Here lie remains of Mr Anti-corruption: R.I.P.

In addition to papering over his shortcomings all his achievements would be over-amplified. For example if he built a house in his village he would be said to have “made giant strides in contributing to the development of his community”. If he held any political post then (no matter his actual record in office), he […]

In addition to papering over his shortcomings all his achievements would be over-amplified. For example if he built a house in his village he would be said to have “made giant strides in contributing to the development of his community”. If he held any political post then (no matter his actual record in office), he would be praised as having “served the nation meritoriously”.  If he succeeded in making millions through failed contracts or sharp practices he would be described as “an entrepreneur, business mogul and financial guru”.  All said and done no effort will be spared to whitewash his image. There is only one serious drawback to receiving “Benin praise”, which is that it is reserved strictly for the dead!
The latest recipient is the late dictator Sani Abacha who ruled Nigeria from December 1993 until May 1998 when a “heart attack” put an end to his penchant for looting the treasury and assassinating democrats. Praise aside the truth about Abacha is that he manoeuvred himself into power, eliminated all threats to himself and proceeded to run the most kleptocratic, murderous, and dictatorial regime in Nigerian history. Under him Nigeria acquired the status of a “pariah nation”. The fact that he was never elected, took over government of the country, dissolved all elected federal, state, and local legislatures and forcibly imposed his will on everyone seems lost on his praise singers.  As Head of State he made corruption the basis of the Nigerian political economy running the treasury like a personal estate.
Sufficient evidence has been presented to prove that he “awarded contracts and pocketed kickbacks, engaged in direct printing of the nation’s currency, diverted security votes into his private bank accounts, over-invoiced the importation of petrol, and engaged in debt buy-back schemes with Russian Steel Companies”. Ismail Gwarzo, his National Security Adviser, told a Special Investigation Panel (SIP) that between June 1996 and October 1997, the Central Bank gave out 456 million dollars and 232 million pounds in cash to Abacha. Gwarzo went as far as giving a breakdown of these sums and the days on which they were collected.  The figures tallied with Central Bank records. The phenomenon of Heads of States of developing nations helping themselves to public money and stashing it in overseas didn’t start with Abacha. “Leaders” such as “Baby Doc” Duvalier of Haiti, Ferdinand Marcos of Philippines, Mobutu Sese Seko of Zaire, and Suharto of Indonesia led the way in expatriating billions of dollars from their countries. The difference between them and Abacha is that in their countries, there is a serious attempt to recover the loot from their families for the common good. In 2002, Ministry of Justice officials of Switzerland said a deal to return millions of dollars deposited in Swiss banks by Abacha collapsed because his son Mohammed refused to sign vital legal papers releasing the money.
The extra-ordinary deal was that the family could keep one hundred million dollars provided Mohammed signed an agreement enabling foreign banks in Switzerland and elsewhere to return a further one billion dollars of looted funds to the Nigerian government. The arrangement ended his three year incarceration on charges of embezzlement but upon his release he reportedly reneged. At the time, an editorial in This Day Newspaper stated that it was morally wrong to release Mohammed simply because he was ready to return part of the loot. Furthermore it asked why $100 million (approximately 1.6 billion naira) should be left with the family. General Abacha was a military man on salary all his life and could not possibly have earned that amount.
The African Network for Environmental and Economic Justice (ANEEJ) condemned the arrangement, saying that it would encourage impunity and undermine the rule of law which is essential for good governance in a democratic society. It’s understandable that pro-Abacha politicians don’t want the loot returned because this money is the very basis of their survival. But the figures are mindboggling. In what has been described as the “largest kleptocracy forfeiture action ever in the United States” a US Attorney-General in a District Court in Washington alleges that Abacha, his son Mohammed, and their associate Abubakar Atiku Bagudu misappropriated, and extorted billions from the government of Nigeria, then laundered the money through the purchase of US government bonds using American financial institutions. International investigators have identified over 130 banks where Abacha’s money is being kept.
The whole world has come to realize that our so-called “anti-corruption war” is a monumental hoax. The nation has sunk to a new low because politicians quite evidently value their political ambitions more than the health, wealth or pride of the nation. There are accusations by opposition parties that the rule of law has been cast aside conveniently forgetting that the money belongs to the nation’s suf-fering masses because the Abacha connections and wealth will be vital to PDP in the 2105 presidential election campaign.
The body language of the president in a recent picture with Mohammed Abacha published in Daily Trust (page 3 of June 10th 2014) tells its own story. The question being asked is whether the ruling party has the moral right to ask Nigerians to make sacrifices for their country? Or to be patriotic? Or even to pay taxes? Endorsing corruption has been elevated into national policy. The presidential pardon of Alamieseigha, and dropping of charges against Mohammed Abacha are the final nails on the coffin of the anti-corruption war.