SOME months after the exit of Justice Emmanuel Ayoola from the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), the anti-graft agency has yet to find a stable leadership. Justice Pius Aderemi (retd) who was nominated by the presidency to replace Ayoola in a substantive capacity was rejected by the Senate on account of his alleged old age. Uriah Angulu, who succeeded Ayoola in an acting capacity, was recently sacked via a letter from the office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mohammed Bello Adoke, directing him to proceed on terminal leave. Angulus tenure of office allegedly expires in July 2011 when he was expected to have completed two terms as a commissioner in the agency. Ordinarily, his terminal leave ought to commence sometime in May 2011 which would have been three months before the due date of his retirement in tandem with the civil service rules. However, the Attorney-Generals directive brought forward the commencement date by about two months. Angulu had since handed over to Abang Rosemary Wushishi, a retired Assistant Inspector-General of Police, as yet another Acting Chairman of ICPC.THE timing and manner of the removal of Angulu have given rise to speculations and insinuations. There is a strong suspicion that the Federal Governments sudden removal of Angulu has more to it than routine hiring and firing of an employee. That is yet to be proved, but there must be a deliberate effort to confirm the veracity or otherwise of this insinuation. Meanwhile, members of the ethnic group of Uriah Angulu and in particular, citizens of his home community have been drawing the attention of the members of the public to the alleged marginalisation of their people which the removal of their son allegedly represents. The protest of Angulus village people reflects how many Nigerians see public office; a veritable vehicle to access the common wealth and have a sense of belonging. Nevertheless, it is wrong to always taint very important matters with ethnic and other primordial colourations.THE issue that many Nigerians have with Angulus unceremonious removal from office is premised on principle which revolves around some ethical and legal questions that far outweigh the ethnic colouration the matter is being painted. Angulu has almost served out two terms as a commissioner with ICPC. His tenure of office has only been shortened by few months and that should not have elicited protest of marginalization. The ill-advised protest has served no useful purpose other than to attempt to reduce the importance of an otherwise serious legal and ethical issue by dressing it in a despicable ethnic robe. The reality is that the issue of marginalisation did not arise in the circumstance but that does not detract from the right of Angulus people and other Nigerians from knowing why the Commissioner was relieved of his duties about five clear months before the expiration of his tenure of office.THE more serious insinuation around Angulus sack is his reported handling of the alleged N6billion fraud at the National Judicial Institute (NJI). There had been serious allegations of fraud of monumental proportions at the NJI. ICPCs investigation of these allegations has revealed that some high-ranking officials of the Institute would need to explain their roles in the alleged fraud. Unfortunately, these officials have allegedly failed to make themselves available to the ICPC for questioning. Of great concern is the alleged interference of the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), the Attorney-General of the Federation and the Minister of Justice in the matter. In all of this, Uriah Angulu was believed to have favoured investigation of allegations against the NJI officials. Even when this stance allegedly pitted him against some highly placed persons in government, he reportedly stood his ground that the fraud allegations must be thoroughly investigated and that all parties to the issue must cooperate to expose the perpetrators of the alleged scam as envisaged by the law setting up the ICPC. It is strongly believed that Angulus uncompromising posture actually culminated in the sack letter which came by way of an instruction to him from the office of the Attorney-General to start his terminal leave.WHETHER or not this angle to the story of the removal of Angulu as the Acting Chairman of ICPC is true is a different matter entirely. But what is clear is that Nigerians would never allow the exit of an Acting Chairman of a public institution to culminate in the cessation of an important assignment being handled by that institution. With or without Angulu, the investigations into the activities of the NJI should continue without hindrance from any quarter. If the objective of those who are allegedly obstructing the cause of justice and subsequently caused Angulu to be sacked is to sweep the allegations under the carpet, they have missed it.THE mysterious sack of Angulu, if anything, has raised the ante about the alleged fraud at the NJI. Many Nigerians are now aware of the undercurrent that allegedly saw to the exit of the Acting Chairman. One can only wait to see how a self respecting helmsman of ICPC, whether acting or substantive will sweep the matter under the carpet without raising high brow. Indeed the interest generated by the Angulu-NJI saga has gone beyond the two public institutions that were originally involved in the matter. The human rights community, civil society organisations and, of course the media, all of who had lately expressed concern about the governments alleged interference in some anti-corruption cases and corruption in the nations judiciary, are bound to show more than a passing interest in the matter at issue.AGAINST the backdrop of the array of parties that are interested in the matter, all stakeholders must rise up to ensure that culprits (if any) at NJI who have been named and those that further investigation may throw up are brought to book. The officials of NJI that ICPC has invited for questioning must make themselves available to the anti-graft body quickly and without fail. That is what the law says, anything to the contrary is not only a breach but also suggestive of admission of guilt.
Click here to read full news..
