EFCC and stalled corruption cases - The Guardian

Friday, 11 October 2013 00:00 Editor Opinion - Editorial

WITHOUT equivocation, the fight against corruption in Nigeria has stalled. And sometimes, it seems that the only fight is over who and how many more people can get involved in the crime. This is the tragedy of Nigeria. Once highly rated for its doggedness and exploits in the war against corruption, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), would appear to have since lost its steam and reputation and become a caricature of its old self. Unlike in the past when at the mere mention of EFCC public office holders trembled, it is doubtful if the commission still evokes any fear or respect among Nigerians. Indeed, it has become commonplace for top politicians to boast about their readiness to honour the invitation of the organisation with an aura of pride and arrogance, on one hand alluding to the toothlessness of the agency.
It is, therefore, hardly surprising that corruption remains business as usual. Foreigners indicted in their home countries on corruption allegations perpetrated in Nigeria were tried, found guilty and sentenced to jail. But in Nigeria, their collaborators are not only free, but still occupy high public offices and celebrated as national heroes. James Ibori, a former Governor of Delta State, who was prosecuted but discharged and acquitted in Nigeria, was found guilty and jailed for similar offence in the United Kingdom. These contradictions say something about the rot in our judicial system, as well as the moral decadence of our society.
In a recent lamentation, Ibrahim Lamorde, the EFCC Chairman, attempted to shift the blame to the lawyers. The sins of the lawyers, according to him, had to do with their various strategies of frustrating the EFCC in the court process, including the filling of several motions and counter-motions, as well as frivolous applications for all kinds of injunctions.
In all sincerity, Lamorde may have made a valid claim, as corroborated by Monday Ubani of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Ikeja Branch, Lagos, who also blamed the Bar for its complicity in the fight against corruption. Though fashioned along the British model, the Nigerian legal system has since been unduly compromised and polluted with an excruciating level of corruption. The Bar and the Bench are both culpable.
Lamorde should, however, be reminded that beyond the corruption of the judicial system, Nigerians are also aware that many law enforcement officers desire to be posted to the EFCC and lobby extensively to make it happen. The incentive structure of the EFCC provides for easy access to wealth. The EFCC needs to look inward for self-cleansing and purging.
Nevertheless, the alarm raised by Lamorde signifies a call for help. It presupposes that the EFCC has genuine intension to fight corruption. A number of steps are desirable, if this lofty goal would ever be attained. There is need for strong will on the part of political leaders at all levels, most especially at the centre. Leadership by example is crucial to any transformation agenda, including the war against corruption. From all indication, the leadership question remains about the most fundamental problem of the country. Instances of frontloading corruption through contract award to fund elections are easily discernible. There is total lack of role modelling by leadership, a problem that must be tackled if the fight against corruption is to be taken seriously.
There is also need for adequate funding of the EFCC and other anti-corruption agencies. Without adequate funding, no organisation can perform effectively. The EFCC may be allowed to retain certain percentage of recovered funds for its effective operations. There is also need for capacity building through training and retraining of its personnel. Although the donor community has assisted in the training of its personnel, the politicisation of the institution and its seeming timidity in outlook may have discouraged donors while frequent transfer of personnel has also depleted its trained capacity. More importantly, the EFCC should be completely made independent of the office of the Attorney General of the Federation, who currently wields enormous powers over the commission, including the power to discontinue any case at any point in time.
There is need for the establishment of a special court exclusively for the prosecution of corruption cases and the decision of the court should be final. It is also important to decentralise the EFCC, given that each state already has unique legal systems for its jurisdiction. Finally, most of these policy prescriptions require a reform of the enabling laws to strengthen the anti-corruption agencies and renew the war against graft.