Cover, Featured
–
President Muhammadu Buhari, who is generally regarded as an incorruptible leader, is being queried for his recent clearance of Babachir Lawal, secretary to the government of the federation and Ibrahim Magu, acting chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, of corrupt allegations, prompting the public to think that his corruption war is one sided
| By Olu Ojewale | Feb 6, 2017 @ 01:00 GMT |
THERE is a common thread running through these Nigerian politicians and government officials; Bukola Saraki, Senate president; Alex Badeh, a former chief of Defence Staff; Sambo Dasuki, a former national security adviser; Olisa Metuh, a former national publicity secretary of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP; Justice Nwali Ngwuta of the Nigerian Supreme Court; Justice Adeniyi Ademola of federal high court and Patrick Akpobolokemi, a former director general of the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency, NIMASA, among others. They are all alleged corrupt officials standing trial on corruption charges at various Nigerian courts.
On another side are also the likes of Babachir David Lawal, secretary to the federal government; Abbah Kyari, chief of staff to the President Muhammadu Buhari; Rotimi Amaechi, minister of Transport; Ogbonaya Onu, minister of Science and Technology; Babatunde Fashola, minister of Power, Housing and Works; Kayode Fayemi, minister of Mines and Mineral Resources; Ibrahim Magu, acting chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, are among others. They are also perceived corrupt government officials who should also be on trial, and perhaps, because of their closeness to the government, the Muhammadu Buhari administration appears to be unwilling or disinterested in testing the veracity of the allegations against them.
The perceived double-standard of the government caused an uproar in the Senate on Tuesday, January 24, by two separate letters from President Muhammadu Buhari and read by Bukola Saraki, Senate president. In the letters, Buhari pointed out some perceived flaws in the resolutions of the Senate last December against Babachir Lawal, secretary to government of the federation, SGF and Ibrahim Magu, acting chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC.
Using a technical ground, President Buhari in his letter dismissed the Senate resolution which asked that the president to fire Lawal and prosecute him, over alleged contract fraud.
The president, in another letter, re-nominated Magu and asked that he should be confirmed as there was no basis for his initial rejection by the Senate. The legislators had earlier rejected Magu on account that a Department of State Security Services report indicted him of corruption.
Indeed, a Senate committee report in November indicted Lawal of fraud in the N1.3billion Presidential Initiative on North East, PINE, contract, which prompted the legislators’ decision to write the president to sack and prosecute him.
But, in a letter to Saraki read at plenary on Tuesday, January 24, Buhari said he won’t sack Babachir because the Senate was not fair to him in arriving at its decision. Buhari said following a receipt of the Senate letter, he set up a review team to consider its recommendations and pointed out some perceived anomalies on which he rejected the Senate recommendations.
The president’s letter said in part: “The report forwarded to the presidency by the senate which informed the decision that Engr Babachir Lawal should resign and be prosecuted by the relevant authority S/Res/075/02/016 was an interim report as against a final report which ought to have been presented to the Senate in the plenary for adoption as a binding and final report before submission to the presidency given the weight of allegations made in the report.”
He also noted that the committee comprised of nine members whereas its interim report was only signed by three members namely senators Solomon Adeola, Yahaya Abdullahi, and Isaac M. Alfa.
He argued that that makes it a minority report and, therefore, presented a challenge for the Presidency to determine the weight to attach to the report.
The president further said that he had also observed that the interim report and the votes and proceedings of the Senate had not established that Lawal was ever given an opportunity to appear before the committee to defend himself.
Buhari pointed out that Rholavision Engineering Limited, the company linked to the SGF was also not invited by the committee to defend itself against the allegations which eventually formed the fulcrum of the Senate’s case against the company.
“You are invited to note that non-application of principles of fair hearing by the senate ad-hoc committee is a clear contravention of section 36 (1) of the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) and against all principles of rule of law as initiated in the Nigerian legal system as well as the rules of the National Assembly committees on handling of public petitions.
“Consequently, I am of the view that barring other consideration that may arise as a result of subsequent investigation of Engr. Lawal by the interim ad-hoc committee. The current report as presented to the presidency in its own right does not meet the principles of fair hearing and compliance with the senate rules for conduct of investigations in matters relating to abuse of office by public officers.
“In the light of the foregoing, I am not able to approve the recommendation to remove and prosecute Engr Lawal on the basis of the Senate ad-hoc committee report dated 15th December, 2016,” he said.
After the letter was read, Shehu Sani, chairman of the Adhoc committee on mounting humanitarian crisis in North East which indicted the SGF, said Buhari’s response was “a funeral service for the anti-corruption fight.”
The senator accused the president of being selective in his ant-graft campaign saying, “Mr President when it comes to fighting corruption in the National Assembly and the Judiciary and in the larger Nigeria sectors the president uses insecticide and when it comes to fighting corruption within the Presidency, they use deodorants… It is unfortunate that we have a political atmosphere where you have a saintly and angelic presidency and a devilish and evil society. We must in every respect fight corruption within the kitchen as we do in the veranda; if we don’t do that then we are being hypocritical.”
He said the president’s letter did not reflect the spirit which they would espouse as a people fighting to cleanse and fumigate the country of corruption.
Going further, the human rights activist said: “It is shocking to me that such a letter can come from the Presidency with such misinformation and outright distortions. They lied by saying that the committee didn’t invite the SGF; the committee invited the SGF and the letter was acknowledged by the permanent secretary in the office of the SGF, Mr. Aminu Nadehu
“To make sure that we buttress our point, we made a paid advert in three or four national dailies: (holding a copy of Daily Trust) this one was published on December 2, 2016 and the SGF is clearly mentioned as one of those expected to come and appear before the National Assembly.
“If they have the intention of simply reaching a pre-determined conclusion by covering up on the issues raised by the committee, that is one thing.”
On the president’s allegation that the report that indicted Lawal was signed by only three of the nine members of the committee, Sani said it was not true. He then showed a copy of the interim report, which he said was signed by seven of the nine members.
Notwithstanding, the conclusion of the Presidency on matter, Sani said: “Mr. President, I stand by the report of that committee and it is very clear to us: if we can allow this committee’s report to be shredded into pieces, then I think it would be in order for us to open all the 138 prisons in this country for all the convicts and awaiting trial inmates to go scot-free.”
At an earlier closed-door session that lasted for two hours, the senators took their turns to condemn Buhari’s response to the resolutions against Lawal and Magu.
The lawmakers were particularly irked by the president’s refusal to address the issues raised in the DSS security report on Magu. “Is it that the report never existed or that it has been withdrawn?” a senator asked.
Nevertheless, the Senate has summoned Lawal Daura, director-general of the DSS, to shed light on the agency’s indictment of Magu as an unfit person to head the EFCC.
Besides, the Senate was said to have resolved that three conditions must be met before confirming him. One, a report from President Buhari containing a fact-sheet on how a decision was reached to re-nominate Magu for the EFCC top-job. Two, withdrawal of security reports of the DSS on Magu, which were presented to the Senate about six weeks ago by the department. Three, a satisfactory performance by Magu before the Senate committee on Anti-Corruption and Financial Crimes, which has the mandate to screen him, where he would have the chance to clear himself of all corrupt allegations levelled against him.
It is believed that Magu’s re-nomination has now been putting pressure on the All Progressives Congress, APC, caucus, which has about 63 of the 109 senators.
That notwithstanding, the uproar which greeted the president’s two separate letters to the upper legislative chamber seems to have shown that the senators are also not convinced that the war on corruption by the government is not selective.
Aliyu Sabi Abdullahi, spokesman of the Senate, drove home the point when he said unethically that senators stood by their report on the SGF.
“We stand by the veracity of the interim report. By our rules one third is the number that is needed to sign the report. Three out of nine is ok but the report was signed by seven persons out of the nine members of the committee,” Abdullahi said.
He also said the letter to the Senate did not address the issue of the DSS report.
Corroborating Sani’s claim that seven persons signed the disputed interim report, Ali Wakili, a senator representing Bauchi State, said contrary to the president’s letter he signed the report of the committee.
Expectedly, Governor Ayodele Fayose of Ekiti State, sees a case of double standard on how Buhari has handled Lawal and Magu’s cases. Through Lere Olayinka, his special assistant on Public Communication and New Media, Fayose said: “This further demonstrates that the federal government is not fighting any corruption. It shows that only the people they don’t like are accused of corruption”
Echoing the same sentiments, the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, led by Ahmed Makarfi, a former senator, in a statement on Wednesday, January 25, signed Dayo Adeyeye, its spokesman, said clearing Lawal and Magu “has finally confirmed our earlier assertion that the ‘anti-corruption war’ of the APC-led administration is a ruse; a witch-hunting mechanism to harass PDP members and perceived enemies of this administration.”
Makarfi, on his part, said even if the Buhari administration should clear Lawal, the issue surrounding allegations would not die. “We should cast our minds back to Halliburton case, for example. All such matters are subject to review in the future especially when there is a new leadership. Therefore, we may not have heard the end of the story,” he said.
On Magu, Makarfi advised the Senate to go ahead and screen for confirmation. “All its observations and those forwarded to it by Nigerians should be discussed with him and ironed out. However, his confirmation should not be seen to be over politicised.”
On his part, Monday Ubani, a human rights lawyer and second national vice-president of the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA, is not happy about the way Buhari has handled the matter against Lawal. He said: “Since the issue was an issue between the legislature and executive, I expected the president to have directed the Police or the EFCC to carry out the investigation instead of another member of the same cabinet.” Ubani believes this would have given the report of the investigation more credibility.
“I expect the Presidency to give details of its basis for clearing the SGF to the public. Don’t forget that the SGF himself admitted that the company actually took the contract.”
Besides, he said the Presidency would need to convince the public that the whole contract was done in a transparent and legal way that did not put SGF in a situation of conflict of interest. “This also brings us to the issue of the need to put in place an enduring structure for fighting corruption that will remain even where there is a change in governments,” Ubani said.
That notwithstanding supporters of Buhari who perceive him as incorruptible would rather sideline the double standard being reported in the anti-graft war. Itse Sagay, SAN, a law professor and chairman of the Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption, PACAC, simply said that “from what I heard though I am not familiar with that case, what the president said was that the man had not been given fair hearing by the Senate. That is what I thought I heard and if that is the case, the Senate has to give him fair hearing and then after that, you can judge him.”
On Magu’s case, Sagay dismissed all the allegations against him as frivolous. He said: “The case of Mr. Magu is straight forward. Apart from doing an excellent job in the struggle to eradicate corruption, he has shown much integrity and commitment. The so-called charges have all turned out to be frivolous. For that, there is no basis for not re-presenting him in fact; the president has no choice than to re-present him. There is no choice other than for him to be re-nominated and it is in the best interest of this country.”
Abubakar Tsav, a retired Police commissioner, would want to believe that nothing substantial had been found against the two government officials. “It is likely that nothing substantial was found in the allegation against Magu and the secretary to the federal government. That was why the president wrote the letter to the Senate. It is a good development because an allegation needs to be established as truth before it could be used in making decisions.”
Whatever position anyone holds on the matter relating to the two senior government officials seems to be immaterial now as government is insisting to have its way. This, probably, has also given people an insight into why the government would not even entertain allegations against the likes of Amaechi, Onu, Kyari and others. They are very close to the president.
That, in itself, is a problem because the decision to absolve Lawal and Magu of any wrong without being allowed to go through the rigorous test of establishing the truth of the matter has also created doubts about the sincerity of the government to fight a just war on corruption. But whatever way the Buhari administration handles the matter is sure to be a campaign issue as the nation moves towards 2019, when Nigerians would have an opportunity to either renew the government’s mandate or find a better alternative.
Ahead of that time, the president probably needs to be reminded that being an incorruptible leader is one thing, keeping perceived corrupt aides under his canopy will be a big dent on his sincerity in fighting corruption. Like they say in the judiciary, ‘justice for one is justice for all.’
Besides, the president would need to be mindful of the fact that for the fourth consecutive year, Nigeria has failed to rise in the Transparency International’s Corruption Perception ranking.
The TI, which released its 2016 report on Thursday, January 26, ranked Nigeria 136 out of 176 countries. A wake up call! No doubt.
— Feb 6, 2017 @ 01:00 GMT
|
Tags:
