Lawyers give knocks, kudos to N/Assembly’s ‘amnesty’ for looters

The new bill by the National Assembly seeking to grant amnesty to treasury looters who fulfill certain conditions received divergent views from lawyers over the weekend. While many of them criticised the policy as a means to shield corrupt government officials and their associates, some welcomed it as an opportunity of cutting back on the […]

The new bill by the National Assembly seeking to grant amnesty to treasury looters who fulfill certain conditions received divergent views from lawyers over the weekend. While many of them criticised the policy as a means to shield corrupt government officials and their associates, some welcomed it as an opportunity of cutting back on the nation’s financial losses.

The proposed law is titled ‘A Bill for an Act to Establish a Scheme to Harness Untaxed Money for Investment Purposes and to Assure any Declarant Regarding Inquiries and Proceedings Under Nigerian Laws and for Other Matters Connected Therewith’ and was sponsored by Linus Okorie (PDP, Ebonyi).

According to the lawmaker, the bill, dubbed ‘Economic Amnesty,’ in Section 4 (a) provides that 30 percent tax and additional surcharge of 25 percent of such tax will be deducted from the recovered loot. It also provides that while the proposed tax would be remitted to the federation account for distribution to all tiers of government, the surcharge is to be remitted directly to specific agencies towards agricultural and infrastructural development of the nation.

The agencies are the National Agricultural Research Development Fund and the Nigerian Infrastructure Fund. Also, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) is to manage the scheme, while the declaration would be made to the chairman of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS).

The proposed law also exempts all declarations made from further assessment/taxation by any tax authority within Nigeria, outside the tax and surcharge provided therein.

In the bill, the Federal Government has powers to make consequential “orders not inconsistent with the scheme to remove any difficulties” that may arise in the course of implementation.

“In return, the bill proposes a total and comprehensive amnesty for all declarants from all otherwise repercussions under Nigerian laws and further provides that all such declarations shall be inadmissible in evidence against the declarant except in matters of national security,” the lawmaker said.

Reacting to the bill, Ilorin-based lawyer, Abeny Mohammed (SAN), condemned it saying that it is meant to protect and serve the interest of members of the National Assembly’.

The Executive Director of Citizens Advocacy for Social & Economic Rights (CASER), Frank Tietie, described the bill as defeatist and irresponsible because it is the political class which is generating this proposal that will eventually be the beneficiaries.

“The citizens fail to realize that crime is crime and for it to be compounded, it must first be prosecuted in the court of law. You must bring the entire money and serve one form of punishment,” he said.

Lagos-based lawyer Joe Nwokedi said it will be the most shameful thing that will happen to Nigeria. He asked: “If looters are to be given amnesty then what moral justification do we have to prosecute other criminals like kidnappers and armed robbers?”

He  suggested that before the National Assembly can go ahead with passing the bill, “they will first amend our criminal procedure Act to expunge looting as a crime so that people will freely indulge in the nefarious act.” 

“The person that made that suggestion in the first place should be investigated, arrested and prosecuted. Looting is a grave criminal offence and shouldn’t be treated lightly. It is a conversion of the common wealth of the people for individual and personal gains whereas the public will be languishing in abject penury and hardship,” Nwokedi added.

Another lawyer with the same opinion is Barrister Umar Gezawa who said the process will be abused, adding that the law will only encourage corruption.

Abuja based lawyer, E.M.D Umukoro, said though the idea may be good it will be abused thereby indirectly encouraging public looters “to continue in their quest so long as they invest it in the economy of the country.”

“The government must call a spade a spade and stop encouraging corruption. It is suggested that what government should have done is to give some time (if at all) tagged grace period for looters to return the loot. After the period they can enforce the law on corruption than this proposed law,” he added. 

However, Josiah Daniel-Ebune, the publisher of the FCT Law Review does not condemn the bill in its entirety. He said he will only support partial amnesty and not complete amnesty. He said full amnesty will still be laying the ground work for people to steal or find criminality attractive.

“Rather, such legislation should contemplate some minimal level of punishment or penalty for corruption activities. Also, the gravity of punishment is now reduced by the fact that the person returns the stolen wealth for the development of the common wealth. I will support partial amnesty and minimum punishment,” he said.

Extending this position, anti-corruption lawyer, Yusuf Ali (SAN) said the situation will  enable the country cut its losses to corruption if well-defined rules govern it. 

He said prolonged court prosecution is a huge drain on the country’s resources at the end of which no benefits accrue to the country.

“I have always held that we must define our objective. Those who put their hands in the public till what do you want to achieve, is it an eye for an eye or to make the best out of the situation that we find ourselves.  If someone has stolen N100 million and you can say ‘o boy can you return N95 million?’

“As long as there are well defined rules governing it, I think we should know what is in our best interest. How many of these cases have we won since we started? We should not behave like the ostrich.

“Even in the USA that is what is involved. If your objective is an eye for an eye, then it is for them to go to jail; even these monies are in places where even their own children do not have access to. So it is in our best interest,” he added.