Tag: Onnoghen

Let us imagine for a moment that the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) and, more importantly, the revered body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SAN) had approached the Justice Walter Onnoghen’s non-asset declaration saga in a radically different manner. It is now in the public domain that the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) admitted in writing that he forgot to declare the humongous amounts of foreign currencies found in at least five accounts. Should members of the legal profession thus not be at the forefront of the clamour for Onnoghen to step aside from his exalted seat until he has proven beyond all doubts that he is without blemish? That would have greatly enhanced the image of the legal profession in the public eye. It would have enabled the National Judicial Council (NJC) to take charge of the matter and ensure that justice is done rather than dithering until an impatient President Muhammadu Buhari, suspended Onnoghen purportedly on the directive of the CCT.

Unfortunately, leading members of the bar sought to delay proceedings at the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) through legal technicalities as well as doing all they could to ensure that the suspended CJN did not appear in person before the CCT. The view has been expressed in some quarters that the suspended CJN appearing before the CCT would do grave damage to the high office he occupies. Those who belong to this school of thought clearly do not make a distinction between the occupant of an office as an individual and the office itself as an institution. That the man who sits at the very apex of the country’s justice administration system could be found to have so brazenly abused the law on the issue of assets declaration, is actually the issue that demeans and demystifies the judiciary. Ensuring that Onnoghen quickly comes before the law to clear his name beyond all reasonable doubts as regards the weighty allegations against him is the only way to restoring and preserving the honour and dignity of the office of CJN.

Though propounded over four decades ago, Professor Peter Ekeh’s theory of the two publics continues to offer a useful and insightful handle for understanding the character of the postcolonial Nigerian State as well as the often dysfunctional behaviors of its political class. Of course, the theory has, not unexpectedly, had its fair share of rigorous critiques. For instance, Professor Eghosa Osaghae, questions the validity of the assumption by Ekeh and some other scholars that an amoral value system is prevalent in the public realm and dominant among a not insubstantial number of the citizenry.

In Osaghae words,”…what they all fail to emphasize is the dynamic nature of values, and in this case that the pervasiveness of amoralism does not make it a monolith acceptable to all segments of society. It is certainly contested by the more nationalistic elements of civil society, who struggle to set new moral rules for behavior in the public realm. The wide support usually given to ‘strong’ ‘corrective’ governments in fact suggests that the amoral value system is not a settled terrain as is often assumed”.

Both during his first outing as military Head of State of Nigeria after the collapse of the Second Republic in 1983 and his current incarnation as elected President of Nigeria, Buhari best depicts those elements of civil society committed to fighting corruption and instilling high ethical values in the public consciousness. However, it is instructive that even though every government in Nigeria since independence-civilain or military – has pledged to tame the monster of corruption, they have all invariably left office even deeper steeped in the mire of graft than their predecessors.

Again, what often appears as strong support for ‘corrective’ regimes at inception is really in my view an expression of happiness by the populace at the fall of another set of ‘big men’. Those who vociferously condemn governments in power and are at the vanguard of campaigns to fight corruption by public office holders, most often, when they find themselves in power, exhibit even more avariciousness than former occupants of high office. Beyond transient euphoria at the arraignment in court of one big man or woman for alleged acts of corruption, amorality is the default mode of substantial segments of Nigeria’s state and civil society.

That is why President Buhari is often a loner in his war against corruption. Yes, his administration has recovered stupendous amounts of looted funds and assets both within and outside the country. A measure of the new climate of fiscal prudence and rectitude is that, unlike the 2015 elections, when the Dr. Goodluck Jonathan administration threw open the vaults for dollars to flow freely into the coffers of those who promised to guarantee him victory in their various spheres of influence, there is today no free money floating around even as the election draws nearer. But then, Buhari’s personal values of prudence and moral integrity are not enough to fight corruption. It is also the responsibility of the administration to device strategies to wean a critical mass of the citizenry away from an ultimately destructive amorality towards the inculcation of and commitment to ennobling values.

Of course, this cannot be achieved even in the two terms in office of Buhari should he win next Saturday’s election as widely presumed. But he has a unique opportunity to, at the very least, plant the irreversible seeds of moral integrity in our public life; seeds that will bloom and endure long after Buhari has quit the high office of President. To achieve this, President Buhari must urgently address the issue of the alleged nepotism in appointments to public office that has been an albatross on the neck of his administration. In a complex, plural society like ours, skewing appointments into public office in favour of a section of the polity creates the impression that some ethno-regional groups are being given preferment above others and not necessarily on the basis of merit.

It is certainly as a result of the amorality that underlies both state and civil society in contemporary Nigeria, that the Onnoghen saga has not elicited the kind of widespread condemnation and outrage the occasion demands.That would have forced the embattled jurist to voluntarily quit his office thus rendering unnecessary President Buhari’s drastic intervention leading to Onnoghen’s suspension. In other climes, with a high level of fidelity to positive moral values particularly with regard to those who hold public office, an officer in Onnoghen’s shoes would have long willingly quit his office rather than waiting to be forced out.

This crisis of morality is also evident in the way aspirants for elective office across parties approach elections. Most of the time, the aspirant prepares a budget to cater for electoral officers, security agents as well as induce voters with money. Virtually all the aspirants from the onset have winning at all costs and by all means fair or foul as their goal. Yet, when a winner emerges, the losing side almost invariably head to the election petitions tribunal claiming that the election was rigged. Thus, we have endless election petition cases putting tremendous pressure on judicial officers who become vulnerable to material inducement. In advanced democracies, candidates for office who see that they have lost immediately make a call congratulating the winner and conceding defeat.

It would appear that Ekeh’s theory of the two publics is even more relevant to Nigeria today than when it was first expounded in 1975. The theory has even begun to have wider ramifications beyond the public sphere. Now, the substantial number of cases of fraud and criminality by staff of big companies in diverse sectors of the economy shows that corruption is rampant not only in the public sector but also pervades the private sector. Perhaps some enterprising researcher will someday investigate the issue of corruption in the private sector and the implication for the economy.

Now, what if the suspended CJN was caught fiddling with the funds of his old school association network, his community town union or other such grassroots groups with deep primordial roots? It is unlikely that the matter would be handled with the same indifference and levity demonstrated by those who are more concerned with procedural details than the substantive infraction admitted to in writing by Onnoghen.

There was a time when the label of thief meant lifelong stigmatization and near total ostracism from respectable society. In contemporary Nigeria, a thief is a thief only if the accused does not belong to my ethno-regional group or yours. To fight corruption meaningfully, the apprehension of indicted persons, taking them to court and recovering looted funds and assets, is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for success. Equally critical is to tackle the amorality responsible for the condoning of acts of dishonesty by the populace.