Corruption is one of the banes of development across the world. It accounts for the weakness of the rule of law. In Nigeria it has dwindled economic growth and prosperity. For many non-Nigerians, it is hard to believe that the country is poor considering the country’s huge oil proceeds alone. Until recent time, corruption rating in Nigeria had been unimpressive. Rather than personifying the war of corruption, it is imperative to build effective institutions that would expose corrupt individuals and ensure that they do not escape justice, writes Thompson Ayodele in The Nation
Corruption is one of the banes of development across the world. It accounts for the failure of government to provide adequate security. It accounts for the weakness of the rule of law. In Nigeria it has dwindled economic growth and prosperity. For many non-Nigerians, it is hard to believe that the country is poor considering the country’s huge oil proceeds alone. Until recent time, corruption rating in Nigeria had been unimpressive. This prompted the last administration to set up the Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC) to combat the menace.
The EFCC under the chairmanship of Alhaji Nuhu Ribadu did excellently well even among politicians. When some bank directors were investigated and made to cough out some of the funds fraudulently acquired while at the helms, the commission received a pat on the back.
For that and similar feats, the EFCC was praised to high heaven. The real challenge for the commission began when it decided to take on politicians, particularly the so-called sacred cows. At a point, efforts were made to whittle down the power of the Commission. The most critical period for the commission was shortly before last year’s general elections. Opponents were so vehement that the Commission was used by the administration then to settle political scores.
Whether the accusation over the conduct of the EFCC against political opponents is correct or otherwise is subject to debate. Whatever might be the shortcomings of the EFCC, the commission has exhibited strong commitment to the war against graft. It has investigated a vast number of people, including political leaders and private individuals. The fight against corruption would remain elusive if those who are well connected, including those who can use the proceeds of their ill-gotten wealth escape justice.
With more than 56 convictions on corruption, money laundering, oil pipeline vandalisms and related offences, assets well over $5 billion have been frozen and seized from corrupt officials, their agents and cronies. The fight against advance fee fraud (419) which has given many innocent Nigerians a bad name has been doggedly pursued, leading to the prosecution and conviction of kingpins, including the celebrated $242 million case involving a Brazilian bank. The EFCC also recovered and returned the sum of $4 million to a victim of advance fee fraud in Hong Kong and has seized and returned over $ 500,000 to sundry US citizens. These are no mean feat.
It would be wrong to personalise the war against graft. Although Nuhu Ribadu’s name has become synonymous with the EFCC, this is not surprising considering the public hue and cry that attend his consideration for further courses. What should be the concern of everyone is that the war on corruption should never be let down when Ribadu is no more in charge. This is what the public expected.
Rather than personifying the war of corruption, it is imperative to build effective institutions that would expose corrupt individuals and ensure that they do not escape justice. The difference between a country where there is a low level of corruption and a country where corruption constitutes huge problem can be explained by the quality of the shared rules and the institutions which coordinate individuals. Some countries adhere to rules which engender trust among public office holders and provide the incentive to perform.
Others have rules system that allow officials to milk public purse and further deprive their citizens the fruits of risk taking efforts. Human beings anywhere depend on the right kind of institutional system.
Part of the reasons the public are not comfortable with the proposed course for Ribadu is the fear that the commission’s power could be eroded. Of course, they have reasons for such fears. Aside from the reported underground moves to hedge out the EFCC boss, the open confrontation between the Attorney General of the Federation and the EFCC with respect to the latter seeking permission from the former before prosecuting indicted individuals is still fresh in mind. This is seen as an attempt to reduce the powers of the anti-graft commission.
The question on everyone’s lip is after the exit of Ribadu, would the EFCC have the same clout to arrest and even prosecute the so-called big fish? There are many interpretations to the proposed course for Ribadu at NIPSS. The one that has gained wide currency is the arrest of one of the governors who was reported to have bankrolled the election of President Yar’Adua. Many are of the view that there could be a connection between the arrest of the former governor and part of a grand design to sideline the EFCC boss. Be that as it may, the burden, of course, is on this administration to prove the public wrong.
The present administration needs to show strong commitment both in words and actions that the war on graft is waxing stronger. Should there be any indication that the administration is backing down, it would reverse whatever gains the nation has made in the anti-corruption war. It would further worsen the nation’s rating.
In case Nuhu Ribadu’s exist is finally pushed through and the war on graft is at low ebb, it would translate into a very huge negative local and international image for this administration. It would further lend credence to the allegation that this government is running the gauntlet amid public disbelief and astonishment at the direction in which some powerful minority policy architects have steered the boat of public leadership.
The truth remains that although Ribadu is widely seen as a hero in the anti-corruption war, it does not mean that he is the only one who can prosecute the war on corruption with the zeal with which it is being done. There are several Nigerians who can do the same. But the present administration should be mindful of the fact that if Ribadu is removed the power of the commission must be strengthened. This would re-assure everyone that the anti-corruption campaign is alive and kicking. To do otherwise would further attract local and international opprobrium.
Mr Ayodele is the Executive Director of Initiative for Public Policy Analysis, based in Lagos.