A civil society group, Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has faulted the recent position by the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice Chief Mike Aondoakaa that the government does not know the names of suspects involved in the Halliburton $180 bribe; and has petitioned the UN Conference of States Parties in Vienna, Austria, asking the Conference to “prevail on the government of Nigeria to disclose the names of suspects to the Nigerian public, and to bring them to justice without further delay.”
The UN Conference of States Parties is the body charged with overseeing the implementation of the UN Convention against Corruption.
In the petition dated 9 April 2009, and signed by SERAP’s Executive Director Adetokunbo Mumuni, the organization stated that “Recently, the government said that it has discovered $150million of the corrupt money in Swiss account. However, it also stated that it did not have the names of the suspects who are the account holders of the $150 million. This position is inconsistent with the position by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), which while responding recently to SERAP’s petition to the EFCC on the matter, stated that some of the suspects involved in Halliburton bribe are being interrogated. If this is correct, it implies that the government knows the names of the suspects but is simply refusing to disclose them to Nigerians.”
According to the group, “normal banking practices suggest that funds lodged in any bank are ascribed or owned by identifiable persons. In fact, Article 14 of the UN Convention against Corruption to which Nigeria is a state party requires states parties to deter and detect all forms of money-laundering, including by keeping records and information about beneficial owner; and to fully share information about money remitters, and originator. States are also required to maintain such information throughout the payment chain.”
“On the basis of the above, we believe that the details of the account holders are available but it may be that the Nigerian government failed and/or neglected to obtain these details. Alternatively, it may be that the government has not fully disclosed the information at its disposal concerning the names of the suspects. Since the discovery of the $150 million should automatically lead to the identification of the names of the account holders, it is more likely that the government knows the names of the suspects but is refusing to disclose these to the Nigerian public. This would amount to a fundamental breach of the UN Convention against Corruption,” the group added.
The group also said that the Nigerian government’s statement to the effect that unless any information on the names of suspects is authenticated by the US government, the government would not act on it, “is a limited interpretation of the obligation of Nigeria to request information, and to seek technical assistance, and for the US government to provide such information or assistance. There is no requirement of authentication of information regarding corruption or money laundering in the entire 71 articles of the UN Convention against Corruption.”
“Also, the government’s position that unless the bribe money reaches the taker, there is no offence committed cannot be supported by any sound legal reasoning and is not backed-up by the UN Convention against Corruption. In the first place, the provisions of the UN Convention against Corruption clearly show in Article 15 that even mere solicitation of bribe by a public official, directly or indirectly, of an undue advantage, is enough to establish the offence of bribery or predicate offences under the Convention. This position is also affirmed in Article 18 dealing with the offence of trading in influence. It should also be noted that participation in, association with or conspiracy to commit, attempts to commit and aiding, abetting, facilitating and counselling bribery is itself a corrupt act under the Convention,” the group added.
The group also stated that “Helping any person who is involved in the commission of predicate offences under the Convention to evade the legal consequences of his or her action (ie Halliburton) is a corrupt act under the Convention. The fact that $150 million is stashed in Swiss accounts suggests an intention on the part of the account holders to conceal or disguise the true nature, source, location, disposition, movement or ownership of or rights with respect to the money. This is also a corrupt act covered by the Convention. In short, contrary to the position of the Attorney General, it is not necessary for the bribe taker to receive the proceed of corruption for the offence of bribery or other predicate offences to be established under the Convention. Article 28 of the Convention is noteworthy here. It provides that “Knowledge, intent or purpose required as an element of an offence established in accordance with this Convention may be inferred from objective factual circumstances.”
“We are seriously concerned that the government’s position shows lack of good faith and political will by the government to disclose the names of the suspects involved in the Halliburton bribe or to bring them to justice. This is a serious violation of Nigeria’s international obligations. It also portrays the government as unserious about the anti-corruption fight or establishing a foundation for the rule of law in the country” the group further argued.
Signed
Adetokunbo Mumuni
Executive Director
11/4/09
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content1'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('comments'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content2'); });