EFCC: Corruption truly fighting back! (1)

That corruption is ‘killing’ Nigeria as a country is no news to all watchers of events in the country. As President Buhari once opined, ‘If we don’t kill corruption, corruption will kill us’. He was contextually referring to the country and her inhabitants. Undoubtedly, this is a truism. Nigeria, beyond the myriads of the economic challenges she is confronting, is afflicted with continuous pilferage of her resources by those who are supposed to be the trustees and custodians of the resources.

The acts of corruption in the country have become so pervasive that the fabrics of our society is fast collapsing. To most Nigerians, corruption has gone beyond endemic to pandemic, as the country’s resources continued to be daily raped. To minimize, if not curb, the ailments, so many anti-corruption bodies exist to combat the menace. Regrettably, however, it seems that the more of these entities established, the higher the growth and perpetration of corruption. The situation has degenerated so badly that the impression of Nigerians generally is that each of the anti-corruption bodies created, constitutes respectively ‘toll gates. The implication of which is that each entity now flexes muscle towards extortion of the citizenry.

Virtually all the bodies have lost respect amongst the citizens. It is in the midst of this confusion that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (the Commission) has been identified as an exception with minor infractions to the general rule. This is not to say that there are no corrupt eggs within her fold also. However, to a large extent, it remains the only anti-corruption entity still relatively feared and respected in the country.

The justification for the corrupt tendencies of the men of the anti-corruption agencies might well be situated in the fact and reality that they are recruited from the same contaminated society. God, therefore, help us.
The situation is now that rather than Nigerians patronizing the other anti-corruption agencies, they prefer to approach the Commission for reasons ranging from speed, firmness to result.

Little wonder that most criminal infractions are daily reported to the Commission rather than other older institutions. In fact, Nigerians even, in contemporary times, approach the Commission for civil matters as if the Commission was a mediation or arbitration centre.
The most felt area of impact of the Commission is economic governance which deals with corruption in the country’s public service. Thus, most public officials detest the Commission and will go to any length either to compromise the officials, or alternatively vilify the Commission.

Thus, the latest onslaught is no news to some of us. As Nigerians following the events around the Commission will know, it is presently facing two battles emanating from some Governors, by extension States and a legal luminary in his own right, Chief Olisa Agbakogba, SAN, respectively. The latter has written a memorandum to the National Assembly requesting the Assembly to revisit the issue of the existence of the Commission on the ground that it is existing unconstitutionally.

The learned Silk had premised his position on the need for the States of the federation to ratify the enactment setting up the Commission, which was not done at the inception. It is baffling to me that the learned Silk who was part of the amici curiae (friends of the court) that addressed the apex Court in the locus classicus case of AG, Ondo State v AG, Federation, is the one raising this issue again. The only ground of my excusing the senior lawyer is that the letter was sent to the National Assembly, presumably for the purpose of re-enactment or fortification of the legal framework.

I pretend not to concur with the view that the ultimate desire of the correspondence is to wipe out the Commission. Should my assumption be right, I have no quarrel with his approach. I would have been angered if another action had been instituted or the Silk had joined force with the extant litigants before the apex Court. I am saying this because i know we, inclusive of the learned Silk, are aware of the decisions of the apex court on the issue, particularly the case I referred to above. Again, without boring my readers without legal minds, the judgment is described as that in rem. The import of this is that it binds everyone with such issue in the entire country. Although the case was based on the challenge to the ICPC Act, the facts and issues are materially the same with that being contended in court currently. On that score, I do not intend to say much other than remark that the Act establishing the EFCC is a product of the legislative power and competence of the National Assembly and not derived from any treaty, as being wrongly canvassed and contended. Were it to be otherwise, a preamble to that effect would have featured in the introductory part of the Act.

To further deflate the assertion is the fact that even prior to the enactment of the Act, most of the offences had featured in one legislation or the other in the country. Again, the Act does not represent the regurgitation of any treaty. It is a legislation, conceived, drafted and enacted pursuant to the constitutional power of the National Assembly and the constitutional duty to ensure the abolition of corruption in the society/country.

Hence, in the light of the foregoing, I do not see any credible legal basis for the challenge of the existence of the Commission in the correspondence to the National Assembly. I believe it is another strategy and mechanism to distract the Commission from the focus on its mandate. However as per the case before apex court, to the extent that the matter is sub judice, I will refrain from discussing the contention amongst the parties.

The truth remains that the substance of the contention is not distant from the assertion of the learned Silk in the correspondence to the National Assembly alluded to above. On this ground, permit me to desist from any voyage into the arena. By way of general remarks, however, those agitating the issues currently are some Governors through their Attorneys General. The demand is simply that they be allowed to address the issues of corruption in their States, particularly where it touches on the funds belonging to their States and the Local Governments. Let me state straight away that the funds appropriated to their States and the Local Governments are not only derivable from the Federation Account, but are meant to serve any Nigerian that has a business in their States either by residency or occupation or trade. As such, it is in the interest of all Nigerians that the funds be managed well, and not misappropriated.