The history of political corruption and governance in Nigeria is replete with episodes that range from the commendable to the most absurd. Yet the struggle against corruption and the quest for good governance has been constant, though historically chequered.
The history of political corruption and governance in Nigeria is replete with episodes that range from the commendable to the most absurd. Yet the struggle against corruption and the quest for good governance has been constant, though historically chequered.
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content1'); });
This struggle has in itself not only attracted academic and non-academic interests but the very nature of the struggle has simultaneously generated pessimism and optimism within and across the world on the future of post-colonial Nigeria. In a simple sense therefore, any discourse on political corruption and governance cannot be isolated from the historical trajectory of the country since its official creation by the British in 1914 following the amalgamation of Southern and Northern protectorate.
The tales of corruption in the political economy of Nigeria since 1999 has never failed to attract interest. My goal is not to revisit pre-1999 episodes of corruption in Nigeria which has been variously discussed by others, but I must point out that, historically, corruption and governance issues cannot be separated because it is only expected that the best form of governance would abhor corruption just as a corrupt regimes would not be interested in promoting popular governance. In other words, the history of governance has not been immune from political corruption as noted by academic scholars who talk about “prebendalism” in the Second Republic and “de-democratization” in the Fourth Republic.
Yet even with these challenges, the Fourth Republic has witnessed the implementation of several anti-corruption policies and creation of some anti-corruption institutions while numerous corrupt politicians, public office holders, oil and bank executives had been arrested and jailed for their crimes. Expectedly, Nigeria was soon delisted from the infamous list of non-cooperative nations in the fight against corruption and money laundering by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the organization responsible for combating money laundering and financing of terrorism. Millions of naira has been retrieved for government and the private sectors both within and outside Nigeria. Nothing less than five former governors, a former speaker of House of Representatives and a cabinet Minister were charged to court in 2011 alone for corrupt practices.
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content2'); });
However in spite of these achievements, corruption remains a major challenge in Nigeria. Among some of these episodes of corruption includes the James Ibori case where a former governor, who had been freed by a court in Nigeria, was arrested in Dubai and jailed in the UK.
The Problem with Nigeria: The Fundamental Issues
It would be recalled that the late world renowned novelist, Chinua Achebe, in 1983 wrote a small book entitled “The Trouble with Nigeria.” In the book, Achebe largely blamed the plight of the country on leadership failures. Hear Achebe:
“The trouble with Nigeria is simply and squarely a failure of leadership. There is nothing basically wrong with the Nigerian character. There is nothing wrong with the Nigerian land or climate or water or air or anything else. The Nigerian problem is the unwillingness or inability of its leaders to the responsibility, to the challenge of personal example which are the hallmark of true leadership”.
From this quote, which opened Achebe’s book, his conviction that leadership failure caused the troubles for Nigeria is not in doubt. However, even where he is very right in his analysis, with reference to political corruption and governance trajectory, a more critical re-reading of his piece clearly shows that even where there is leadership failure there are other implied levels of failure other than those of leadership.
It is in this light that I identify four fundamental issues that have not only occasioned political corruption but have continued to dent best possible governance. In discussing these four fundamental issues, I am guided by two assumptions. First, that political corruption remains the major challenge of governance in Nigeria. Second, that political corruption negatively impacts other strata of governance such as security, education, energy and power and other sectors. Having said this, I proceed to highlight the four fundamental issues.
First is the nature of Nigeria’s political elite and the consensus that seems to exist among most of them on the question of corruption. This issue, in a way is related to Achebe’s position on Nigeria’s leadership. Political corruption is often aided by the political elites, whether the ruling or the counter elites, through their appalling acts of political accommodation which is in itself driven by the quest to gain political power at whatever cost, whether it’s a “do-or-die” or “ turning a blind eye” to corruption and the corrupt.
My point is simple: why would political elites accommodate individuals with questionable characters or people who are being investigated for serious acts of corruption into a political party even when such individuals are known to be corrupt? Rather than view corruption as a malady that can dent the chances of a political party, the pages of national newspapers have been replete with instances where corrupt politicians who decamp from one party to another and are welcome with rallies and adulation. Corruption becomes relegated while politics and quest for power by any means necessary tend to become the essence of politics. No wonder mediocre litter Nigeria’s political space and good governance is endangered.
Known corrupt individuals have not only backed political office holders but pictures of some of these corrupt individuals with public office holder have severally graced the front pages of newspapers! Unfortunately, because politics has been devalued, the culture of resignation even where an allegation of corruption has been made is considered an aberration. Political office holders find it difficult to resign or at least “step aside” to allow for non-interference in administrative investigation of their actions.
Second is the issue of weak institutions. I have severally presented papers to explain some of the challenges faced by anti-corruption institutions such as the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). If the EFCC arrests a corrupt public officer for stealing millions of naira and the courts release such individuals after paying a token, who is to be blamed? Political corruption and governance are shaped by institutions, and it is these institutions, through the individuals that operate them, that implement the rules of the game. If these same institutions are weak or compromised, how would the process of deepening corruption and best possible governance be promoted?
Related to weak institutions is a third germane issue which is the legal framework. There is an urgent need to drastically revisit the punishment for corruption in Nigeria. This need has been buttressed by calls which range from those for special courts for the trial of corruption cases to those that advocate for a “Chinese treatment” for corrupt individuals. To this effect, some judges have, in a way rightly, argued that the light punishment for corruption is based on the existing laws and inadequate legal framework.
A typical example of inadequate legal framework was demonstrated by the Court in the decision of Justice Abubakar Talba of an Abuja high court on January 28, 2013 in the police pension scam case involving on John Yusuf, a Director at the Police Pension Office who was charged with criminal misappropriation and stealing by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, under section 309 of the Penal Code Act, Cap 532, Laws of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, Nigeria, 2007. Yussuf pleaded guilty to breach of trust and fraudulently converting N2bn of police pension funds to his private use. Upon conviction, the trial Judge sentenced him to two years imprisonment with an option of fine in the sum of N750,000 for the three offences he pleaded guilty to even though, each of the three offenses attracted a maximum of two years jail term
Even though, the conviction was unarguably overtly light and against the weight of evidence, it is clear that the Judge manipulated the inadequate legal provisions and the inherent weakness in the criminal justice administration system to abuse his discretion in favour of the accused. Section 309 of the Penal Code, under which Yusuf was sentenced, provides that “whoever commits criminal misappropriation shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years or with fine or with both”. Therefore, we shall continue to witness inconsequential and unconscionable convictions of this nature until the law is amended to provide for stiffer penalty and the criminal justice administration system is reviewed by the National Assembly. For instance where the law says a man who steals should be sentenced to two years with an option of fine, can be amended upwardly and the sentence increased while also making provision for restitution. As the law is today, victims of crime go home empty handed. For now, there are numerous cases where the legal system is frustrating the activities of the EFCC.
Yet another related problem is the undue delay in the judicial process. This is perhaps, the most monstrous challenge in the prosecution of political corruption in Nigeria. A former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Dahiru Musdapher at the Second Annual Conference on the Reform of Criminal Justice Administration held in Asaba in June 2012 stated that: “almost every criminal trial, especially on serious charges of corruption, is now preceded by endless objections and applications to quash charges. This, he adds, effectively stalls the main proceedings and results in the misuse of judicial time and resources.” According to him, “Some judges, wittingly or unwittingly, aid this process by failing in their duty to be firmly in control of criminal proceedings in their courts and allowing these gimmicks to go on unabated”. This is so true.
It is extremely challenging in Nigeria today to prosecute accused persons, particularly in corruption and money laundering cases. It is now a brazen and unbridled “art” for many defence counsel to stall prosecution of cases by endless, and most times frivolous interlocutory applications and appeals; blackmailing and intimidating judges who do not yield to their delay tactics thereby encouraging their clients to malinger and hide from the law.
Lastly, political corruption has persisted because there is the lack of what I would call collective governance. Simply put, collective governance is grounded in democracy to an extent that both the government and the governed are conscious of their roles and responsibilities in the governance process. Here, governance is not only restricted to government. Rather, the civil society as represented in individuals, organizations and groups are as involved in shaping and sustaining best practices in governance as the government officials themselves. By this token, citizens become proactive members of the state.
My point is this: even where there is the failure of governance from the point of government and the country’s leadership, the governed on a number of occasions have not shown their distaste for corruption. Nigeria is the way it is not only because of leadership failure but followers have also failed to appreciate the power that they wield as checks on the government. Though it is often easy to argue that poverty is responsible for the loss of value in the society, collective governance would only be attained when the people for whom government exists in the first place have a mindset that they chiefly determine who rules them and how they should be ruled. The churches and mosques should become more involved in the naming and shaming of corrupt individuals. It is laughable the number of corrupt Nigerians that go to mosques and churches for “thanksgiving” even after looting the nation’s treasury!
Instead of collective governance, the socio-cultural landscape in the political economy is readily exploited by criminals to give sentimental or primordial interpretation or coloration to allegations of crimes against them, particularly corruption related crimes. As a result, even in glaring incidents of misconduct, fraud, crime and corruption the perpetrators do not lack sympathizers who cluster around them. Added to this is the adulation of wealth irrespective of how ill-gotten. For instance, the nouveau rich or sudden millionaires as a result of corruption, money laundering or other crimes are neither questioned by the society on how they got the wealth nor, at least despised. Instead, people congregate around them, and seek their favor.
Regrettably, it is within this peculiar and hostile milieu that the EFCC prosecutes corruption cases in Nigeria. The effect is that there is a high tendency by accused persons to tamper with witnesses either by compromise or outright intimidation which makes it difficult for the EFCC in some cases to secure witnesses attendance in courts.
There is also a disposition of sympathizers to assist the criminals to hide their proceeds of crime. A good example of this was the case of James Ibori a former Governor of Delta State. When Ibori was arraigned by the EFCC in the Kaduna Division of the Federal High Court on the 17th of December, 2007, large crowds numbering about 500 travelled all the way from Delta State to Kaduna in buses, a distance of more than 700kms in solidarity with the former governor notwithstanding the fact that Ibori was being prosecuted for laundering billions of Naira belonging to their State which in turn, impoverished them.
When the court refused Ibori’s oral application for bail, the crowd went wild, caused a stampede, pulled down the fence of the court’s premises and the women among them went semi-nude in protest. It was very difficult for the security agents to control them. With such frenzy, one could imagine what would have happened if the case had been held in Delta State. The position was not different with the other high profile suspects who always appeared on each day of trial with placards carrying crowds in protest against the EFCC prosecution.
Conclusion: Towards Collective Governance
I have briefly discussed what I consider to be the four fundamental issues in political corruption and governance in Nigeria. I am very aware that some would have expected that the “usual” culprit (i.e. ethnicity) should have made the list as one of the fundamental issues. My take is that though ethnicity was, and still remains, a major challenge to governance in Nigeria, it is merely a symptom of the jaundiced post-colonial political economy as manifested in the aforementioned fundamental issues which have not only sustained it but promoted its continuous manipulation for individual, class, and group interests.
If the political elites conform to best possible governance, if institutions are strengthened and are seen to be above prejudice, tyranny and impunity, if the criminal justice administration system and laws are reviewed to strengthen the EFCC and frontally check and engage corruption and if Nigerians embrace collective governance, ethnicity would no longer have a pride of place in the country’s political economy. Most importantly, collective governance would not only popularize governance but it would remain the best way to fight corruption. Simply put, just as government and its institutions strive for best possible governance, non-government entities like individuals, the press, religious organizations and other groups must make anti-corruption a watchword.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of SaharaReporters
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('comments'); });