It is no longer hidden that President Muhammadu Buhari and
his co-travellers in the country’s current state of toxaemia have fully
resorted to political terrorism and barbarism in their so called
“anti corruption crusade”. Hiding under the guise of “anti corruption” to
perpetrate heinous State crimes such as treason, State murder and other
forms of official terrorism, had been a recurring decimal in Nigeria;
dating back to January 1966, during Nigeria’s first military coup. Major Gen
Muhammadu Buhari (as he then was), used the same excuse to oust the democratically
elected Presidency of Shehu Shagari on 31st December 1983.
Since
then, successive military and civilian governments in Nigeria had laid claims
to “fight against corruption” as the corner stone of their administrations. The
Obasanjo civilian administration of 1999-2007, was exceptionally noted to have
gone extra mile in creating visible anti corruption agencies such as EFCC and
ICPC, created between 2000 and 2004. His anti corruption policies were also
relatively proactive, civil and rule of law compliant; whereas those of the
past military and civilian administrations particularly that of the Buhari
military regime (1984-85) were archaic, retrogressive and repressive. This is
on repeat mission in the current Presidency of Muhammadu Buhari with worst yet
to happen.
In all
these, Nigeria has ended up losing billions of dollars to its criminal
political gangsters with over 90% of the looted funds ending up not recovered.
The worst is that the more the host administration shouts “fight against corruption”,
the more public funds are looted in its present and connivance with reckless
abandon. Corrupt practices in Nigeria have not only gone e-gold
or electronically undetected, but they have also been entrenched and clothed
with impunity. As we speak, criminal enrichment in the country
going viral with illicitly acquired properties springing up in leading Nigerian
cities. A trip to Nigerian roads and security checkpoints is another eye opener
and a fundamental measurement of President Buhari’s policy-noise on
corruption. Extortion at military (including soldiers and navy) checkpoints is
now scientific and artistic with civilian agents recruited as collection agents
under negotiated percentage settlements.
In Nigeria
of present political composition, looters are endlessly looking for
the looted with the looting going on rampage underneath or expressly. A
president who is flown in a private jet, acquired with looted funds, is busy
looking for the looters. Lawyers particularly the Silk, who illicitly charge
roguish serving and former political office holders hundreds of millions of
naira as consultancy and professional fees in high profile State graft or
electoral cases, from illicit public funds, have joined “the fight against
corruption”. Those who milked dry States like Rivers, Lagos and Edo and left
them in quandary of indebtedness and penury are now “agents of anti
corruption”; likewise print, visual and a number of pro establishment online
media, acquired with looted public funds.
Some
mainstream CSOs and their leaders with juicy cuts from looted funds; propertied
and motorized, are also “singers of anti corruption in Nigeria”. Today, in
Nigeria of Buhari’s Presidency, political opponents and opponent activists and
independent senior judicial officers are cajoled, threatened, repressed and
labelled “looters” and treated like violent criminals. These respected citizens
are routinely taken into custody before investigation with prima
facie evidence thousands of miles away to be laid on against them. When in custody,
torture becomes a routine to force them to admit committing non-existent crimes
or offences. Where reverse is the case, they are held incommunicado for months
with impunity and untried.
Fighting
corruption with “captains or doyens of corruption” leading the way or procuring
the “government in power”, is akin to inviting a serial human parts dealer to
come and become a defender of human rights in the human rights community. These
explain the current State of bastardized and corrupted anti corruption policy
direction of the Buhari Administration; where political terrorism and barbarism
now hold sway.
Having
carefully studied the recent late night State violence by President Buhari’s
DSS against some respected senior judicial officers and associated revelations
by some of them including Hon Justices John Inyang Okoro and Sylvester Nwuta
Nwali (serving Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria) as well as Hon
Justices Adeniyi Ademola, Mu’azu Pindiga and Nnamdi Dimgba (serving Judges of
the Federal and State High Court); we are, again, shocked and dismayed as what
Nigeria has turned into in the past 17 months of Buhari’s Presidency. The roles
of the print and visual media and a number of pro establishment online media
are also very saddening; likewise the turn-coat position of the
NBA.
These
quickly remind us of an immortal advice handed down to one Chris Ubah by Mr.
Peter Obi (as he then was), who later became the Governor of Anambra State. The
latter had advised the former to “guide his unguided utterances against judges
handling the then Anambra State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal
(September 2003 to August 2005) because it will take him 20 years to become a
judge, that is if he so wishes and goes back to school to continue from where
he dropped in junior secondary school”
These
explain our deep sadness over coordinated attacks and image damnation launched
by the Buhari Administration against the named serving senior judicial
officers, using its riotous DSS and compromised media. While we have no
apologies for any serving senior judicial officer that corruptly enriches
him/herself or that allows him/herself to be corrupted, provided he or she is
processed, prosecuted and punished in accordance with due process and
constitutionalism; we condemn in unequivocal terms the deliberate and
coordinated ruination of innocent others who have toiled and laboured to build
and protect their integrity by being contented and refusing to be corrupted or
tainted.
Launching
campaigns of calumny and criminal stigmatization against a set of innocent
serving senior judicial officers on account of their refusal to pervert the
course of justice to impress the riotous agents of the Buhari Administration,
is totally an irreparable damage, not only to the judges and
their career but also to the collective image of Nigeria as a whole. This is
more so when it is logically grounded that three out of every five Local
Government Areas (LGAs) in Nigeria’s 774 LGAs may most likely not produce a
Supreme Court Justice in twenty years, if not more than that.
It is also tearful and heart-bleeding as how the
conscience of the nation or democratic institutions in the country has turned
over night into agents of darkness and layers of dictatorship and
lawlessness. Rather than standing up at all times in defense of
democracy and rule of law, reverse is now the case. To the extent that Senior
Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) (staunch defenders of the rule of law) now call for
the suspension of rule of law in a democratic setting; likewise defense of
illegalities by some, if not many of Nigeria’s foremost professors of
criminology, constitutional and criminal laws as well as human rights
activists, stomached by the Buhari Administration; Nigeria and its democracy
are doomed.
In all these, our questions to the Buhari Administration
and its riotous DSS are: What is the difference between a mad man running
amok with a sharp knife in a crowded market and a perceived sane man running
behind and chasing him with another sharp knife in the same crowded market?
Between two of them; who is insane and who is sane?
We asked the above questions because it has become an
entrenched routine for the Buhari Administration to bend rules and resort to
short-cut, lawlessness, illegality and unconstitutionality in its governance
approaches, particularly in its so called “anti corruption crusade”. Though
President Muhammadu Buhari himself, seconds President Jacob Zuma of South
Africa in the world ranking of the least educated Presidents, yet it is also an
incontestable fact that his Administration parades an assemblage of leading
scholars in law and criminology. The movers and shakers in Nigeria’s mainstream
CSOs are also part and parcel of its Administration; yet the Administration has
continued to behave or operate as an outlaw or a brigand political entity.
For the
purpose of putting the records straight and advocacy and technical
enlightenment, crimes, as we have them today in the globe are
divided into two major categories of “mala inse” (crimes with global application
and acceptance such as murder, armed robbery, asportation, carjacking, aviation
terrorism, rape, arson, burglary, etc) and “mala prohibita” (anti social
conducts defined differently by different countries as crimes or otherwise,
such as adultery, victimless crime (i.e. prostitution) and some categories of
white-collar crimes).
Further, “corruption” and most of its agents as a crime
appear to fall under “mala inse” because of its global
reprehension leading to the adoption of the United Nations’ Convention
against Corruption (UNCAC) by the member-States of the United Nations
including Nigeria in 2003. The UN Anti Corruption Convention entered into force
on 14th of December 2005 with 176 signatories and 140 full
State-Parties including Nigeria, which signed it on 3rd December
2003 and ratified same on 14th December 2004.
“Corruption”,
globally is a complex social,
political and economic phenomenon which still battles with a uniformed global
definition. It involves misconducts in public and private sectors for the
purpose of illicitly obtaining material and non material gains or favors. To be
punishable, corruption must pass through the process of
codification in a written and known criminal law by a member-State of the UN. Corruption,
on its own, cannot a constitute crime or an offense, except aided by
its agents such as bribery, fraud, kickbacks, extortion, embezzlement, money
laundering, obtaining by false pretence, etc.
Corruption
also belongs to the family of invisible
crimes called “white-collar crimes”. “Invisible
crimes” are so called because of difficulties in detecting them. Most
importantly, they are nonviolent in nature (i.e. their
perpetrators do not use physical violence in perpetrating them). They are very
common in “white-collar” society or civil service or pen-culture
society, dominated by government and corporate entities. The opposite of “white-collar
crimes” are “blue-collar crimes” or “street crimes”
(stealing, robbery, auto theft, burglary, youth crimes, abduction, arson, etc),
usually common in “blue-collar society” or commercial areas or cash-economy.
To Prof Edwin Sutherland (1949) of the Chicago
Criminological School, “white-collar crime” is a crime committed by
a person of respectability and high social status in the course of his or her
occupation or office business. It arises from fraud, embezzlement, electronic
or cyber crime, bribery, insider trading, kick-backs, contract inflation,
over-invoicing, identity theft, forgery, money laundering etc. The concept of white-collar crimes was
popularized by Prof Sutherland in 1949.
Pieces of
evidence required for an offense of corruption against any perpetrator
substantially start from electronic and paper based evidence and
end in same. Investigations associated with corrupt practices start from behind-the-scene
(i.e. data mining with or without the knowledge of the suspect) and end with investigator-suspect
interface (for clarifications and pre-prosecutorial fair hearing).
Investigations into corrupt cases do not require late night invasion of homes
and other dwelling houses as well as breaking into such homes with sledge
hammers, acid substances, etc or corruption and abuse of search warrants (if
any). The defence of retrieval of criminal proceeds is watery and
impeachable; even if the movement of criminal proceeds was detected by secret
police at ungodly hours, intelligence and policing surveillance methods
remain the legally acceptable or permissible approaches until the godly hours
return.
Search warrants must not be executed unless the suspects
are present and put on credible notice. Forcing suspects (i.e. Justices and
Judges) to sign such warrants or purported inventories for items purportedly
recovered, amount to armed robbery, burglary, torture, assault and threats to
life and properties. Besides, corruption must be handled by the requisite anti
graft agencies such as Police, EFCC and ICPC. DSS has no statutory or
constitutional duties whatsoever in the law enforcement aspect of anti
corruption crusade. If for any reason, it has intelligence, it should be
exchanged or passed to anti corruption agencies like EFCC, Police and ICPC.
It is therefore, in recognition of hefty challenges and
difficulties associated with detection and punishment of crime of corruption
that the United Nations strongly recommended “Prevention” as the most
effective approach at curbing it. The UN, through its Convention against
Corruption (UNCAC), specifically allocated 60% to Prevention, 20%
to Prosecution/Punishment and 20% to international
cooperation, technical cooperation and information exchange among
Member-States.
According
to the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), corruption
can be prosecuted after the fact, but first and foremost, it requires
prevention. An entire chapter of the Convention is dedicated to prevention,
with measures directed at both the public and private sectors. These include
model preventive policies, such as the establishment of anticorruption bodies
and enhanced transparency in the financing of election campaigns and political
parties. States must endeavour to ensure that their public services are subject
to safeguards that promote efficiency, transparency and recruitment based on
merit.
Once recruited, public servants should be subject to codes
of conduct, requirements for financial and other disclosures, and appropriate
disciplinary measures. Transparency and accountability in matters of public
finance must also be promoted, and specific requirements are established for
the prevention of corruption, in the particularly critical areas of the public
sector, such as the judiciary and public procurement. Those who use public
services must expect a high standard of conduct from their public servants.
Preventing public corruption also requires an effort from
all members of society at large. For these reasons, the Convention calls on
countries to promote actively the involvement of non-governmental and
community-based organizations, as well as other elements of civil society, and
to raise public awareness of corruption and what can be done about it. Article
5 of the Convention enjoins each State Party to establish and promote effective
practices aimed at the prevention of corruption. The UNCAC also recommended domestic criminalization
of agents of corruption in line with international best practices as well as
strict adherence to rule of law and human rights in tackling the perpetrators.
Tackling corruption can only be meaningful and result-oriented if Government
or Political Corruption is curbed or tamed drastically. By Government
or Political Corruption, it simply means when a public office holder or
other government employees act reprehensively in an official capacity for
personal or material gain. It is also official misuse of powers or public
resources for personal gain.
Others amounting to
encouragement of corruption and abuse of office are: Patronage:
Undue favors given to supporters of government officials. Nepotism/Cronyism:
Illegitimate act of favoring relatives and personal friends of government
officials as well as shielding them from investigation.
Apart from the fact that there
are 22 or more anti graft agencies and criminal enactments in Nigeria, which
include the EFCC Act (2004), the ICPC Act (2000), the Money Laundering
Prohibition Act of 2004, the Advance Fee Fraud & Other Related Offenses Act
(1995), the Failed Banks (Recovery of Debts) & Other Financial Malpractices
in Banks Act (1994), the Banks & Other Financial Institutions Act of 1991;
and Miscellaneous Offenses Act, the Corrupt Proceeds & Properties’
Forfeiture Act of 1999, and the Criminal and the Penal Codes of 2004 and the ACJA
2015; corruption and abuse of office are also
constitutionally prohibited in Nigeria in Section 15 (5) of the 1999
Constitution. Section 15 (5) of the Constitution provides as follows: “the
State shall abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of office”.
In fighting corruption in
Nigeria, the rule of law and constitutionalism must remain its benchmark at all
times. Turning fight against corruption into instruments for political
vendetta, terrorism and brigandage is democratically dicey and disastrous. The
agencies in charge of investigation and prosecution of corruption cases in
Nigeria including the Buhari Administration are constitutionally restrained
from stigmatizing and criminalizing those under investigation or using
corruption as a cover to unleash State terror, falsehood and propaganda against
them. Till date, offense of corruption in Nigeria is not a capital offense, but
substantially misdemeanour; easily investigative and triable; substantially
requiring paper and electronic evidence; once detected.
Corruption also belongs to the family of nonviolent crimes; just
like victimless crimes (i.e. alcoholism and commercial sex habits).
While Section 35 of the 1999
Constitution guarantees the citizens’ right to personal liberty,
subsections (8) and (12) of Section 36 forbid the Buhari Administration
from subjecting the citizens to trial-by-ordeal or jungle justice and
guarantee the citizens’ rights to fair hearing and presumption of innocence
unless found guilty by courts of competent jurisdiction. The citizens’ right to
privacy is also protected by Section 37 of the Constitution.
The Presidency of Buhari is also
guilty of favouritism and nepotism, which belongs to family
of corruption and amounts to corruption and abuse of office, contrary
to Section 15 (5) of the 1999 Constitution. Till date, despite the seriousness
of allegations made against Mr. Rotimi Amechi by two respected Justices of the
Supreme Court in their recent letters to the CJN, concerning the late night
invasion of their homes by the DSS, which raises a serious image and
credibility challenge to the Administration’s so called “fight against
corruption”, Mr. Rotimi Amechi, who is a Minister of the Federal Republic of
Nigeria; has neither been invited nor under any form of criminal investigation
by the DSS or Police or EFCC or ICPC.
We call on the affected serving
senior Judicial Officers particularly Hon Justices Sylvester Ngwuta Nwali, John
Inyang Okoro, Nnamdi Dimgba, Adeniyi Ademola and Mu’azu Pindiga to use all
means constitutionally available to clear their names and seek remedial and
compensatory justice against the named riotous agents of the Buhari
Administration. With the exception of those judges indicted and sanctioned by
the NJC, the judges above named and others singled out for further
intimidation, must stand firm at all times and refuse to be intimidated. The
courage and sagacity of the named respected serving senior Judicial Officers
are totally commendable. We rise in strong solidarity with the Nigerian
Judiciary to save the rule of law from brink and executive bastardization.
The Buhari Administration is,
therefore, called upon to retrieve from the DSS files containing its so called
“ongoing investigation of the judges” and transfer them to the office of the
Deputy Inspector General of Police in charge of Force Criminal
Investigation Department (FCID) and its fraud unit. Any would-be outcome of the
so called DSS probe is already dead, biased, corrupted and malicious on
arrival.
The Buhari Administration must
also sack Hon Rotimi Amechi as a Minister of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in
charge of Ministry of Transportation so as to pave way for his criminal
investigation on account of strong allegations against him bordering on
corruption and electoral fraud as contained in the letters of Hon Justices Sylvester
Ngwuta Nwali and John Inyang Okoro (serving Justices of the Supreme Court of
Nigeria), to the CJN; which are now in the public domain. This is because Their
Lordships are incapable of making such weighty allegations without knowing
their accompanying consequences; if untrue.
Signed:
Emeka Umeagbalasi, Board
Chairman
International Society for
Civil Liberties & the Rule of Law (Intersociety)
Mobile Line: +2348174090052
Obianuju Igboeli, Esq.
Head, Civil Liberties & Rule
of Law Program
Mobile
Line: +2348180771506
Email: info@intersociety-ng.org
Website: www.intersociety-ng.org
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please restrict your comment to the subject matter.