Lawyers converged on Lagos Sheraton Hotel, Ikeja for the launch of Dr. Kolawole Olaniyan’s book, Corruption and Human Rights Law in Africa, last week. They emphasised the need to depoliticise and internationalise anti-corruption war. Precious Igbonwelundu reports.
Lawyers have attributed the abuse of human rights in Nigeria and Africa to massive corruption. They advocated the internationalisation of anti-graft war in the continent when they converged on the Lagos Sheraton Hotel, Ikeja, for the launch of the book: Corruption and Human Rights Law in Africa, written by Dr. Kolawole Olaniyan of Amnesty International.
The event, which had lawyers and academia in attendance, saw the stakeholders lamenting the negative effects of corruption in the continent.
They noted that the practice where corruption is only fought through criminal proceedings was no longer effective. They advocated the need for the depoliticisation and internationalisation of war against corruption in line with the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
The lawyers said Olaniyan’s 368-paged book, came at a time when the continent’s leaders were neck deep in corruption. To them, it was an apt solution to salvage Africa.
They noted that anti corruption movement needs certain strengths the human rights law framework has established. For human rights to be realised, it must root out underlying causes of corruption.
Answering question on why it took human rights time to address grand corruption, Olaniyan highlighted several key points.
He stated the need to attach an appropriate level of moral imperative to war on corruption, noting that: “It is not just an abstract, victimless crime or tool for political revenge. It is a central cause of human suffering and poverty, and real people are real victims, everyday. The victims are largely neutralised (and virtually anonymous) in the criminal process, with no access to human rights remedies,” he said.
He continued: “Education, health, development, basic freedom to information, association and life, fair trials and private property rights all languish in the hands of a governance structure laced with corruption. Just as in human rights discourse, the socially and economically vulnerable suffer the most.
“But where can we, the people, the “victims of corruption” go for redress? Who will hear our cries for help when we know all too well that our treasuries are being pilfered while public services – from physical infrastructure to fair criminal justice systems and humane, equal treatment of our populaces–are routinely denied?” he queried.
Continuing, Olaniyan said as long as instances of grand corruption continue to be treated solely as particular criminal acts of individuals, various immunities will protect wrongdoers from sanctions and the argument of state sovereignty will politicise international efforts at accountability.
“The human rights normative framework, however, has succeeded in limiting otherwise unchecked state power by imposing the duties to protect, respect and fulfill human rights, in effect, realising a concept of public trust.
“The state is entrusted to operate for the benefit and security of the people, not to take what it will from the people’s national coffers. Law protects people, not states; the power of the state is not absolute and cannot be used as a veil for abuse by its agents, but rather is responsible for their acts,” he said.
Instead of struggling through the inept causation standards in criminal law, Olaniyan suggested that “the obligations of the state rather than the corrupt acts of its high-ranking officials” be considered to establish responsibility.
“We could look to a state’s acts, or failures to act, in carrying out obligations and commitments under international treaties on corruption and human rights to determine a nexus of breach of diligence and vigilance, corrupt acts of high-ranking officials and alleged human rights violations. This general form of showing causation is more fitting, considering especially the secrecy within which corruption lives,” he said.
Reviewing the book, Abdul Tejan-Cole, a former head of Sierra Leone’s Anti-Corruption Commission, called it “a coming of age story of the anti-corruption movement”.
Represented by Jude Ilo, Tejan-Cole described the book as a representation of a scholarship that responds to the urgent governance need in Africa; a provocative endeavour that casts a different light on the understanding of corruption and an ingenious exposé that elevates corruption to an existential threat to human rights in the continent.
“The ability of the author to weave this compelling narrative is both profound and commendable. Each year, international anti-corruption day precedes human rights day, but in all other ways, the developing struggle against corruption follows the path laid by the human rights movement.
“Anti corruption efforts would be best progressed by relying not only on the shoulders of national criminal law systems, but also thorough recognition by and integration into global and regional human rights law, norms and practice.
“The 368-paged book painstakingly considers the many faceted perspectives of this proposition from a review of existing treatment of grand corruption schemes in domestic criminal law settings to a look at the wide-ranging scope of human rights protected by the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and other international treaties impacted or violated by corruption, to the theoretical bases for applying the normative human rights framework to a problem, which has proven too vast to handle through criminal law alone, results in a reference point for lawyers, judges, elected leaders and civil society alike to take the movement forward.
“The application of this framework to grand corruption is clear, as is Olaniyan’s clear advice that sticking with a strict adherence to traditional norms of state and sovereign immunity of national criminal law systems will always keep us from touching the lifeblood of corruption,” he said.
According to Tejan-Cole, there should be a derivative proceeding such as practised in corporate shareholders’ actions that would allow members of the public to bring in recovery of stolen assets.
He said though civil society’s experience in initiating and supporting anti corruption proceedings elucidate other complications in getting to accountability, there is still more work to be done in showcasing the damage corruption does to human rights.
”Recent and unfolding experience in international asset recovery and repatriation schemes also reveal a host of thorny issues that will likely require significant time to develop into norms, which respect not only peoples’ rights to wealth and development, but also democratic values of governance and decision-making by a truly representative mechanism, lest we devolve into battles between peoples’ within a state and between the people and the state.
“In practice, finding answers to some of these questions will be difficult. Although relating corruption to human rights will enable governments and spirited public citizens to use human rights mechanisms to address the problem of corruption, making corruption a human rights issue will not necessarily on its own ensure that it is eliminated.
“The author acknowledges the limitation of this approach and rightly opines that human rights approach to corruption should only be a part of multi-tiered engagements that should incorporate all other mechanisms for fighting corruption.
“He outlines a multiplicity of strategies for addressing corruption in the region. It is clear, though, that a one-size-fits-all response to corruption cannot satisfactorily or effectively address the problem, especially given its complexities, multidisciplinary and contemporary nature (and the fact that its causes vary widely), and its varying, but devastating effects on human rights in regions like Africa.
At the event were Oba of Lagos, Rilwanu Akiolu; All Progressives’ Congress spokesman, Lai Mohammed; Tayo Oyetibo (SAN); Prof. Olowole Smith (SAN); Prof. Ibidapo Obe; Mr. Femi Falana (SAN); Bisi Olateru-Olagbegi; Richard Akinola, among others.
