Chief Okoi Obono-Obla, the President’s Senior
Special Assistant on Prosecution, can be fiery if the discussion is
on corruption. To him, many lawyers and the courts are not helpful
when it comes to tackling the malaise. Obono-Obla, who has just
been named chairman of the Special Presidential Investigation Panel
for the Recovery of Public Property, tells ERIC IKHILAE how
his panel hopes to operate, his fear for the Judiciary and why it
appears difficult to tackle corruption.
The constitution
of your panel was announced about two weeks ago. When will you
begin work?
We have begun work. Although we are yet to have an office, we
have made a request for an office and some other things that we
need to start work effectively, and I believe the government is
doing something about it.
Currently, we are doing preliminary work and trying to see how
we can map out strategies to enable us do our work well. I am very
certain that, in the next two weeks, we should take off
effectively.
By the law setting up your panel, you appear to have a
broad mandate. From where do you intend to begin?
You are right. The law is all-embracing, very comprehensive and
broad. But, we do not intend to go on a wild goose chase. We are
going to look at certain areas, focus on them and ensure that we do
the work the way those who appointed us want us to do it.
So, what areas are you focusing on?
We will look at the oil and gas industry for instance. Then, the
Judiciary and other areas that need to be urgently cleansed up.
How do you react to the argument that your panel amounts
to a duplication of effort on the part of the government, because
the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the
Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission
(ICPC), the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) and other related agencies
are already doing what you have been asked to do?
Those who hold that position are ignorant, with due
respect. First, Nigeria is a member of the United Nations
systems. In 2003, the United Nations Convention Against Corruption
(UNCAC) was enacted. Some aspects of that convention make
provisions for national governments to set up multiple
anti-corruption bodies to address the issue of corruption.
This is because the convention identifies corruption as a threat
to humanity, to development, to democracy, to the society, among
others. I can tell you that organised crimes like terrorism and
money laundering are all a dialectical consequences of
corruption.
So, we have the Nigeria Police, which can investigate all forms
of crime, including corruption, economic and financial crimes.The
EFCC, the ICPC and the CCB are all there doing the same thing.
So, what distinguishes your panel from these
bodies?
Let me tell you, the Recovery of Public Property (Special
Provisions) Act Cap R4 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria predates
the EFCC Act, ICPC Act and even the Code of Conduct Bureau and
Tribunal Act (CCB/T Act). So, I can say that the law, setting up
our panel, is the oldest anti-corruption law in Nigeria.
But, unfortunately, successive governments did not have the
will, the commitment to fight corruption. That is why that law was
left in a state of limbo. Now, we have a government that is
committed to fighting corruption, and the government has gone to
exhume the law from where it was buried.
There are differences between my panel and the Code of Conduct
Tribunal (CCB/T). For example, the CCB/T cannot impose a term of
imprisonment. My panel has the jurisdiction to investigate the
assets of a public officer.
If we find out that you suppress some information about your
assets, then we can file a charge against you at the Federal High
Court. And, if you are found guilty, you will be sentenced to 21
years’ imprisonment. Such provision is not there in the CCB/T
Act.
In what areas is your panel different from the
anti-graft bodies?
Under the law setting us up, if you under declare your assets,
or if you have more assets than what your legitimate earnings can
accommodate, we can investigate you, send our findings to the
Federal High Court. And, if you are found guilty, you will be
sentenced to life imprisonment.
This is the only law that has provision for life imprisonment
for corruption, embezzlement, contributing to the economic
adversity of Nigeria. You will not that the CCB/T covers public
officers alone.
The law, under which we are to operate, also extends to those in
the private sector. It also extends to relatives of public
officers. For example, a lot of public officers keep funds and
acquire property in the names of relatives, their children, their
wives, cousins, aunties, their friends, among others.
So, this law gives us the power to investigate relatives and
friends of public officers to see if they have acquired assets that
are inconsistent with their legitimate earnings. So, you can see
the differences now between out panel, the EFCC, ICPC and the
CCB/T.
If you say your panel can examine issues relating to
economic and financial crimes, how will it work around the obstacle
created by Section 6 (C) of the EFCC Act, which grants exclusive
powers to the EFCC on such matters?
You see, as I noted earlier, that, under the UNCAC, there is
room for national government to set up agencies whose functions in
relation to corruption overlap. So, there is nothing wrong with
that. We will do what we call, inter-agencies collaboration,
partnership and cooperation.
But, I can say that the law that sets up our panel is different
substantially from others. The functions may seem similar, but the
law is unique in its own way.
I have given you the example of the provision for life
imprisonment that is not in the CCCB/T, which only confiscate the
assets found to have been unlawfully acquired and bars the public
officer from further holding public office. But, under this law,
you will go to prison for 21 years.
Do you imply that your panel can undertake prosecution
on its own?
Yes. It will be unconstitutional for us to investigate and pass
on our findings to another body to do the prosecution. We will
investigate and prosecute as far as the assets of public officers
and those in private sector are concern.
For instance, a drug baron may not be working in the public
sector, but he has assets. And if we find out that he acquired
these assets through unlawful activities (because that is what the
law said), then we are empowered to go after such a drug baron.
Also, somebody who indulges in money laundering, but who cannot
be classified as belonging to either the public or private sector,
but has acquired assets that are suspicious, we can go after him,
seize those assets and charge him to court.
So, you can see the differences and why I said the laws are
different, although they may look similar on the surface.
The Executive has consistently accused the Judiciary of
not supporting its anti-corruption efforts. But, people wonder why
this same Executive has not deemed it fit to reach out to the
Judiciary for support?
We do not want to interfere with the functions of the Judiciary.
The Constitution has spelt out the functions of the different arms
of government. In theory, we are separated, but in practice, we are
supposed to work together. But, we will not go out of our way to
interfere with the internal workings of the Judiciary.
We will not tell the judges how to dispense justice. They should
dispense justice in accordance with their oath of office. If
government says corruption is a problem, we expect the Judiciary,
that is part of government to also see corruption as a problem.
But, we have not seen that.
For instance, we have judges, who have been indicted. Yes, I
feel a judge, who has been investigated from criminal allegations
for corruption, even if he is acquitted by a court of law, his
integrity is at stake. His honour is at stake, because a judge
ought to be like Caesar’s wife, who is above suspicion.
So, if a judge has brought himself to the level of being
investigated by law enforcement agencies, has been accused of
corruption and has been docked, though not sent to prison, that
judge has lost his credibility to sit as a judge.
As a lawyer, I will find it difficult to appear before that
judge and defer to him/her. You may ask me why. It is because we,
in the legal profession, consider judges as representing God.
That is why we address judges as ‘My Lord;’ that is why we bow
when we see them. We respect them. We consider the status of a
judge as prestigious. So, a judge, who has lost that toga of
integrity, credibility and honour should cease to be a judge.
So, how do think the Judiciary should approach this
issue?
What I expect the Judiciary to do, if it is working in tandem
with the Executive, is for the National Judicial Council (NJC) to
make a list of all the effected judges and hand to Mr. President to
either retire or dismiss them.
The perception out there is that you, as a person, have,
in recent time, been hard on the Judiciary. Don’t you think this
could affect you when you return to practice?
I will return to practice when I am done here. I am not afraid
that the position I take now could affect me, because I am not
against any judge. I am executing my official brief and I will do
it professionally, conscientiously and diligently, without minding
whose ox is gored.
So, that is it. I will return to practice, because I have not
done anything wrong. If anybody feels bad that I have done my job
professionally, let them forgive me for that, but I have to do my
job. I am not hard on the Judiciary.
I want the proper thing to be done, because I have been part of
the system and know what goes on within the system. So, I feel for
the legal profession.
I am passionate about the Bar and the Judiciary as a whole. I
tell you, we are endangered if we do not take steps to restore the
confidence of the public to the system. We are on the blink of
extinction.
How will you react to the criticism that this
administration has not recorded much success in the prosecution of
high-profile corruption cases despite its claim to be fighting
corruption?
I do not agree with the position, because we have had quite a
number of convictions. As a matter of fact, the EFCC said last week
that it recently recorded about 200 convictions. That is
salutary.
The case of the former Adamawa State governor, whose conviction
was reversed by the Court of Appeal, has not been concluded. I
believe an appeal should be before the Supreme Court by now. So, we
can only conclude on that after the Supreme Court gives its
verdict. The Supreme Court can restore his conviction.
So, we should wait until all these cases are heard at the Court
of Appeal and Supreme Court before we can say whether or not the
cases were properly handled. But for now, it is premature to say
so. I believe the EFCC is doing a good work and we are going to see
more convictions in the next few months.
The report on bribery and corruption in Nigeria, which
was just released by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
(UNODC) and the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), confirmed
that, despite this government’s claim of fighting corruption, it is
still prevalent. What do you think is wrong?
That survey was carried out five years ago. It is not a
reflection of the true position of things in the country. Let us be
fair. This government has done well as long as fighting corruption
is concerned. It is not easy.
Corruption in Nigeria has become endemic. And this government
has done very well. Look at the amount of money that we have
recovered. Look at the property we have recovered from looters.
Look at the number of cases on-going in court. This is
unprecedented in the history of Nigeria.
High placed persons, ex-ministers, ex-governors and others are
standing trial. So, you cannot say that this government’s fight
against corruption is not yielding results. You know it will be
impossible to totally eradicate corruption. We will reduce
corruption, because there is corruption in every society.
The most important thing is that anybody that is found corrupt
should be punished. And that is what we are trying to do – to
punish anybody, who indulges in corruption. But we are not saying
we are going to eradicate corruption completely. You know that is
impossible. But, we will try to reduce corruption to the barest
minimum,
What is the government doing to recover the $15 million
seized from the Goodluck Jonathan-government by the South African
government? Has Nigeria forfeited it to South
Africa?
I do not have a brief on that. Maybe you should ask the EFCC or
other relevant agencies. I also read about the seizure during
President Jonathan’s government, but I do not know what the current
situation is.
Shouldn’t your panel be interested in such
issues?
If it is brought to our attention, we will look at it. We can
take steps. We can request for documents relating to the
transaction. We can execute bench warrant on anybody. So, maybe we
will look into it. We will look into it.
Culled : Nation
Chief Okoi Obono-Obla, the President’s Senior
Special Assistant on Prosecution, can be fiery if the discussion is
on corruption. To him, many lawyers and the courts are not helpful
when it comes to tackling the malaise. Obono-Obla, who has just
been named chairman of the Special Presidential Investigation Panel
for the Recovery of Public Property, tells ERIC IKHILAE how
his panel hopes to operate, his fear for the Judiciary and why it
appears difficult to tackle corruption.
The constitution
of your panel was announced about two weeks ago. When will you
begin work?
We have begun work. Although we are yet to have an office, we
have made a request for an office and some other things that we
need to start work effectively, and I believe the government is
doing something about it.
Currently, we are doing preliminary work and trying to see how
we can map out strategies to enable us do our work well. I am very
certain that, in the next two weeks, we should take off
effectively.
By the law setting up your panel, you appear to have a
broad mandate. From where do you intend to begin?
You are right. The law is all-embracing, very comprehensive and
broad. But, we do not intend to go on a wild goose chase. We are
going to look at certain areas, focus on them and ensure that we do
the work the way those who appointed us want us to do it.
So, what areas are you focusing on?
We will look at the oil and gas industry for instance. Then, the
Judiciary and other areas that need to be urgently cleansed up.
How do you react to the argument that your panel amounts
to a duplication of effort on the part of the government, because
the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the
Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission
(ICPC), the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) and other related agencies
are already doing what you have been asked to do?
Those who hold that position are ignorant, with due
respect. First, Nigeria is a member of the United Nations
systems. In 2003, the United Nations Convention Against Corruption
(UNCAC) was enacted. Some aspects of that convention make
provisions for national governments to set up multiple
anti-corruption bodies to address the issue of corruption.
This is because the convention identifies corruption as a threat
to humanity, to development, to democracy, to the society, among
others. I can tell you that organised crimes like terrorism and
money laundering are all a dialectical consequences of
corruption.
So, we have the Nigeria Police, which can investigate all forms
of crime, including corruption, economic and financial crimes.The
EFCC, the ICPC and the CCB are all there doing the same thing.
So, what distinguishes your panel from these
bodies?
Let me tell you, the Recovery of Public Property (Special
Provisions) Act Cap R4 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria predates
the EFCC Act, ICPC Act and even the Code of Conduct Bureau and
Tribunal Act (CCB/T Act). So, I can say that the law, setting up
our panel, is the oldest anti-corruption law in Nigeria.
But, unfortunately, successive governments did not have the
will, the commitment to fight corruption. That is why that law was
left in a state of limbo. Now, we have a government that is
committed to fighting corruption, and the government has gone to
exhume the law from where it was buried.
There are differences between my panel and the Code of Conduct
Tribunal (CCB/T). For example, the CCB/T cannot impose a term of
imprisonment. My panel has the jurisdiction to investigate the
assets of a public officer.
If we find out that you suppress some information about your
assets, then we can file a charge against you at the Federal High
Court. And, if you are found guilty, you will be sentenced to 21
years’ imprisonment. Such provision is not there in the CCB/T
Act.
In what areas is your panel different from the
anti-graft bodies?
Under the law setting us up, if you under declare your assets,
or if you have more assets than what your legitimate earnings can
accommodate, we can investigate you, send our findings to the
Federal High Court. And, if you are found guilty, you will be
sentenced to life imprisonment.
This is the only law that has provision for life imprisonment
for corruption, embezzlement, contributing to the economic
adversity of Nigeria. You will not that the CCB/T covers public
officers alone.
The law, under which we are to operate, also extends to those in
the private sector. It also extends to relatives of public
officers. For example, a lot of public officers keep funds and
acquire property in the names of relatives, their children, their
wives, cousins, aunties, their friends, among others.
So, this law gives us the power to investigate relatives and
friends of public officers to see if they have acquired assets that
are inconsistent with their legitimate earnings. So, you can see
the differences now between out panel, the EFCC, ICPC and the
CCB/T.
If you say your panel can examine issues relating to
economic and financial crimes, how will it work around the obstacle
created by Section 6 (C) of the EFCC Act, which grants exclusive
powers to the EFCC on such matters?
You see, as I noted earlier, that, under the UNCAC, there is
room for national government to set up agencies whose functions in
relation to corruption overlap. So, there is nothing wrong with
that. We will do what we call, inter-agencies collaboration,
partnership and cooperation.
But, I can say that the law that sets up our panel is different
substantially from others. The functions may seem similar, but the
law is unique in its own way.
I have given you the example of the provision for life
imprisonment that is not in the CCCB/T, which only confiscate the
assets found to have been unlawfully acquired and bars the public
officer from further holding public office. But, under this law,
you will go to prison for 21 years.
Do you imply that your panel can undertake prosecution
on its own?
Yes. It will be unconstitutional for us to investigate and pass
on our findings to another body to do the prosecution. We will
investigate and prosecute as far as the assets of public officers
and those in private sector are concern.
For instance, a drug baron may not be working in the public
sector, but he has assets. And if we find out that he acquired
these assets through unlawful activities (because that is what the
law said), then we are empowered to go after such a drug baron.
Also, somebody who indulges in money laundering, but who cannot
be classified as belonging to either the public or private sector,
but has acquired assets that are suspicious, we can go after him,
seize those assets and charge him to court.
So, you can see the differences and why I said the laws are
different, although they may look similar on the surface.
The Executive has consistently accused the Judiciary of
not supporting its anti-corruption efforts. But, people wonder why
this same Executive has not deemed it fit to reach out to the
Judiciary for support?
We do not want to interfere with the functions of the Judiciary.
The Constitution has spelt out the functions of the different arms
of government. In theory, we are separated, but in practice, we are
supposed to work together. But, we will not go out of our way to
interfere with the internal workings of the Judiciary.
We will not tell the judges how to dispense justice. They should
dispense justice in accordance with their oath of office. If
government says corruption is a problem, we expect the Judiciary,
that is part of government to also see corruption as a problem.
But, we have not seen that.
For instance, we have judges, who have been indicted. Yes, I
feel a judge, who has been investigated from criminal allegations
for corruption, even if he is acquitted by a court of law, his
integrity is at stake. His honour is at stake, because a judge
ought to be like Caesar’s wife, who is above suspicion.
So, if a judge has brought himself to the level of being
investigated by law enforcement agencies, has been accused of
corruption and has been docked, though not sent to prison, that
judge has lost his credibility to sit as a judge.
As a lawyer, I will find it difficult to appear before that
judge and defer to him/her. You may ask me why. It is because we,
in the legal profession, consider judges as representing God.
That is why we address judges as ‘My Lord;’ that is why we bow
when we see them. We respect them. We consider the status of a
judge as prestigious. So, a judge, who has lost that toga of
integrity, credibility and honour should cease to be a judge.
So, how do think the Judiciary should approach this
issue?
What I expect the Judiciary to do, if it is working in tandem
with the Executive, is for the National Judicial Council (NJC) to
make a list of all the effected judges and hand to Mr. President to
either retire or dismiss them.
The perception out there is that you, as a person, have,
in recent time, been hard on the Judiciary. Don’t you think this
could affect you when you return to practice?
I will return to practice when I am done here. I am not afraid
that the position I take now could affect me, because I am not
against any judge. I am executing my official brief and I will do
it professionally, conscientiously and diligently, without minding
whose ox is gored.
So, that is it. I will return to practice, because I have not
done anything wrong. If anybody feels bad that I have done my job
professionally, let them forgive me for that, but I have to do my
job. I am not hard on the Judiciary.
I want the proper thing to be done, because I have been part of
the system and know what goes on within the system. So, I feel for
the legal profession.
I am passionate about the Bar and the Judiciary as a whole. I
tell you, we are endangered if we do not take steps to restore the
confidence of the public to the system. We are on the blink of
extinction.
How will you react to the criticism that this
administration has not recorded much success in the prosecution of
high-profile corruption cases despite its claim to be fighting
corruption?
I do not agree with the position, because we have had quite a
number of convictions. As a matter of fact, the EFCC said last week
that it recently recorded about 200 convictions. That is
salutary.
The case of the former Adamawa State governor, whose conviction
was reversed by the Court of Appeal, has not been concluded. I
believe an appeal should be before the Supreme Court by now. So, we
can only conclude on that after the Supreme Court gives its
verdict. The Supreme Court can restore his conviction.
So, we should wait until all these cases are heard at the Court
of Appeal and Supreme Court before we can say whether or not the
cases were properly handled. But for now, it is premature to say
so. I believe the EFCC is doing a good work and we are going to see
more convictions in the next few months.
The report on bribery and corruption in Nigeria, which
was just released by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
(UNODC) and the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), confirmed
that, despite this government’s claim of fighting corruption, it is
still prevalent. What do you think is wrong?
That survey was carried out five years ago. It is not a
reflection of the true position of things in the country. Let us be
fair. This government has done well as long as fighting corruption
is concerned. It is not easy.
Corruption in Nigeria has become endemic. And this government
has done very well. Look at the amount of money that we have
recovered. Look at the property we have recovered from looters.
Look at the number of cases on-going in court. This is
unprecedented in the history of Nigeria.
High placed persons, ex-ministers, ex-governors and others are
standing trial. So, you cannot say that this government’s fight
against corruption is not yielding results. You know it will be
impossible to totally eradicate corruption. We will reduce
corruption, because there is corruption in every society.
The most important thing is that anybody that is found corrupt
should be punished. And that is what we are trying to do – to
punish anybody, who indulges in corruption. But we are not saying
we are going to eradicate corruption completely. You know that is
impossible. But, we will try to reduce corruption to the barest
minimum,
What is the government doing to recover the $15 million
seized from the Goodluck Jonathan-government by the South African
government? Has Nigeria forfeited it to South
Africa?
I do not have a brief on that. Maybe you should ask the EFCC or
other relevant agencies. I also read about the seizure during
President Jonathan’s government, but I do not know what the current
situation is.
Shouldn’t your panel be interested in such
issues?
If it is brought to our attention, we will look at it. We can
take steps. We can request for documents relating to the
transaction. We can execute bench warrant on anybody. So, maybe we
will look into it. We will look into it.
Culled : Nation
Read more https://www.nairalaw.com/conceal-your-assets-face-21-years-imprisonment-obono-obla/