SEEKING to rejuvenate its weakened anti-corruption war, the Federal Government has empanelled yet another committee to “monitor and evaluate” the implementation of the National Anti-Corruption Strategy. The 17-man committee’s mandate, according to the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, is to ensure that the anti-corruption strategy is delivered to Nigerians. This is another cosmetic move: slaying the monster requires mustering a strong political will, effective coordination and unflagging commitment by key functionaries.
None of these three is in evidence today, thereby denying the campaign of the popular buy-in that experts say is critical in stamping out pervasive corruption. Malami appears to set great store by the panel he inaugurated in Abuja last week. Following on the national strategy adopted in April last year, he said the committee, whose members include civil society activists, would monitor and provide annual reports of the progress made in implementing the national strategy and rely on periodic reports and statistics provided by law enforcement and regulatory agencies as well as by country assessments conducted pursuant to Nigeria’s obligations under the United Nations Convention Against Corruption.
Given the magnitude of corruption in the country, a committee such as this may appear necessary to provide policymakers with an independent assessor. But we are not persuaded that this panel will make any difference or that it is even relevant at this stage when the anti-graft campaign is flailing and has run out of steam.
Instead of a new committee, the government should have re-empowered the seven-person Presidential Advisory Committee against Corruption that President Muhammadu Buhari appointed in August 2015. Headed by the reputed constitutional law professor, Itse Sagay, what it lacks in statutory powers it has made up for in the enthusiasm and passion demonstrated by its members. One member, Hadiza Bala Usman, has since been appointed to head the Nigerian Ports Authority; while another, Bolaji Owasanoye, who is also its executive secretary, is the Chairman-designate of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Related Offences Commission. The new committee appears therefore to be duplication, another bureaucratic layer when decisive action is urgently needed to re-energise the war on corruption.
Sadly, corruption is still strongly on the march despite the brave efforts of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission. Our rating on the Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index remains stubbornly high despite a rash of convictions secured by the EFCC in the last three years. The agency presented a scorecard last week showcasing 139 convictions between January and June this year. This included two highly exposed political persons – former governors of Taraba and Plateau states respectively, Jolly Nyame and Joshua Dariye – and a Senior Advocate of Nigeria. Eighty-nine convictions were secured in May alone and a total of 189 persons were convicted in 2017, according to the agency.
But the reality that only two HEPs were convicted brings home how many of the powerful are escaping justice. At least, 13 former governors are still on trial, some of them since 2007. Several VIPs indicted in corruption charges are actively seeking public office: a few are vigorously pursuing the presidential tickets of the main political parties, emboldened by delays in their trials and by outright dismissal in some cases of the charges brought against them by the courts.
Experience has demonstrated that political will, strong institutions and effective enforcement are the game changers. Inheriting the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau that had been established in 1952 under the British colonial rule, Singapore reformed it, moved it to the Prime Minister’s office and enacted a slew of legislation that guaranteed its independence and efficiency. In the five years to 2013, two-thirds of all its investigations led to prosecution and disciplinary action. Its reputation and ranking as sixth least corrupt nation by TI in 2017 earned it top investment draw by business executives polled by the World Economic Forum 2014/2015 Global Competiveness Report.
Just as Singapore did not waste its time with multiple agencies or endless committees, neither did the United Kingdom. Instead, it funds the Serious Fraud Office as its main driver against bribery and corruption. The Bribery Act 2010 was followed this year by the Unexplained Wealth Orders under which a person reasonably suspected of crime can be compelled by a court order to explain the source of his wealth or property.
To drive the war, Buhari needs an effective coordinator to harmonise investigation, prosecution and intelligence. Inter-agency brawling has spilled into the open, featuring the Department of State Services sending armed operatives to thwart arrest of some suspects. Malami should demonstrate greater commitment and avoid politicising corruption. He should make the whistle-blower policy and the Freedom of Information Act to work. The CSOs say over 90 per cent of requests for information in public agencies are ignored. Yet, the FoI unit is domiciled in the AGF’s office.
According to the OECD, apart from building institutional capacity, reforms “require a strategy that is really operational”. It cites the creation of an investigative agency in Hong Kong “with a large staff and plentiful funds” as crucial. Buhari and Malami should take this to heart and re-enervate the campaign against graft.
END
Be the first to comment