The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Returned

  • Returned to owner

    •It is a positive development that Nigeria gets more of its looted funds back

    Nigeria received the welcome news of a British court ruling that the U.S. $85 million seized from entities involved in the celebrated Malabu Oil case be remitted to the Federal Government. This legal outcome represents an anti-corruption triumph for the Buhari administration; and, just as important, it highlights determination to follow due process in the recovery of stolen monies.

    It was certainly not an easy battle: there were formidable adversaries, including the multinational oil giants Shell BP and ENI, the shell company Malabu Oil and Gas, as well as wealthy and well-connected Nigerian politicians; the legal battle had a wide range that included countries in Africa, Europe and the United States, spanning nearly two decades and several administrations.

    In 1998, the then oil minister, Dan Etete, awarded an oil block, OPL 245, to Malabu, a company owned by him. It was revoked by the Obasanjo administration and later restored. The block eventually became the subject of dispute between Shell and ENI, a quarrel which was ostensibly settled in 2011 when the Jonathan administration paid $1.092 billion to Malabu for it. $215 million of this amount was held back by British commercial courts at the request of an Etete associate, who was claiming it as Malabu’s share.

    The final forfeiture ruling comes after UK courts had dismissed Malabu’s suit for the payment of the $85 million, and after allegedly refusing to reply to legal correspondence from the Federal Government’s lawyers for a year.

    This is a welcome triumph for a country worn out by unremitting allegations of corruption against politically exposed persons, especially the top functionaries of previous administrations. In this case, the allegations were substantiated through the exhaustive collation of evidence, the deposition of witnesses in Nigeria, the United States and Europe, and the diligent prosecution of the case in a British court.

    Nigeria cannot afford to rest on its oars, however. The total sum in question is a princely $1.1 billion. $85 million, as substantial as it is, is less than one per cent of that amount. This was a civil suit, not a criminal one; the public office-holders, security operatives and oil company executives who were the major actors in this tawdry manifestation of cupidity must not get away with what they did.

    The Federal Government has instituted its own prosecutions in relation to the Malabu case, and must ensure that they are successfully concluded in the manner this case was. Far too many corruption prosecutions in local courts have been stymied by multiple adjournments and legal technicalities with the result that very few of them have reached a conclusion.

    As the country celebrates this victory, all stakeholders must renew their commitment to fight corruption and financial malfeasance to a standstill. Investigative bodies like the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB), and the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), must realise that indicting culprits is insufficient.

    They must also ensure that evidence is meticulously gathered and presented so that cases can be effectively prosecuted in court. Judges must disallow manipulation and time-wasting in the cases before them, and should stop legal technicalities from getting in the way of substantive matters.

    As significant as it is, the victory over Malabu is in only a minor skirmish in an extensive war. Transparency International’s 2016 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) ranked Nigeria 136th out of 175 nations with a score of 28 percent. The National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) estimates that some N400 billion is given to public officials as bribes every year. In spite of the concerted efforts of the Buhari administration, the country’s oil industry is still mired in sleaze.

    The battle must continue until complete victory is achieved.

     

  • Buhari and the returned loot

    Buhari and the returned loot

    President should focus on bringing looters to book

    President Muhammadu Buhari’s disclosure that some of those who reportedly looted public fund under the Jonathan administration have started returning same quietly to the treasury might have been intended to assure  Nigerians of the government’s seriousness to fight corruption; but it has spurred controversies across the land.

    President Buhari, who gleefully made the announcement in obvious response to insinuations that not much change has been seen or felt since he took over the reins of government, is an indication that he is yet to fully appreciate the depth of the problem, and the demands of democracy.

    The president should realise that he is acting on behalf of the Nigerian state and people whose money was siphoned and misapplied. He therefore owes the people a duty of full disclosure. Who are those who embezzled the funds, thus depriving the people of basic necessities of life, and are now secretly making returns?

    It is also the duty of the president to get the appropriate agencies of government to probe the circumstances and determine how much was actually stolen. It cannot be left for the looters to determine how much to return and when.

    Besides, corrupt enrichment is a crime against the state. It is therefore punishable. It is out of tune with the laws of the land that thieves be shielded. It amounts to encouraging such acts.

    But, in doing this, the president ought to appreciate the limitation to his powers. He is the Chief Executive of the Federation, not the judiciary. All alleged looters should be arraigned before the courts, tried and if found guilty, the penalties spelt out in the statutes should be fully applied. Only then could it be said that corruption is being fought by the Buhari administration.

    It is apposite to ask the government the account into which the recovered money is being remitted. This has become important in view of allegations that some money recovered in similar circumstances in the past could not be traced. In recent times, too, anti-corruption czars have been charged with mismanaging such funds. It behoves the president to apprise Nigerians of everything concerning this. We call on him to put a stop to this surreptitious return of looted funds, and give a full account of what has been so returned. The Federal Ministry of Finance should speak out on the matter.

    We advise that the president to desist from encouraging mere refund of whatever is negotiated behind the doors and refrain from making such comments.

    Nigerians have lost so much. The education system is in a shambles and this has affected the quality of learning, thus impairing development. The real sector of the economy is shrinking daily. As such, the manufacturing sector has, in the past three quarters, recorded negative growth. This has translated to unemployment for the teeming youth and is a threat to the health of the nation. It is certainly a frightening prospect for national security.

    At a time new ministers and other officials of state have just been appointed, and others being considered, the president should not be seen to be condoning corruption in any way. He should remain focused and consistent in presenting himself as having zero tolerance for corrupt practices. Leakages in the system account for more than half the published expenditure yearly. This much was once disclosed by a former chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mallam Nuhu Ribadu.

    Moreover, it is unfortunate that the president continues to make important policy statements and breaks news to the foreign media and Nigerians in the Diaspora. While acknowledging that Nigerians abroad retain their rights, it should be realised that his primary duty is to interact with the people at home who elected him and to whom he is primarily responsible. No other world leader succeeds or expects to succeed by holding his people and critical institutions in contempt.

    The Nigerian media was fully involved in the battle for change that produced him as president. The news that the president would not appoint ministers before September was first broken while on a similar foreign visit, he said ministers are mere noise makers and the civil service should be credited with sustaining governance in the country.

    The battle for cleansing the society should not be left for the president and his team. It is a battle for all patriots. If the anti-corruption war is to be won, we all owe it a duty to the fatherland to scrutinise processes and mechanisms adopted in enthroning new values in the society. In this case, we call on the civil society community, especially the network of organisations involved in the campaign against corruption and those promoting good governance practices to step up advocacy, reminding the president at all times of his pledge to Nigerians during the election campaign.

  • ‘Why ATM charges were returned’

    The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has defended the return of Automated Teller Machines (ATMs) charges, saying it is to relieve banks of financial burdens after it was removed in December 2012.

    CBN Director, Banking & Payments System Department, ‘Dipo Fatokun said the N65 charge would cover the remuneration of the switches, ATM monitors and fit-notes processing by acquiring banks.

    He told The Nation in Lagos: “It is not a reintroduction per se. You have to agree with me that when the amendment was made in December 2012, it used to be N100 on any remote on us withdrawal that you do.

    “And you know a remote on us is when a cardholder goes to ATM of a bank, other than his bank, to withdraw cash. It was removed then, so that people can be encouraged to go to other ATMs without paying for it. But the truth is that as we explained that the N100 include N35 that goes to the issuing bank, which has now been completely waived. The issuing bank does not make any thing.

    “But in going to other ATMs to make withdrawals, your bank, the acquirer bank incurs a cost of N65 which they pay to the switches, and the owner of the ATM that you are using.”

    Fatokun said between 2012, and now, when the review was done, it was discovered that people had actually turned ATMs into their personal purses because nothing was charged.

    “Somebody needs N500; he will go to ATMs and withdraw. He needs, N1,000 he will go to an ATM, such that in a day, some people can patronise ATMs up to eight times. This has created a huge cost burden for the banks that issued the cards and it is becoming discouraging to them.

    “That is why we said that the remote-on-us, will still continue, but  it is when you make the fourth withdrawal that N65 that  has to be paid on your behalf will apply. Still, customers can withdraw any amount from their banks’ ATMs without paying fees,” he said.

    Policy, Fatokun said, did not discourage financial inclusion as claimed by some people, adding that cash-less banking encourages use of e-payment channels like Point-of-Sale (PoS) and online payment, among others.

    “Remember that when you talk about cash-less, you are encouraging people to do their transactions, other than cash. So, it is not discouragement, really, it is a motivation,” he said.

    Fatokun explained that the charge would apply as from the fourth transaction in another bank’s ATM. “The fee shall apply in ‘’Remote-on-us’’ withdrawal (in a month) by a card holder, thereby making the first three ‘remote-on-us transactions free for the card holder, but to be paid for by the issuing bank. September 1, shall be the effective date for the implementation of the new fee,” he said.

  • Consumers want SON returned to Ports

    Some consumers over the weekend in Abuja called on the Federal Government to return the Standards Organisations of Nigeria (SON) to the ports.

    They told the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) that the increase in substandard products in the market had made the return of SON operatives imperative at the entry points.

    They said the presence of SON was needed at those points to complement the duties of the other security and regulation agencies.

    Chief Omeya Okoh said the nation’s markets would continued to be inundated with fake and substandard products “because of weak restrictive measures at the sea and air ports”.

    According to him, the withdrawal of SON from the ports is inimical to the fight against substandard goods.

    “It is better to stop those products at the point of entry than deploying measures to find them after they have entered into the market.

    “The current effort of SON at curbing substandard product is, to best of my knowledge, not effective because our markets are flooded with fake goods.

    “I call on the Federal Government to return SON to the borders and ports in order to reduce this menace,’’ he said.

    Mr Patrick Aturu said all agencies responsible for discouraging smuggling and illegal trade must be empowered to perform their duties more effectively.

    “SON has done very well in the past while they were properly deployed. Their withdrawal from those points should be reversed.”

  • Why I returned to Labour Party, by ex-Ondo commissioner

    Why I returned to Labour Party, by ex-Ondo commissioner

    Former Ondo State Commissioner for Works Hon. Yele Omogunwa spoke with KAYODE ALFRED on his travails in politics and why he returned to the Labour Party (LP), despite his previous disagreement with Governor Segun Mimiko.

    What is the solution to the insurgency by the Boko Haram sect?

    I pity Mr. President on the issue. I believe the problem of Boko Haram predates the administration of Dr. Goodluck Jonathan. I understand that Mr. President set up a committee to dialogue with them. Are they really faceless people? Today, you hear that Shekau has been killed; tomorrow, a radio or video tape will surface debunking his death. Conflicting reports everywhere about who killed who, number of death and casualties and so on re being bandied everywhere. We even hear that they have inroads into our security system. So, dialogue is important to this matter whatever it will take to save the life of Nigeria and our children. Then if dialogue fails, we can explore military onslaught. Yes, we must face it.

    You were also a Commissioner of Works under the Governor Segun Mimiko of Ondo State before you resigned. What necessitated your resignation and how was your experience?

    The moment you can’t meet your aspirations, whether you are there or not, you are just wasting your time. I did not start my political career as the Commissioner for Works. I’ve been in the political system for over 25 years. I started from the grassroots. I was a Supervisory Counsellor for Education in Irele Local Government. I’ve been the Local Government Secretary. I was a chairman in that local government before I became Commissioner for Education under late Chief Adefarati, where I spent three and a half years or thereabouts. I have stint in three ministries. These ministries they are sharing in Ondo State today by three commissioners were overseen by me as one ministry; they are Ministries of Information, Youths, Sports Development and Culture. I managed them as Commissioner of Information, Youths, Sports Development and Culture. Then, there was a cabinet reshuffle and I was moved to the Ministry of Education, perhaps because of my background. The late Adefarati was awarded the best governor in education. This meant we were doing well in education. So, when the opportunity for elections into the Senate came, I saw it as a bigger platform to impact lives of more people. There was rule by the party (Labour Party) that if you want to contest for a political office, you must resign your present office. So I decided to run for the Senate and I resigned, more so that my local government has never had the opportunity of being represented by anybody in the Senate. Despite the fact that I knew that all odds were against me – I was not favoured – but because I had set my hands on the plough, I resigned my position as Commissioner for Works and as a member of Labour Party. I left my friend (Governor Mimiko). You know in politics, there are no permanent friends nor enemies but permanent interests. Yes, I left the party. Then, there were overtures; the governor was talking to me. “We’ve come a long way. We’ve suffered together. Why not come back and see what God will do.” After a while, precisely January 13, 2012, he came visiting me with two other people. I spoke my mind and we settled. You people say the devil you know is better than the angel you don’t know. I know Governor Mimiko very well, his politics and style. So, I went back to the party, but with a condition that I would not want to be appointed a commissioner again.

    What is your assessment of party politics in Ondo State, especially in the light of the newly formed APC?

    The APC in Ondo State is still an underdog. There are three political parties of note in Ondo State; the PDP, the APC and the Labour Party, which is the biggest for now. APC is just coming on board. By my assessment, I don’t see them doing anything in Ondo State. The only difference in the ACN and the APC in Ondo State is just the change of name. It is still the same set of people. I don’t know, if they have gotten new converts, but there is no convert of note that I have learnt of. We know every individual from various communities who work magic. If none of these people have not joined the party, who will want to listen to you? Though it is too early to really say, but I don’t see as any strong opposition in APC as far as Ondo State is concerned.

    Then, I need to comment on the crises in the PDP at the national level. The crisis in the PDP should be arrested on time, lest they throw this country into turmoil. The Baraje-led PDP faction versus Tukur-led faction portends danger for the country, if allowed to degenerate. It is well and good, if the crises favour the opposition to take power, but military intervention will be a bad experience.

    What is your future ambition, as the party prepares for 2015?

    My political ambition is to remain a politician. In what capacity is what I have not made up my mind on because I’m not God. I lost my 2011 senatorial ambition because I had no godfather; I did not have the support of the governor. I mapped out a fantastic campaign strategy. I was going about campaigning. When it comes to grassroots politics, I think under a fair contest external hands within the two of us – myself and the incumbent Senator – it could have been a big fight. But he had the heart, the eye and the mind of the governor which I did not have. You know in our political setting, just the body language of the governor would tell the people where the pendulum would swing. Even my own people would say ‘He is the governor, we dare not criticise him’ as if the governor is God. That godfatherism I did not have then. I have been out of government for the past three and a half years; a senator is sitting, some people are in government and they have what it takes to contest elections but I have God. So, at the right time, God will show me the next step. Yes, governorship could come to the South or the North, but it will depend on some variables. Nobody knows the mind of the Governor. If I were him, I will work on a successor, so that he could keep the flag flying. But note that there are other parties too, even though Labour Party is the darling party in power now. But, if things are not done well, you know human beings.

  • Returned to owner

    Returned to owner

    In a very welcome display of international concern for the well-being of Nigeria’s cultural heritage, the French government has returned five Nok terracotta figures which had been illegally taken out of the country. The statuettes had been found in the luggage of a traveller by French customs officials and had been seized pending a determination of their provenance. After exhaustive research, it was discovered that they were authentic Nok art works of great antiquity and virtually beyond price.

    Given the depressing presence of thousands of Nigerian artefacts scattered across museums and private collections in different parts of the world, it is heart-warming that France has seen the self-evident wisdom in ensuring that such priceless works of art are returned to the country where they were produced. Instead of remaining indifferent to the situation and permitting the large-scale theft of Nigeria’s artistic patrimony to continue unheeded, the French government sought to ensure that it would no longer be a conduit for such illegalities.

    The French example should be adopted by other countries, in particular, Britain and the United States. Both countries have museums and collections full of ancient Nigerian art, much of which left the country in tragic or suspicious circumstances. Many items were looted by British forces in the various military campaigns that established colonial rule. The British Museum, the Museum of Mankind and the Wallace Collection are full of illegally-acquired art treasures. In more recent times, the large-scale theft of cultural artefacts has been the main source of illegally-exported items.

    While Benin bronzes are the best-known example of stolen Nigerian artwork in foreign countries, there is also an extensive collection of royal household art stolen from palaces across Nigeria and illegally taken beyond its shores. These artefacts are openly displayed in museums that have consistently refused all requests by successive Nigerian administrations to return them. No country should be a willing accomplice in the theft of a nation’s cultural heritage.

    It is also clear that Nigeria itself has to demonstrate its own seriousness in reducing the problem to the barest minimum. The country’s museums, palaces and cultural institutions are so badly-secured that thieves simply walk in and help themselves to the treasures on display. The ease with which hundreds of items leave the country’s shores annually also leaves a great deal to be desired. There appears to be no system of identifying, documenting and keeping track of Nigerian artworks, and this makes it difficult to investigate cases of art theft. When culprits are apprehended, they are rarely brought to court.

    Nigeria must ensure that it expands its capacity to properly preserve and store cultural artefacts. It must also be prepared to participate actively in investigating art theft, especially the suspected collusion of highly-placed officials in the illegal export of artwork. When stolen art is returned, it should trigger a comprehensive examination of how it was stolen and exported in the first place. Whoever is found to have been complicit in such illegalities must face appropriate sanctions. In the specific case of the returned Nok statuettes, for example, the country should ensure that legal proceedings are initiated against the individual with whom they were found.

    As the country puts its own house in order, it can then pursue restitution claims against foreign countries with renewed vigour. The return of stolen artefacts can be built into bilateral agreements and bi-national commissions; it should be reiterated ceaselessly at meetings with officials from the nations concerned; it could be made a pre-condition of all cultural exchange agreements. Nigeria should show the world just how serious it is about the ownership, preservation and retention of its priceless cultural heritage.