to the setback. He said many of them might be conniving with the defence team to elongate the trial, especially those involving highly-placed persons, for their mutual benefit. He also observed that former governors on trial followed a familiar pattern of challenging the jurisdiction of the courts.

He said the office of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice is also a cog in the wheel of EFCC because the minister dictates to the commission the cases to prosecute and those that should be kept at bay. He called for autonomy for the EFCC, to enable it tackle cases of corruption within the civil and public service.

But, the EFCC has disagreed with those accusing it of abandoning the case files of corrupt politicians, saying they are doing so out of ignorance. The commission said it had done so much and had taken high profile cases to court to determine.

Cases abandoned by EFCC

Over the years, corruption trials have not gone beyond the plea stage, some for as long as seven years after the first arraignment in court. Many public office holders accused of corruption are still walking free. Some of them have been elected into the National Assembly.

Former Abia State Governor Orji Kalu was arraigned on July 27, 2007 before an Abuja High Court on a 107 count charge of money laundering, official corruption and criminal diversion of public funds in excess of N5 billion. He approached the Court of Appeal to set aside the ruling of the Federal High Court that he had a case to answer. The appellate court dismissed the appeal for lack of merit and gave the anti-graft agency the nod to prosecute him. With the charges still hanging on his neck, the former governor became a presidential candidate in 2015. He later contested for a Senate seat, which he lost.

Former Plateau State Governor Joshua Dariye was arraigned by the EFCC before an Abuja High Court on a 23-count charge involving N700million. He was granted bail, but he challenged the jurisdiction of the court to try him. He argued that the alleged offence committed by him took place in Plateau State and the funds involved belonged to the state. He said his trial ought to take place in the state, not in Abuja. The judge dismissed Dariye’s objection. He later went to the Court of Appeal, which also threw out the application and ordered him to face trial. While the case was still pending before the court, Dariye won a senatorial seat in 2011.

Former Governor Saminu Turaki of Jigawa State was docked on a 32-count charge of stealing N36billion from the treasury. He was granted bail on July 27, 2007 by Justice Binta Murtala Nyako of the Federal High Court, Abuja. His bail was contested by the EFCC on the ground that he claimed multiple nationalities and could jump bail, if granted. Turaki has secured the transfer of his trial to his home state. While the argument over his bail was on, Turaki won a seat in the Senate. He was in the National Assembly between 2007 and 2011.

His Enugu State counterpart, Chimaroke Nnamani, was also arraigned before the Federal High Court in Lagos on a 105-count charge for allegedly stealing N5.3billion The case, lasted for eight years. He was a member of the Senate between 2007 and 2011.

Former Governor Jolly Nyame of Taraba State was docked on 41-count charge in July 2007. He was alleged to have embezzled N1.3billion and collected N180million from a contractor as a kick-back from a N250 million contract awarded to the company for the supply of stationery to the state government.

The former governor of Ogun State, Otunba Gbenga Daniel, was arraigned before an Abeokuta High Court by the EFCC in April 2012 for alleged fraudulent conversion of land and diversion of public funds. His trial has suffered numerous adjournments without major progress.

The trial of the former Oyo State governor, Senator Rashidi Ladoja , who was arraigned by the EFCC in 2008 has followed similar pattern with numerous adjournments. Ladoja was docked alongside his former aide, Chief Waheed Akanbi, on a 10-count charge of money laundering to the tune of N4.7 billion.

The accused were alleged to have conspired to convert properties and resources derived from an illegal act, hoping to conceal their illicit origin.

Ekiti State Governor Ayo Fayose was arraigned before a Federal High Court in Lagos in 2007 for alleged mismanagement of N1.2 billion poultry project during his first tenure. Upon application filed by Fayose, the court transferred the case to the Federal High Court, Ado-Ekiti. Like he did in Lagos, Fayose brought an application to quash the charge in Ado-Ekiti. The application was dismissed by Justice Adamu Hobon, who described it as an abuse of court process. The case is still pending in the court.

Way forward

Constitutional lawyer Prof. Itse Sagay advised the EFCC to live up to its responsibilities. He said the anti-graft agency should ensure that cases are brought to logical conclusion. He said the election of Buhari should encourage them to do their job without the fear of being victimised. “I believe, if well funded, just like the INEC is funded, the commission would perform optionally,” Sagay added.

July 16, 2015
Are anti-graft laws weak?

Like his elder brother, former Edo State Governor Lucky Igbinedion in 2008, Michael easily got off the hook after being convicted for a N25 billion fraud on April 30. He was fined N3million in lieu of six years imprisonment. Michael easily paid the fine just as his brother did seven years ago. Nigerians were outraged by the verdict, with many accusing the judge of encouraging graft. But did Justice Abubakar Liman err? No, say lawyers, who argue that he was only interpreting the law. PRECIOUS IGBONWELUNDU reports

•Judge incurs public ire over ‘fame’ verdict

•SANs, others: blame the law not the judge

Background

History has a way of repeating itself. Last April 30, Michael, younger brother of former Edo State Governor Lucky Igbinedion, got away easily after being convicted for a N25 billion fraud. He was fined N3million in lieu of six years imprisonment. A similar sentence was handed to his brother in 2008 after he was found guilty of embezzling N2.8 billion and sentenced to six years imprisonment with an option of N3.5 million fine.

Igbinedion with an aide to the former governor, Patrick Eboigbodin (first accused), and their companies-Gava Corporation Limited; Romrig Nigeria Limited; PML Securities Company Limited and PML Nigeria Limited- were charged to court by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for alleged N25billion fraud, on 81 count charge of money laundering, abuse of office and fund misappropriation.

The offences, contravened Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 10 of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, and are punishable under Sections 14 and 15.

Justice Abubakar Liman of the Federal High Court in Benin sentenced Eboigbodin to 20 years in prison without fine option. He will spend two years in prison as the sentence will run concurrently. Igbinedion was sentenced to six years in prison with an option of N3million fine.

The Igbinedions’ cases are not isolated. About three years ago, former Police Pension Board boss, Yakubu Yusuf was sentenced to two years in prison with an option of N250,000 fine, after he was found guilty of embezzling N23.3 billion. Like the Igbinedions, he easily paid the fine and returned home.

At a time when some are campaigning for capital punishment for corruption, the sentences are perceived as insult on Nigerians and a set back in the fight against corruption.

This has exacerbated public anger and resentment against the judiciary, with many Nigerians accusing judges of protecting high profile criminals .

They wonder why Justice Liman did not sentence Igbinedion to six years imprisonment without a fine option; or six years in prison with a fine of N3 million to deter other public office holders.

Many see the verdict as a “slap-on-the-wrist” and are accusing the judge of compromise. But is that the case? Who should be blamed and how do we ensure that the punishment for politically exposed persons found guilty of corruption can contain the vice?

What the law says?

There are legislations on money laundering and corruption related charges. The EFCC Act, the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) Act, the Advance Fee Fraud Act and the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, among others, provide punishments ranging from two to 15 years for those found guilty of corruption.

Under the Money Laundering Act, which the accused persons were charged and convicted on, the law provides that a person convicted for such offence is liable to a minimum of two years in prison, a maximum of three years or an option of fine.

According to Section 15, any person who ‘(1) (c) carries out or attempt, under a false identity, to carry out any of the transactions specified in Sections 1 to 5 of this Act; or (d) make or accepts cash payments exceeding the amount authorised to be reported under this Act; or (e) fails to report an international transfer of funds or securities required to be reported under this Act…contravenes the provisions of Section 2, 3, 4, 5 or 10 of this Act; or commits an offence under this section.

‘(2) A person, who commits an offence under subsection (1) of this section, is liable on conviction- (a) in the case of an offence under paragraphs (a) to (c) of subsection (1) to imprisonment for a term of not less than 2 years or more than 3years; (b) in the case of an offence under paragraphs (d) to (f), where the offender- (i) is an individual to a fine of not less than N250,000 or more than 1million Naira or term of imprisonment of not less than 2 years or more than 3 years or to both fine and imprisonment; or (ii) is a financial institution or any other body corporate to a fine of not less than N250,000 or more than N1,000,000.00 (1 million Naira) (3) A person found guilty of an offence under this section may also be banned indefinitely or for a period of 5 years from exercising the profession, which provided the opportunity for the offence to be committed.’

The fight against corruption

Like cancer, corruption has continued to permeate all fabric of the national life, with daily reports of mind-boggling looting of state treasury by public officers and their cronies, while critical infrastructures that would have created employment opportunities for the masses, abandoned.

According to Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) for 2014, Nigeria, with 27 per cent grade, ranked 136 out of 175 countries. Despite the devastated effect of corruption in the polity, majority of the high profile cases have suffered severe setback at various courts across the country.

While the prosecuting agencies continue to secure stiff punishments for ‘lesser thieves’, they have continuously exhibited what observers described as incompetence as well as inadequate capacity to thoroughly investigate and prosecute high profile economic crimes.

Among the cases stalled from arraignment are those against the former Governors Orji Uzor Kalu (Abia), Abdullahi Adamu (Nasarawa), Jolly Nyame (Taraba) Abubakar Audu (Kogi), Joshua Dariye (Plateau), Ayo Fayose (Ekiti), Ibrahim Turaki (Jigawa), Chimaraoke Nnamani (Enugu) and Timipre Sylva (Bayelsa).

In spite of several anti-graft laws, there is a feeling of hopelessness among the low and middle class as it is believed that perpetrators of high profile corruption do not fear any consequences and are ‘untouchable’.

But despite the torrent of criticisms that have trailed Justice Liman’s verdict, some analysts think the judge has been unfairly lampooned since his decision was based on the charges before him.

They believe the law enforcement as well as prosecuting agencies are responsible for the lack of successes or the seeming weak sentences handed to high profile criminals.

According to them, rather than carry out thorough investigations and charge these persons under the appropriate laws with heavier punishments, the law enforcement agencies choose to implore lesser charges; living the judges with not much options.

However, some observers think Justice Liman in exercising his discretion, should have considered the effects of corruption, and chosen the stiffest among the provided options under the charge, rather than allowing Igbinedion pay a token N3 million and going home like a free man.

According to them, the most glaring of the complains against the judgment was that the co-accused was not given an option of fine. Critics are of the view that the judgment showed that the judge was not in tune with expectations of the people, as such, sent a signal that encouraged people to steal more.

Some have queried Justice Liman for adjourning the sentencing to April 30, a day after he found them guilty. They wondered whether it was an opportunity delibrately created to be reached out to or be induced.

According to them, sentencing a man convicted for N25 billion money laundering to a fine of N3 million, has further created an impression that children of the rich can get away with blue murder, while the poor get the full weight of the law for petty crimes.

Lawyers speak

•Quakers

Airing his view, a constitutional lawyer, Norrison Quakers (SAN), said: “You cannot blame the judge. There are two things to be considered. What is the penal sanction provision? What is the state of the evidence put forward by the prosecution? A judge will not go outside what the law says and must also not go beyond what is before him regardless of how he feels about a particular case.

“Also, for each offence, there is a punishment. While some of the punishments are mandatory, others are left at the discretion of the judge. The problem is not with the judge and it is not with the laws either because we have enough laws to combat corruption.

“Rather, it is as a result of the inefficiencies of the prosecuting or law enforcement agencies. We have a handful of laws that could be applied in cases of corruption or money laundering. There is provision for forfeiture of assets in the EFCC and the NDLEA Acts, which can be achieved through an Exparte Order.

“The challenge is with the flat-footedness of the prosecution. Rather than implore the full provisions of the law, they resort to compromise. It is not about the general perception of the public, but court decisions are taken based on evidence and facts placed before a judge and the relevant sections of the law under, which an offence is charged. No matter how a judge feels about a matter, he must not descend to the arena, else it would amount to miscarriage of justice.”

•Ozekhome

Similarly, Mike Ozekhome (SAN) and Adetokunbo Mumuni believed a judge cannot act beyond the charge before him. They argued that Justice Liman only exercised his discretion as provided for by the law and could not have gone beyond what was stated as punishment for the crime.

They said the way forward was for the legislature, which is saddled with the responsibility of enacting laws, to amend the enabling legislations in order to provide for stiffer and mandatory punishments for corruption.

Mumuni said serious matters should no longer be left at the discretion of the judge. He suggested the need for the laws to be more categorical and for the fine option on corruption cases removed

Ozekhome emphasised that the nation operates accusatorial system rather than inquisitorial criminal justice system, which rests the onus on the prosecution to prove an accused person’s guilt.

To executive director, Constitutional Watch, Ahams Njoku, the judgment was fair and in accordance with the law.

He said: “They (people) seem to be at a loss on why the money that was said to be laundered stood above the fine to be paid by Igbinedion. The first thing to note is that the offence appears to be a strict liability one.

“Igbinedion was said to have accepted cash payments of the sums of 10million, three hundred and nine thousand naira and also 21 million naira contrary to the Money Laundering Act (Section 15(1) 2004)…

“The next issue to consider is the sentencing under the Money Laundering Act (Section 15(2) 2004 thereof)… In other words, the judge has the discretion to either sentence the person to an option of fine or he can sentence the person the prison. He can also fine the person and at the same time send him to prison. But the thing to note is that the judge in exercising this discretion is guided by the law and judicial precedent.”

“By virtue of Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, a court can only impose a sentence as prescribed by the law. It provides: “Subject as otherwise provided by this constitution, a person shall not be convicted of a criminal offence unless that offence is defined and the penalty, therefore, is prescribed in a written law; and in this subsection, a written law refers to an Act of the National Assembly or a Law of a State, any subsidiary legislation or instrument under the provisions of a law”. “Any attempt by the judge in this case to have imposed any other sentence above the three million naira fine which is the maxim would not only be ultra vires but indeed unconstitutional.”

“One may suggest that the sentencing in this case was not only fair, but according to the law. Anything to the contrary would have been based on the whims and caprices of the presiding judge and the certainty of the law would have been violated. Then the court would cease to be a court of law, but a court of public sentiment.”

•Obayuwana

To former Edo State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Dr. Osagie Obayuwana there is need for the amendment of the laws to meet with the yearnings of the people.

‘Sentencing should be reflective of social policies. It is social expectations that the legislators in making the law should capture. It was social disapproval of the offence of armed robbery, murder and kidnapping that informed death penalty as sanction for anyone convicted of the offence.

“A lot of people are already calling for mandatory death penalty for corruption and most of the people clamouring for stiffer punishment against corruption are not of the ruling class, but this does not appear to be an area of importance for the National Assembly because they are also exposed.

“There is need for amendment of the criminal law to make punishment for corruption mandatory in order to forestall situations where judges in exercising their discretion, give sentences that defeat the purpose.

“Generally, corruption is perceived as an offence for the rich, not the poor. It entails not just stealing, but also abuse of public office with consequences that are far and wide which impact on millions. If we can be strict in punishing armed robbery, murder or kidnapping, why can’t we be that strict for corruption?

“If we do not want death penalty for corruption, then, it should be punishable with life imprisonment without an option of fine. That way, public officers will no longer be able to escape the weight of the law if found wanting.

“The incoming administration of Gen. Muhammadu Buhari must take concrete steps to ensure that all those former governors, politicians who have corruption charges but have been frustrating them, are speedily prosecuted.

“In order to deliver on his anti-corruption stance, the incoming legislature must amend the legislations for stiffer punishment. I also think that judicial officers as well as other public officials have to appreciate and match in line with public for corruption and corrupt practices as the bane of present day Nigeria.”

May 19, 2015
Raising the bar in the anti-graft war

The Independent Corrupt Practices and other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), has raised the stakes in the fight against corruption in Nigeria with the establishment of an anti-corruption academy. The institution known as the Anti-Corruption Academy of Nigeria (ACAN) is the training and capacity building arm of the Commission.

The establishment of ACAN is one of the bold steps taken by the ICPC in recent years to step up the fight against corruption in a more structured, determined and concerted onslaught. It is also partly a fulfilment of Nigeria’s commitment to the global initiative to rid the world of the menace, as the Academy is a key enabling instrument required for the successful implementation of the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) in the country.

With this singular move, Nigeria has taken its pride of place among the nations that have shown seriousness to tackle corruption under the UNCAC initiative. When the Convention came into force in 2005, it was the first legally binding international anti-corruption instrument, clearly defining corruption in its various forms and setting templates to deal with them through constitutional and legal methods.

The Convention required signatory nations to implement a wide range of measures in areas including law enforcement, asset recovery, mobilisation of stakeholders and international cooperation, for the overall success of the national and global anti-corruption campaign. The challenge posed by this tall agenda gave rise to the need for an intellectual and practical support platform to guide, direct and coordinate the campaign.

That was what led to the establishment of the International Anti-Corruption Academy (IACA) with headquarters in Laxenburg, Austria, by the United Nations. The Academy began operations in September 2010 with a clear mandate to promote advanced academic research on corruption related issues, especially on newer types of corruption as well as provide superior anti-corruption training for various categories of law enforcement practitioners.

IACA was also mandated to provide education, capacity building and necessary technical assistance to relevant groups of stakeholders involved in the anti-corruption fight in both the public and private sectors. The institution has been delivering on these core mandates. Nigeria joined IACA in 2011. Her membership was ratified by the Federal Executive Council in 2012 and the country is proudly represented in IACA’s faculty.

ICPC’s Anti-Corruption Academy of Nigeria (ACAN) is therefore a necessity in the fight to rid the country of the menace. And like IACA, it is poised to make a difference. Situated in a serene environment in Keffi, Nasarawa State, the Academy began operations in November last year, two years behind the target set for its take off by the current Chairman of the ICPC, Mr. Ekpo Nta, due to funding constraints.

However, the Provost of the institution, Professor Sola Akinrinade, who was appointed only last October hit the ground running, as if to make up for the delay in its take-off. The institution has already done its first training programme for officers in the Intelligence Unit of the ICPC, which was concluded in January 2015. According to the Provost, another training programme is scheduled for March 2015. This one, like some others being planned for the year, will involve external participants.

Prof Akinrinade, before his new appointment, was the immediate past Vice Chancellor of the Osun State University, Osogbo and former Visiting Professor to the Nigeria Universities Commission (NUC). He describes the Academy as an investment in the future of the country, a centre of excellence in anti-corruption research, learning, teaching, knowledge dissemination, training and capacity building. According to him, this specialised institution is also expected to become the hub of the activities of IACA in the African region,

Speaking on the mandate given to ACAN by its parent body the ICPC, the Provost listed five key areas of focus. First, its primary duty is to train ICPC staff to meet contemporary challenges of anti-corruption fighting, to enhance the operations of the Commission. By doing this, it will build the capacity of staff to effectively deliver the strategic plan of the commission in its areas of operations including investigation, prosecution, asset recovery, public education and enlightenment.

Second, to engage ministries Departments and Agencies (MDAs) in the public sector as well as organisations in the private sector, such as corporate entities, professional bodies and others to address issues of corruption within their own areas of operation. This involves running seminars and workshops to address areas where they are prone to corrupt practices. The academy is already working on the training of Anti-Corruption Units (ACTUs) in the MDAs.

Third, to run special courses that will lead to the certification of anti-corruption professionals. To actualise this, the academy will collaborate with some universities and other relevant academic institutions both in Nigeria and abroad to run post graduate programmes up to Masters degree level for practitioners in the field of anti-corruption to enhance their knowledge and skills. Already, the Senate of the University of Calabar has approved a Masters degree in anti-Corruption studies in this regard.

Fourth, the Academy will engage in knowledge production and dissemination. It has a research unit which is already developing a research policy on corruption related issues. This will make it easy to access information on such issues. The academy is backed by state of the art e-learning facilities. The research unit is headed by a renowned scholar from the University of Ibadan.

Fifth, the Academy will network and establish linkages with institutions engaged in specialised training of professionals in both the public and private sectors. These include institutions related to the banking and finance industry, media and legal professions; and public service, among others. Recently, the Provost visited the National Electoral Institute where he sought collaboration to address electoral corruption ahead the 2015 elections.

The Academy has a tall ambition to reach and educate not only the critical stakeholders in anti-corruption fight but also the general populace. This desire is underscored by the global shift of emphasis to preventive mechanisms for fighting corruption through proactive sensitization and education of all stakeholders on ethics and integrity issues as well as compliance with established rules.

In this task, the Academy has the full support of the ICPC Chairman who is eager to have it be a world class institution that will address all the country’s capacity building needs in anti-corruption fighting. All these, however, will depend on the availability of adequate funding.

•Adesanya wrote from Abuja.

March 1, 2015
Anti-graft club advises students on violence

The Usmanu Danfodiyo University, Sokoto (UDUS) chapter of Zero Tolerance for Corruption (ZTC), an anti-graft campaign initiative, has implored students to steer clear of corruption and electoral violence.

The lecture with the theme: Role of tertiary institutions in the fight against electoral violence was held in the university auditorium. It was chaired by Dr Abubakar Matazu of Faculty of Law and attended by the Vice-Chancellor (VC), Prof Abdullahi Abdu Zuru, his deputy, Prof Muhammad Lawal Ahmadu, Registrar, Mallam M.K. Jabbo, represented by Mrs K. Abdullahi, Chief Security Officer, Col Abdullahi Muhammad Gwandu (rtd), Dean of Students’ Affairs, Dr Adamu Aliero.

Prof Ahmadu spoke on Corruption, post-election violence and the role of youths. He said corruption gave rise to underdevelopment, political instability, insecurity and collapse of infrastructure. He added that electoral violence was the direct outcome of a corrupt system.

He said: “Discussions on Nigerian politics should address factual issues affecting the people, as against frivolities relating to religious or ethnic affiliations. The role of youth in curbing electoral violence include acquiring education and training on ethical conduct and imbib good moral behaviour. As students, you must be among the vanguard promoting justice and fairness in all areas of our national life.”

A Christian leader, Reverend Father Onuh Ladi, represented by Prof I.S. Ogundiya, said havoc wreaked by electoral violence could not be quantified, stressing that there was the need for the youth to maintain high moral standard and discipline.

Mallam Musa Aliyu Zuru, who represented Muslim community, suggested that ethical and civic education courses should be introduced in curriculum of tertiary institutions to train the youth on morality and ethics. He said it was pertinent for people to be tolerant and live in peacefully with others regardless of religion, ethnicity or language.

The VC remarked that poverty, corruption and underdevelopment remained the cause of electoral violence. He urged students to shun violence, adding that politicians were fond of using religion and ethnicity to brainwash the youth and incite them to foment trouble.

He said: “You must acquire education as youths and you must show a difference. I appeal to you to use your intellectual knowledge to promote peace and harmony. You must take the responsibility to educate some of your peers who are not in the school to learn the art of living together.”

Col. Gwandu advised the students not to indulge in violence or vandalise properties. He said: “If you participate in violence and you lose your life, you are gone forever, and life will continue with those that are living.”

Dr Aliero believed the seminar would open up the minds of the students against violence and any form of corruption.

The ZTC chairman, Hassan Maikasuwa, a 500-Level Veterinary Medicine student, urged everyone to join in the fight against corruption.

February 12, 2015
How to win anti-graft war, by Judge

Authorities of the Imo State University (IMSU), Owerri, have held a public lecture with the theme: “The anti-corruption war in Nigeria: A reality or a ruse? The lecture was delivered by Justice Obande Festus Ogbuinya.

Speaking during the programme, Vice-Chancellor, Prof Ukachukwu Awuzie, said public lectures were avenues for the institution to expand its frontiers on research and scholarship.

Describing the problem of corruption as a cancer that must be won, he praised the state government for its efforts to fight the scourge.

The Chairman, Committee on Inaugural and Public Lectures, Prof Izu Marcel Onyeocha, charged participants to live a life devoid of corrupt practices.

In his lecture, Justice Obande said the war against corruption could only be won when everyone joins the fight, saying “the war becomes effective when it becomes everyone’s fight and when the society sees it as an anathema and isolates or ostracises anyone found to be corrupt.”

The Acting Registrar, Austin Igbokwe, said the anti-corruption war must start from the family unit, saying that building personal integrity was crucial to ensuring a corrupt-free society.

Speaking at the event, former head of department of English and Literary studies, Dr Vitalis Nwulu, stated that the lecture was an eye-opener.

“It was quite illuminating and it further brings us to the understanding of the several laws that are germane to the anti-corruption war in Nigeria and what the lecturer has done is to let us know why we need to be part of that war as the family is the basic structure to which this war can be fought in a larger society,” he stated.

The event featured presentation of awards to Justice Obande, dance exhibitions and choir ministrations.

The ceremony was also attended by Commissioner for Health, who was represented by Dr Sam Madugba; HRH Eze Obiefule, Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academics), Prof Collins Ubochi and other principal officer of the institution.

September 25, 2014
Anti-graft agencies urged to probe Fisheries Dept

The Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development yesterday is fighting off allegations of corrupt practices at the Department of Fisheries.

In a petition to President Goodluck Jonathan, a group of “concerned professionals” listed several alleged fraudulent activities by the department’s leadership. The petitioners urged anti-corruption agencies to investigate the department.

They queried the competence of the acting director, Ms Foluke Areola saying her tenure is “illegal”.

The petitioners also alleged that “anarchy is the order of the day” at the department.

“With profound respects, may we draw the attention of the President Dr. Goodluck Jonathan – and the public – to the unsavoury and putrid situation at the Federal Department of Fisheries, a department under the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development,” the petition said.

The allegations levelled against the department include the arrest of fishing trawlers, allegedly for having no fishing licence.

The petition reads: “A very recent case is a letter written by Areola that fishing trawlers, which had been fishing in Nigerian waters for over eight years – with duly issued fishing licences till December 2013 – were illegal foreign trawlers. The truth, however, is that they applied for renewal of the licences in December 2013 and their applications were confirmed to have been received.

“Rather than communicate to the owners of the vessels not to go to sea until the licences were issued, she branded the vessels as illegal…”

The petitioners alleged that there was fraud in the manner N1.5 billion was said to have been expended on the Growth Enhancement Support (GES) for fish farmers in Nigeria. They said the “real” amount spent on the GES was a far cry from the minister’s claim.

In a speech at the second stakeholders’ interactive forum on: Repositioning the Fishery Sector on February 25, 2014, the minister claimed that the ministry spent N1.5 billion on the GES.

“It’s our wish that the President investigate this. When that is done, it would be discovered that only five fish farmers from 10 states of the federation were each given 500 fingerlings and five bags of fish feeds each,” the petitioners alleged.

According to them, the beneficiaries paid N12,500, which is 50 per cent of the cost of each bag of fish feed.

They alleged that the N300 million said to have been paid for fish nets was far above the N2 million expended on the items.

Among other allegations, the “concerned professionals” said 42 cold rooms of fish importers, which employed at least 500,000 Nigerians, were locked up over allegations that the fish were bad. They said the minister, during a visit, confirmed that the “fish were in fact of good quality” and asked for the justification for shutting down the cold rooms.

But the ministry said the allegations in the petition amounted to “blackmail, a campaign of calumny and a calculated attempt to discredit the lofty goals of the Transformation Agenda in the Fishery sector”.

It denied that N1.5 billion was spent on the GES, saying only N156 million was expended on the project. The ministry said the “incorrect” figure in the minister’s speech was a “typographical error”.

“The Group of Professionals contradicted themselves in the figures quoted under GES. Simple calculation was muddled up in the desperate bid to confuse readers. The N1.5 billion stated in the minister’s speech was indeed a typographical error. The real amount is N0.156 billion, which is N156 million,” the ministry said.

It explained why two senior officers in the Fisheries Department were prevented from participating in the oral interview for the post of director of the department.

The “concerned professionals” had said Mr. Akintunde Atanda and Ms. Abiodun Cheke – two senior officers – were prevented from taking part in the oral interview to prevent them from contesting for the position of director to keep Ms. Areola as the acting director.

But the ministry said the officers were under disciplinary action.

It said: “The Federal Civil Service Commission (FCSC) is the only organ of government that can explain why these officers were denied participation in the oral interview. These officers are under disciplinary action.”

The ministry also said only 24 cold rooms were locked up by its officials, an action it justified.

“The minister personally visited Bexolac Food Limited on Monday, March 24 and found cartons of spoilt fish in the cold rooms of the company in the full glare of journalists.

“The minister also visited Premium Sea Food on Friday, March 28, 2014, where the company brought out mackerel in replacement of the spoilt herrings in their cold room. They forgot that they had signed in the sampling sheet used to remove some of the samples to the Nigerian Fisheries Laboratory for analysis.”

Other companies found guilty, according to the ministry, also include Bharat Ventures. Several stocks of fish were reportedly found to have been spoilt at the company.

On the arrest and designation of fish trawlers as illegal, the ministry said the petitioners’ claim was baseless.

It said: “The question to ask is: why did all the other fishing trawlers in Nigeria obtain their licences before December 31, 2013 and these eight other trawlers were still fishing at sea into the New Year?”

The ministry asked the “concerned professionals” to prove that the trawlers were illegal foreign trawlers.

“The allegations in the petition are essentially mistaken; they cannot stand up to scrutiny,” the ministry added.

April 10, 2014
The other anti-graft war

A bill to create a National Financial Intelligency Agency (NFIA) is before the Senate. If passed into law, it will, among others, take over the Financial Intelligence Unit of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). Its independence will make it a juristic body that can sue and be sued. In other parts of the world, this unit is non-juristic. Will the proposed agency aid the fight against corruption when it is exposed to litigations? Lawyers are of the view that rather than create a new anti-graft agency, the government should strengthen the existing ones, writes Adebisi Onanuga

•Lawyers rebuff moves for new agency

In the fight against corruption, Nigeria has explored many options. Presently, the Economic and

Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) are in the forefront of the war against corruption. The jury is still out on how well these agencies have fared. Many have accused them, especially the EFCC, of being used by the government to witch-hunt political opponents. This, among other reasons, may be why some are moving that the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) be excised from the EFCC. Last week, Senate Leader Victor Ndoma-Egba and Chairman of the Senate Committee on Drugs, Narcotics, Financial Crimes and Anti-corruption Senator Victor Lar tabled a bill for the establishment of a Nigerian Financial Intelligence Agency (NFIA). The proposed bill seeks to amend certain provisions of the EFCC Act and the Money Laundering Act.

According to Senator Ndoma-Egba, the bill is to create a legal, institutional and regulatory framework that will ensure transparency, effective and efficient management administration and operation of Nigeria’s financial intelligence centre. The bill seeks to establish a separate agency for the FIU, which is under the EFCC pursuant to Section 2 (c) of the EFCC Act.The proposed bill, in addition, places the Special Control Unit against Money Laundering (SCUML), currently under the EFCC, within the operational mandate of the proposed NFIA.

Under the EFCC Act, the commission is the designated FIU in Nigeria. It is charged with coordinating the various institutions in the fight against money laundering and enforcement of all laws on economic and financial crimes.

While the proposed bill provides that the Director-General shall be appointed by the President on the recommendation of the Minister of Justice, it made no provision for Senate’s clearance or confirmation of the agency’s head.

Rather, it stated in Section 12 (1) that the Director-General of the proposed NFIA shall be exempted from security screening.

How fius function

The operation of the financial intelligence units worldwide is within either the purview of law enforcement agencies, such as the Police or the EFCC or departments and ministries, such as finance and justice. They do not operate independently. They operate behind the scenes in order to achieve maximum results in their activities without political interference or the possibility of unnecessary exposure to litigation that may cripple their operation.

In Nigeria, the fact the NFIU is insulated from litigation and political influence enhances its effectiveness.

It is to the credit of this Unit that Nigeria was delisted from the list of non-cooperative countries in the fight against money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism.

Such was the success of the unit that many other countries have started to copy from Nigeria while some West African countries are being trained by the NFIU on how to operate their FIUs.

Out of about 134 countries that have FIUs, only about nine countries have the type of agency the proposed bill seeks to establish.

The countries are Ukraine, Romania, Niue, Malta, Egypt, Jordan Antigua and Barbuda.

Several other countries with serious corruption and anti-money laundering measures including the United States of America (USA), United Kingdom (UK), Germany, Canada, Hong Kong, Japan, New Zealand, Netherlands, Australia and over 120 other countries have their FIUs situated either within their law enforcement agencies or ministries of Finance or Justice, among others.

Lawyers reject bill

Ndoma-Egba explained that the need to establish the agency was part of the efforts to combat money laundering and financing of terrorist activities.

He said the agency would also meet the precondition for the removal of Nigeria from the Financial Action Task Force list of non-cooperative countries and territories.

Though Nigeria has an F IU as an autonomous department in the EFCC, Ndoma-Egba insisted that the shortcomings of the unit, as constituted and operated, is hinged on its limited capacity to effectively carry out its functions. Senator Lar further added that the agency would provide necessary confidentiality required in the relationship between financial intelligence unit and security agencies. “As you know, when these agencies operate, they want confidentiality in their relationship with the NFIU.

“However, if the NFIU is operating as a department of one of the agencies that is also interested in the intelligence, the confidence is lost.”

Former Edo State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice Chief Charles Uwensuyi-Edosomwan (SAN) backed the agency’s creation.

According to him, a viable FIU is needed

to complement the EFCC in its fight

against corruption, which is the country’s primary problem.

“All you have to do is review the petroleum subsidy saga that has lost generations unborn their patrimony and you may begin to see our humongous corruption problem in its real dimensions as worse than the current violence and insecurity of life and property which in themselves are some of the classic manifestation of the corruption problem.

“The needed NFIA is one that should be peopled by well trained financial investigators savvy in the global myriad of mysterious veins and capillaries through which stolen wealth is processed into seemingly legitimate acquisitions of yesterday’s paupers turned today’s moguls.

“They should also be savvy in the here talked about intelligence gathering relating of funds movement that finance and further acts of terror.

“Aside these qualities, they should be patriotic Nigerians who would be brave enough to stare down thieving personages and deliver reports on them to the EFCC who’ll then process them to the Attorney-General who should in turn take action as needed to prosecute deserving vermin, bring them to book and recover the stolen property to its source,” he suggested.

Chief Uwensuyi-Edosomwan believe the agency, when established, would go a long way to aiding the fight against corruption in many ways, such as tracking financial information, analysing, sorting and exposing shady deals; nipping corrupt deals of whatever dimension – local/international in the bud; and aiding the EFCC in its investigations of financial crimes.

“When you see recent decisions of Appellate courts overturning High court decisions on EFCC cases, it isn’t too hard to see that corruption cases are currently poorly investigated,” he said.

To him, the agency would definitely help the fight against corruption.

However, Senator Ita Enang opposed the bill on the ground that an FIU is already domiciled in EFCC.

He argued that passing the bill into law amounts to duplication of laws and may result in unnecessary conflict among agencies performing similar functions.

He said: “I am conscious that this is an Executive Bill. It will only draw attention of the Senate to existing Acts. Passing this Bill will amount to repetition of the laws.”

Also, pundits in the intelligence sector argued that if the proposed NFIA is created, it would amount to a departure from common practices around the world, which is to insulate the FIUs for efficient performance of their functions.

According to them, once the NFIA is established as proposed by this bill, with the power to sue and be sued, it will expose the NFIU to political influence and litigation including injunctions that may restrain it from performing its duties and ultimately, destroy the country’s institutions for fighting corruption.

Mr. Sebastine Hon (SAN) does not see any reason a separate and an independent intelligence financial unit should be established out of the EFCC.

Hon maintained that the EFCC is abysmally underfunded by successive administrations since its establishment.

“I have also publicly decried its being grossly understaffed,” he said. He lamented that the federal civil service is marooned by red tapism, which complex conundrum is exacerbated by duplication of parastatals, saddled with largely the same functions adding that this has had a depleting effect on our commonwealth.

“I see no reason another financial intelligence unit will be established to operate side-by-side with the EFCC.

“I have always drawn comparison between Nigeria and the USA. The US population is just double that of Nigeria and Nigeria is higher on the corruption index. Yet, US budget for its replica of the EFCC, namely the FBI, is 10 times more than that of Nigeria for the EFCC. In terms of staffing, the FBI has more than 50,000 personnel on its payroll, while the EFCC and the ICPC combined have less than 5, 000 staff! What a way to fight corruption in Nigeria!

“Obviously, from the analysis above, there is no doubt that the EFCC needs to be strengthened financially and personnel-wise instead of its functions being fragmented and assigned to another federal body.

“With due respect, we are having too many moribund federal parastals.”

Hon believes there is executive interference and lack of political will to fight corruption.

He said EFCC should be left alone, even as it needs to rise up to its statutory responsibilities. “My certified answer, therefore, is a capital ‘NO’ to a separate independent intelligence financial unit out of the EFCC,” he said.

Mr. Dele Adesina (SAN) argued that no new agency is needed to fight economic and financial crimes or corruption in all ramifications, including money laundering.

He regretted that the country seems to believe so much in creating something new and or duplicating institutions, as if an institution being new determines its efficiency and effectiveness.

“Whereas, the effectiveness of any institution is a product of so many factors, including but not limited to the capacity of the handlers, provision of adequate funding, provision of materials and necessary equipments and the political will of those who establish the institution to make the institution succeed,” he stressed.

He described the proposed bill as an unnecessary attempt to create a new institution to take over the functions of an existing one.

“If NFIA is being created to take over the functions of the FIU of the EFCC and the Special Control Unit against money laundering, the question one will readily ask is why a separate administrative institution needs to be created to take over these existing functions from an existing agency?

“If the existing institutions, such as the EFCC or even the Special Fraud Unit of the regular police force have not been able to perform these functions effectively, the necessary thing to do is to ask the question why this is so. Take definitive steps to locate the problems inhibiting the effective discharge of the statutory responsibilities and solve them, not in creating a new institution all together,” he advised.

Adesina recalled that the national newspapers was recently awash with a report that EFCC lacks the funds to carry out its functions.

“Has somebody somewhere made the funds adequately available and EFCC is still found incapable of effectively performing its functions under its establishment Act, which failure has warranted the establishment of a separate and new institution?

“There is nothing to suggest that. All that I am trying to say here is that performance is not a function of duplication of institutions.”

He argued that the EFCC Establishment Act 2004 (as amended) and the Money Laundering Prohibition Act 2004 have copious provisions to deal with these situational crimes, and if well enforced can stem the tide against financial crimes and money laundering.

“So, I will rather advocate for the strengthening of the existing institutions than creating new ones. How do you strengthen them? By giving them priority for funding, priority of provision of necessary equipments including communications, providing incentives for the officials, as well as enhanced training on the job.

“I believe that the issue generally is that of enforcement of our laws. The laws are there, but sustained enforcement does not appear to be there and that is what the National Assembly should address. Proliferation of law enforcement agencies will do more harm than good.

“I will rather suggest with all sense of responsibility that whatever may be responsible for the shortfalls in the expected performance of the EFCC should be provided them so that they can function adequately and maximally. The resources used to establish a new agency should be used to strengthen the existing one. The emphasis is not in the names but in the functions and the performance of the statutory functions,” he said.

He urged the lawmakers to use the opportunity to look at the agencies in a holistic manner and then streamline their roles and their functions.

“I am unable to see why an agency well-funded, well-staffed and well-equipped should not be sufficient to take on the responsibility of enforcing anti-money laundering laws and fight financial and economic crimes,” he said.

Lagos lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana (SAN) described the proposed NFIA bill as reckless and an attempt to draw the NFIU out to weaken the institution for fighting corruption and financial crimes. To him, any bill for the creation of another bureaucracy such as the proposed NFIA will effectively destroy our institutions for fighting corruption in Nigeria.

Falana urged the National Assembly to decline further consideration of the proposed NFIA Bill and to set in motion, measures necessary to enhance the autonomy and funding of the existing anti-graft Agencies.

The lawyer who noted that the anti-graft agencies, including the EFCC, the ICPC, among others are being underfunded counseled the National Assembly to make laws that will strengthen the activities of the agencies to make them more functional instead of creating another agency with a lean purse that will end up not leaving up to the expectations of Nigerians and the international community.

“For instance, the EFCC Act should be amended to make it more independent with proper funding by making its budget a first line charge as we have in the judiciary,” he added.

Constitutional lawyer and rights activist Mr Theophilus Akanwa said the proposed agency is not what Nigeria needs.

He said: “It is very appalling that the present administration seem to be missing the proper directions desirous of good people of Nigeria. Why should another anti-corruption agency be created when the existing ones are not well funded to meet their statutory obligations?

“The desired result of curbing corruption should not be based on the number of anti-corruption agencies in place nor replacing them at will. We need to have the right people in these agencies; we need to apply the already laws in order to fight corruption.

“We need to fund the existing agencies adequately to help them carry out their duties effectively, efficiently and to prevent any form of inducement. If the alreadys agencies are not well funded, then the yet to be created ones will not even be funded. Corruption is on the rise and this government should do something drastic to save our dear country from total collapse.

“I consider the bill for the creation of NFIA as one of those to create jobs for the boys and I encourage the National Assembly not to pass the said bill, but closely monitor the activities of the agencies and encourage more funding of them.”

The Chairman, Civil Society Network Against Corruption (CSNAC), Olanrewaju Suraju, described the provision where the appointment of the Director-General of the proposed Agency will not be subjected to security clearance and Senate confirmation as “ridiculous”. “The bill should be thrown into the dustbin,” he said.

According to him, the sponsors of the Bill do not mean well for Nigeria.

“It is rather unfortunate that we are faced with efforts to draw the country back in her anti corruption crusade. Our practice is in consonance with international best practices and should not be tampered with unless we want to create another job for the boys,” he cautioned.

HOWEVER, sources close to the National Assembly say that some of the legislators are not comfortable with the Bill, as it will expose the hypocrisy of the National Assembly in the fight against corruption.

An aide to a Senator opposed to the Bill, who spoke on condition of anonymity, also faulted the Bill’s intention.

“I think the whole essence of the Bill is to politicise the NFIA and cripple its activities. You know our people, once the agency is given the power to sue and be sued, they will inundate it with Court injunctions, which will prevent the agency from releasing adverse information against them.

“Don’t forget, 2015 election is around the corner and nobody wants to take anything for granted. With our weak judicial system in Nigeria, you should expect the unexpected.

“The NFIA Bill is a bad omen that will leave sour taste in everybody’s mouth. Those who are supporting it know they have ulterior motives and Nigerians should be warned not to listen to their sweet talks,” he said.

December 24, 2013
N650m ‘scam’: Anti-graft officials may storm Ondo

Operatives of the three anti-graft agencies may soon storm Ondo State, following a petition by a group, the Ondo Elders and Youths Amalgamated Forum (OEYAF).

The group alleged that over N650 million may have been stolen by officials of the Ministry of Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs in connivance with some council workers.

It was learnt that the group petitioned the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the Independent Corrupt Practices and other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and the Special Fraud Unit (SFU) when the state government allegedly failed to sanction the officials “involved in the scam”.

Sources said the scam was perpetrated in seven local government councils during the preparation of the 2012 salary and leave bonus.

They said the government, through the Office of the Accountant-General, discovered that there was a wide margin between the amount paid in 2011 and 2012.

It was learnt that Governor Olusegun Mimiko ordered an audit in the 18 councils when he heard of the fraud.

Sources said the audit reports established that there was a wide margin of N650 million between the amounts released in 2012 and 2011.

They said the report indicted some officials of the ministry and the local governments.

OEYAF Chairman Mr. Moses Fanibe said the failure of the state government to prosecute the “indicted” officials prompted the group to petition the anti-grant agencies.

One of the agencies is said to have directed its operatives to probe the alleged fraud. Sources said they may storm the state this week.

April 16, 2013