In Nigeria's social-political index, corruption probably ranks highest. This has continued to be a major trauma for government and other stakeholders in the business of enthroning accountability and good governance. More worrisome is that corruption has reached a cancerous state. Why is it difficult to prosecute corruption cases in Nigeria' This is what Mr. Yele Delano (SAN) tries to unravel in this interview with ABIODUN FANORO. Excerpts:WHY is it difficult to successfully prosecute corruption cases in Nigeria'The reasons are many. The first and most important reason is the absence of the political will on the part of those in authorities, to prosecute cases to their logical conclusion. A few cases where results were recorded had been by way of plea-bargaining. This, in my mind, defeats the whole objective of instituting and prosecuting corruption cases.The objective is not financial, it is not about recovering money. I think the paramount objective should be to prosecute, to find someone guilty and to punish him.In one word, the sole objective is supposed to be a deterrence. The focus is not supposed to be money because a lot of money has been lost already. If we are able to prosecute and punish the culprit, you will find out that there would be fewer cases to prosecute in future.Another reason is that our system of justice, even at the best of time, is protracted, it is delayed. We have a system that has not been able to deliver justice, even in civil matters, not to talk of complex fraud cases.There are many reasons for that. If you look at the set up of the anti-graft agencies, for instance the EFCC (Economic and Financial Crime Commission), you will discover that it has a foundational problem, it is made up of the same rustic elements from the Police. Police itself is an institution that has been adjudged to have been unable to live up to expectation in the performance of its duties. Well, I am not saying that we should look for new people to hire, what I am saying is the need for training, I mean relevant trainings. We need to find out how has it been done in countries where corruption has been fought and how we can do it and get it right. We also need to ensure that the EFCC and other anti-graft agencies are credible.You stressed the need to borrow from the experience of countries that are well-grounded in the prosecution of corruption cases. Extending this to the recent successful prosecution of the former Delta State governor, James Ibori, in the United Kingdom, what are the things that made the difference between prosecution of corruption cases between Britain and Nigeria'Clearly, some of the things I have said earlier, you can see them playing out in the Ibori case. I doubt if there was the political will in the prosecution of Ibori (by the Nigerian authorities).Secondly, the English judicial system is a well-tested system. It is transparent. The English are committed to putting all necessary resources behind the prosecution of such cases. The English do not place financial reward as the objective for prosecution. Rather, they are of the view that if they could secure conviction, then the money that they spent would have been well-spent.Do you share the view that Ibori's conviction in U.K. has thrown a lot of challenges to the Nigerian judicial system and the government itself'I think that nobody in the Nigerian justice system would say all is well, whether you are in the Police, in the judiciary or a legal practitioner. The Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Dahiru Musdapher, has said quite frankly and I think rightly so, that all is not well with our judicial system, so we have these challenges. The Ibori case is good for us, because it brings the issue to the fore. This will force us to face our demon. It would channel our energies on how to make things work better.In what way could this Ibori 's U.K. conviction be made to impact on public institutions in Nigeria'Well, I do not believe in the fire brigade approach to solving problems, I don't believe in responding to incidents and events. I believe in the planned and determined review of our judicial system, of our police system, of our criminal justice system, to deliver justice not only in corruption cases. But in many other cases, that have continued to suffer. Nigerians are entitled to receiving quick dispensation of justice. That is the duty of government to the people of Nigeria. I don't think we need to react to just one case. I think what we need to do is a holistic review of our justice system. We should plan it, then it would take time, but we should know that at least, we are on a journey, a journey that has an expected end.How can the problem of lack of political will be addressed'Well, the answer is very simple. Political will is determined by those in power, the politicians, and they are (supposed to be) elected by the people. So ultimately, the electorate, the Nigerian populace must take responsibility for this lack of political will.Since lack of political will is from elected politicians who form governments, how can we remove government from prosecuting corruption cases'You cannot remove government from prosecution of cases. That is one of the primary roles of government, I mean the executive. In any case, if you remove government from prosecution, in whom would the power of prosecution be vested' How do you know that the person in whom you now vest this power would use it desirably' The solution is simple, what happens in a democracy is that there must be a viable opposition that are criticising the actions of government, including a situation where government has shown a clear lack of political will to prosecute corruption cases diligently. If there is a viable opposition who constructively contests every action of government and engages government on issues, then you will find that government would be more responsible on issues that it takes.For instance, if the Attorney-General enters nolle prosecute in respect of a matter that is highly contentious, then the opposition must put him to task on why he should enter nolle prosecute. And it is not sufficient for the Attorney-General to say there is lack of evidence, he needs to tell the public which evidence is not there and why he has to go to court in the first place, if there was no sufficient evidence.Would the separation of the offices of the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice not help efficient prosecution of corruption cases'No, I don't think so. I don't think that we need to expand this government further. I don't think separating the two offices would make any difference if you don't change the system as a whole. The problem is systematic failure. It is not the failure of an office or a person.Is there any need for the provision for private prosecutor'The idea of a private prosecution is a good one. A private prosecutor often has the incentive and self-motivation to perform and to secure conviction where an accused is guilty. Generally, private prosecutors have more experience than civil servants.Corruption in the judiciary has even been attested to by Chief Justice Dahiru Musdapher. What do you think went wrong for judges to compromise'The first thing I want to say is that you cannot paint every judge with the same brush. Not every judge in Nigeria is corrupt. And my sincere position is that the justice delivery system still performs its primary function. However, it is many times delayed, no doubt, there have been cases that have not received justice, cases in which judges have indisputably come into wrong decisions. It would be difficult to defend that judges are not corrupt, but majority of cases are still determined.But there is no doubt that when one case is compromised and decided unjustly, it receives a lot of publicity and attention. I think nobody will say that all is well with our justice delivery system, but it is not correct to say all judges are corrupt. I must say that some factors are responsible for the mess in the judiciary. Top among them are lack of basic working tools for judges, poor remuneration of judges, inefficient rules of court, corruption in the non-judicial personnel, unnecessary delay by legal practitioners, nepotism in the appointment of judges and again, the issue of lack of political will.Many have blamed cases of corruption among judges on their exposure to material wealth, especially by politicians. What is your opinion on this'All over the world and Nigeria is not an exception, taking over the job of a judge is a sacrifice by the judge to his people. Nowhere would you find judges getting rich from their duties as judges. But basically, judges must have good remuneration to meet their needs. The remuneration must be reasonable and commensurate with their job. They must be given a dignified remuneration.Some people are of the view that the use of serving judges to handle election petitions could unconsciously compromise them. Do you agree'I don't see the obvious relationship, especially in political cases, between the judge handling the case and the governor of a particular state. In fact, what obtains is that judges from a particular state are taken to another state completely to go and serve. They are randomly chosen, and each tribunal is made up of five judges. Also, these five judges are not necessarily from the same state. In fact, not even two are likely to come from the same state. If serving judges are not to be used, the alternative is to use retired judges. But don't forget that retired judges have nothing to lose, while serving judges have their jobs and their integrity at stake. I think to that extent, I cannot see obvious compromise when serving judges are used. What is at stake is our collective fate and future, so we need to be sure that that is not being compromised in any way and this has to be demonstrated.At the centre of fighting corruption are the two main anti-graft agencies - the EFCC and ICPC - whose confidence among the public is said to be fast waning. How can this confidence be restored'I am someone who believes that even the Police must be policed. In essence, what I am saying is that the anti-graft agencies too must be investigated, the investigator must also be investigated before it either slips away or gets carried away by self-appreciation. Again, I will recommend this model, which I earlier suggested, random investigation. One good thing we can do is to have a random investigation. They should also in addition examine the memos, the evidence, statements of accused persons, investigation in the bank, I am sure after all these, eminent people would be able to say independently whether or not a particular case has been dealt with properly or not. Right now, nobody does that, nobody knows why these cases are not doing well. Even the committee has to be random, the people it uses this year may not necessarily be used next year so that they cannot be pre-approached. When an investigator knows that at any point in time his own case may be reviewed, at all times, he would be up and doing.In the light of the successful conviction of James Ibori in U.K., would it not be right for the EFCC to review all its previous cases in Nigeria'Nigeria has a judicial system. We cannot break it for one person. This system requires that a case would commence at the Magistrate's Court, in line with the appellate tradition, move to the High Court, from there to the Court of Appeal and then the Supreme Court. It is for the aggrieved party, in this case, the government, which has failed to secure conviction, to appeal and have a judicial review of the case. That would be a matter for the Attorney-General to look at. But don't forget that the evidence that was available in U.K. was not the same evidence that was available in Nigeria. It is easier said than done. The Attorney-General can only make that decision based on the evidence at his disposal.In the light of the failure of EFCC in the Ibori case, would it not be imperative for EFCC, in particular, to engage in introspection by having a review of some of the cases it has failed to secure convictions, with a view of revealing why and how they failed'I have no doubt that the Chairman of the EFCC would be taking a review of all the cases, with the aim of establishing why the agency failed to obtain convictions in some of the cases in the past. The chairman would be doing this to help strengthen both pending and future cases to enable him achieve better results. That is the job of a lawyer, I am glad EFCC Chairman, Mr. Ibrahim Larmode is a lawyer. As a lawyer, you need to do a review of your cases to enable you see the weaknesses and find out how you can strengthen them.
Click here to read full news..
