After reviewing Mr. President's answers to some of the
questions during his maiden media briefing, I have no cause to doubt that he
means well for Nigeria. Therefore, to the extent that his displayed sterner
resolve is not selectively applied along partisan or political party lines, I
am optimistic that, come 2019, our image of a corruption-laden society in the
eyes of the global community will experience a radical reversal. I will address this point in more detail
later.
Unquestionably, President Buhari is certainly a tough
guy. What is uncertain is to what extent
his lieutenants are ready to align with his zero-tolerance pronouncements on
corrupt practices. Undeniably, the best leaders create a well-defined and
structured delegation of authority and responsibility, as the President alone
cannot be everywhere at the same time, enforcing compliance. Under a complex and
vast federal system like ours, where the central government wields so much power,
the possibility of adverse disconnect between Abuja and the governed is very
real. Thus, in the absence of a well-defined decentralised structure, the need
to ensure federal presence in local communities cannot be overemphasised.
Therefore, delegated power must be backed by sustainable institutional frameworks and a regulatory regime that is purposeful, robust and audacious.
Nigeria has them in abundance - EFCC, PPPRA, ICPC, NCC, DPR, National
Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) and the entire law enforcement
agencies.
Now that the President has spoken, the die is cast. These law
enforcement agencies and regulatory bodies cannot turn around to blame their
inability to perform their mandates on the “instruction or body language” of
the President. Presently, it is on
record: the man from above has spoken, and we know where he stands, not just on
the war against corruption and corrupt practices, but on the mechanics of
sanctions. In the words of the
President: Do you want people who stole
N50B to be granted bail to go to London when we have 2 Million IDPS in camps? Absolutely not. Nor should they be granted bail until they
return what they have stolen from the country’s coffers.
The rule of law abhors inequality and abuse of power in every
respect – it is a check on the government, the governed, and the officials of
government. Millions of other Nigerians support the President’s position
on corruption, which is sidelining Nigeria’s ability to become a great economic
power like that of China or South Korea.
If we must overcome the menace of graft and abuse of office, then the
EFCC and all the law enforcement agencies must take the President’s mandate
seriously and perform accordingly.
Debating and Debasing the Rule of Law
As naturally expected, the President has come under severe
attacks and intense condemnation from lawyers, scholars, politicians and the
public for his apparent support for the continued detention of Dasuki and the
Biafra new voice, Nnamdi Kanu. So, to my
learned colleagues who question the reasonableness of the President's hard view
on the application of the principle of rule of law to the culpable Nigerians
and indicted felons, query: “Where were you when Mr. Odili, the former Governor
of River State, in collaboration with his highly paid lawyers, hijacked regular
court proceedings and gave a nonsensical meaning - a meaning that has no
foundation in law, equity, and reasonableness - to the application of perpetual
injunction? Where were your indictments?”
Where were your indictments when the former Chairman of the
Pension Reform Task Force, Alhaji Abdulrasheed Maina, absconded with billions of
pension funds rather than confront his accusers with cold, hard facts and a detailed account of his
stewardship? Where were you when Mrs. Stella Odua, abusing procedural rules, escaped
legislative inquiry into her purchase and ownership of two highly priced automobiles?
Today, there are tons of cases filed by EFCC against
prominent Nigerian politicians like former Nasarawa State Governor, Abdullahi
Adamu, Saminu Turaki, and Gbenga Daniel, bogus Petroleum Marketers, just to
name a few, who died unnatural death in our courts through abuse of process
via discretionary reliefs.
Injunction, whether interim or perpetual, is not a substitute
for a valid defence, especially concerning the substantive suit. In a
similar vein, securing it is not a verdict on the merit. Sad to say, that has been the culture in our
courts over the years.
When judges and lawyers were perfecting the craft of killing
justice at procedural stages via questionable adjournments and injunctions, our
lawyers and concerned citizens could only talk about problems in the judiciary,
without specifically identifying the problems or stating how they manifest. The
only solution, as always, was to be financially independent of the judicial system. While financial independence of
the judiciary is important, the lack of it does not exonerate judges’ role as
dependable arbiters.
As I write, most active members of the bar community are
still very unwilling to accept the fact that injunctions and adjournments and
all the procedural “mumbles jumbles” that they have come to embrace as smart
legal maneuverings, do in fact, pose the greatest threat to real justice and
the principle of rule of law in Nigeria. Most often, we watch helplessly as high-profile cases die at the
pretrial stage. This type of practice is
crippling the entire Nigerian legal system.
Analysis
Rule of law, in its true sense, does not discriminate between
the government, private citizens and institutions in its application. It is
equally applied across the board in a similar fashion. In other words, private
citizens are subject to the law and are accountable under the law, just like
the government.
According to the World Justice Project, “rule of law is a
system in which the following four universal principles are upheld: The
government and its officials and agents as well as individuals and private
entities are accountable under the law." This definition mirrored the
United Nations standard, to wit, “all persons, institutions and entities,
public and private, including the State itself, are accountable to just, fair
and equitable laws and are entitled without any discrimination to equal
protection of the law.” Unfortunately, in Nigeria, these are not the true test of the
rule of law. As a private individual, you are accountable to the law just as
you are entitled to protection under the law.
You cannot knowingly, purposefully, and deliberately abuse your office in wanton disregard of the rules and regulations setting up the office, and turn around to seek refuge under the law when called upon to give account of your stewardship. When you buy justice, using part of the public funds that you stole, you are perverting the justice system and debasing the principle of the rule of law.
You cannot knowingly, purposefully, and deliberately abuse your office in wanton disregard of the rules and regulations setting up the office, and turn around to seek refuge under the law when called upon to give account of your stewardship. When you buy justice, using part of the public funds that you stole, you are perverting the justice system and debasing the principle of the rule of law.
Granted, two wrongs do not make a right. Now that we have a
President, overtly poised to confront the Bull of corruption by the horns, we
should support and join hands with him, instead of crying Argentina. The money
bonanza, shameful as it was, that encapsulates Dasuki’s period at NSA is
egregious and deserves total condemnation by every Nigerian. Therefore, his
trial, tempestuous as it is evolving presently, cannot and must not be the best yardstick to construe our observance or otherwise, with any local or universal rights to fair
hearing.
Indeed, an accused is considered innocent until he is proven
guilty. However, there is nothing in the instant case that falls within that
acceptable maxim of an accused being innocent until proven guilty. Dasuki has
admitted that he squandered about 2 billion in his possession. He did
not deny any of the charges levelled against him. Instead, he incredulously
questions our wisdom in holding him accountable for his misconduct, which makes
the whole Dasuki saga an aberration.
The rule of law is not just about trial, it is more about conduct
- an orderly society where the government and private citizens are expected to
play complementary roles.
For the first time in recent memory, we have seen a President
espousing prosecutorial activism. Surprisingly, and of course, all of a sudden,
we have remembered the sanctity of the principle of the rule of law and the concept
of the "accused being innocent until proven guilty." Once again, let
it be on record that retired Col. Dasuki admitted stealing more than two
billion US Dollars of public funds meant for armed procurement. In addition, he
is not denying the fact that he liberally disbursed the money to
politicians. Dasuki is amazed that he is
being subjected to “undue scrutiny,” when what he did, in his subjective
reasoning, is consistent with our perverted culture of sharing at Aso Villa.
And that is the culture that our lawyers and human rights activists are
rationalising and defending right now.
There is something fundamentally wrong with our often
reported demands for probity, transparency and accountability in our political
system, when the legal community is not outraged when a Security Adviser, in
the position of a retired military officer in the caliber of Dasuki, suffers no
scruples, while dispensing with impunity, public funds well over two billion US
Dollars (funds meant for acquisition of weapons for the armed forces in its war
against insurgency) to politicians. So, where is the outrage? Now, we are debating handcuffs!
Moving Forward.
In sum, if you and your cronies purposely, knowingly, and
intentionally abuse your power and violate the law of the land, there is
nothing wrong with the government ceaselessly and openly harassing you and your
friends within the limits of the law, and yes, even applying punitive measures,
not only to securing forfeiture of the looted funds, but to serving as a
deterrent to other Nigerians. It is that simple. This President, or any
President of Nigeria, in the course of his or her war against bogus Petroleum
Marketers, Pension Funds raiders, and all the Dasukis in our place of work,
should never be saddled with the question of whether, as a society, we have
advanced beyond certain benchmarks in observance of certain jurisprudential
rights.
Desperate times call for desperate measures. To move forward, I strongly hold that henceforth, criminal prosecutions in Nigeria should reflect a case-by-case approach. Dasuki's show of shame is an aberration and a crime against the state and a crime against humanity. We should not apply the rule of law to validate an act bordering upon absurdity. And we must not invoke the spirit of the rule of law to dilute a conduct that bordered upon high treason. Treason is not just about taking up arms against the state or instigating the collapse of the state. It is also treasonable to deny the state the use of arms or frustrate its acquisition and deployment, when doing so is inconsistent with the fundamental objectives of your official duty. The law is seemingly asinine sometimes, but the rule of law is not stupid; it is consistent with common sense and reasonableness. Without mincing words, I am encouraged by the tone of the President – a tone that is consistent with the voice of one crying in the wilderness, crying for an end to a corrupt judicial system and the frivolity of the ruling elite.
Desperate times call for desperate measures. To move forward, I strongly hold that henceforth, criminal prosecutions in Nigeria should reflect a case-by-case approach. Dasuki's show of shame is an aberration and a crime against the state and a crime against humanity. We should not apply the rule of law to validate an act bordering upon absurdity. And we must not invoke the spirit of the rule of law to dilute a conduct that bordered upon high treason. Treason is not just about taking up arms against the state or instigating the collapse of the state. It is also treasonable to deny the state the use of arms or frustrate its acquisition and deployment, when doing so is inconsistent with the fundamental objectives of your official duty. The law is seemingly asinine sometimes, but the rule of law is not stupid; it is consistent with common sense and reasonableness. Without mincing words, I am encouraged by the tone of the President – a tone that is consistent with the voice of one crying in the wilderness, crying for an end to a corrupt judicial system and the frivolity of the ruling elite.
