Can Buhari Confront the Anti-Corruption ‘Industry’? -By Uche Igwe

Uche Igwe

The term ‘industry’ is normally used in respect of manufacturing or at least refers to a specific branch of business (e.g. the entertainment industry, the oil and gas industry). So how come I am now using it for corruption, something negative. This is because the level of corruption is flourishing rather than reducing in Nigeria. Various anti-corruption programmes of doubtful impact enable what I refer to as an ‘anti-corruption industry’ to coexist along the corruption it is ostensibly supposed to be combating. Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars have been spent on many so-called reform projects. Instead of the problem to reduce, it continues to increase. For more than sixteen years now, the fight against corruption has been reduced to mere sloganeering. The ‘reforms’, at best, ends up swelling the pockets of the ‘reformers’. It cannot continue.

Today the biggest barrier to the ‘war’ against corruption in Nigeria is the anti-corruption industry. It is a smokescreen under which several forms of sophisticated corruption are being promoted. I do not want to talk about the multiplicity of agencies and the duplication of roles of these agencies. Though it is part of the confusion that sustains the industry, I believe that some suggestions are on the table to reduce their number and streamline their functions. Whether that will deplete the industry in any way remains a matter of debate.

Beyond that I think some drastic actions are necessary. For instance an organisation like the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) should be scrapped completely. It is simply a glorified police station with more than 1000 policemen currently in its employment (669 in 2008). It is a known fact that in most police stations in Nigeria, a complainant can easily turn into the accused, depending on who offers the most money. Justice is available to the highest bidder. How will anyone expect a different culture from the policemen at the EFCC, where more than ninety percent of the staff of the operations department are drawn from the police and from one part of the country? Is it because of the mere fact that they earn salaries from two different organisations or what? What happens in terms of all the alleged cover ups we hear about? How many of those that have been arrested for one form of corrupt act or another have been diligently prosecuted? What about the changing list of suspects of the fuel subsidy scams? What about those arrested in connection with the pension scam? What could be the causes of the delays and the reasons why charges are hurriedly filed and later withdrawn for most of the suspects prosecuted by the EFCC? One can imagine that these are not professionals but that may be a style to fleece suspects and make money. Has anyone bothered about the content of the various plea bargain deals packaged by the EFCC? Who negotiated these and what standards did they follow? It is evident that EFCC has started blowing hot air with arrests of high profile suspects who will never be diligently prosecuted on the long run. Has anyone bothered to ask why the EFCC waited till after the exit of the former Attorney General Bello Adoke before re-opening investigations on the Malabu oil deal?

On a more substantive note, it may be necessary to repel the EFCC Act 2004 completely because some of the core functions of the commission may soon be taken over by autonomous agencies. For instance with the passage of the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Centre Bill into an Act, the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit which used to be under the EFCC will soon become autonomous. Such development will empower the agency to share intelligence promptly with other financial intelligence centres (FIUs) and all other relevant law enforcement agencies and could help trace movement of dirty monies useful to crack down on kidnapping and even terrorism. In the past it has been alleged that bureaucratic bottlenecks has hampered information sharing and led to selective attention to the intelligence reports received.

The second legislation is the Proceeds of Crime (POCA) Act 2015 which was recently passed by the Seventh National Assembly. It removes the asset recovery responsibility from the EFCC. The POCA Act is focused on the recovery of illegally acquired property through confiscation, forfeiture and civil recovery and provides powers to seize, freeze and restrain criminals from any dealing with their property. The President should sign both Acts into law. After that, the EFCC will be left with only investigation and prosecutor powers which can easily be transferred to another agency or could actually be left with a special unit of the police.

Has anybody asked the EFCC to account for all the properties confiscated in the past from the high profile criminals they investigated? Were the properties handed over to government or were they sold? If they were sold, who bought them and how transparent was the process of selling them? What about the monies recovered from these? Were they paid back into the government treasury or were they unilaterally converted to EFCC funds? I challenge EFCC to provide a comprehensive list of these properties and what they did with them as part of their winding down notes. The officials of EFCC, especially in the operations unit, and their present and former prosecutors should be compelled to declare their assets.

Just recently, it was reported in the media of an ongoing litigation trying to unravel the government agency in custody of information about the Abacha loot, between the offices of the Attorney General of the Federation and of the National Security Adviser. There were claims and counter-claims about who should do what. Really? Now if such information is not available, does it not validate the strong speculation that all the loot recovered from the late Sani Abacha and other looters might have been re-looted again? How can any discerning mind exonerate EFCC from the whole embarrassing saga?

I do not wish to suggest that the anti-corruption industry that I refer to is only based at the EFCC. No. It is in every ministry and parastatal. It has branches in almost every anti-corruption agency, including the Corporate Affairs Commission, the Code of Conduct Bureau, Nigerian Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (NEITI) and even the Bureau for Public Procurement (BPP). The issuance of Certificate of ‘No Objection’ for contract awards is a well-known ‘old’ racket that can be obtained even by unregistered companies associated with influential individuals. With the National Council on Public Procurement yet to be inaugurated, the past Federal Executive Council was literally turned into a contract bazaar of sorts. Will that continue under this new regime?

I am aware that the fight against corruption is one of the cardinal points on the agenda of the new government. President Buhari said so during his inaugural speech. Therefore if he has to achieve results early, he must start looking for ways to crack the anti-corruption industry firmly rooted in anti-corruption agencies, in the judiciary, in all agencies of government, among the political class, the police and even the media and civil society organisations. I can say this will not be easy because these establishments are quite sophisticated in their corrupt acts. However until he dismantles these networks, they will keep finding a way to frustrate his efforts to their own benefit. The courage he is able to display in confronting this industry will be the biggest test of his political will to fight the scourge of corruption. It is either he destroys that virulent industry or their activities will submerge his positive efforts and ruin his government.

Uche Igwe wrote from the Department of Politics, University of Sussex.