The $9.3m question

The detainees told South African investigators that the money was meant to procure arms for the ‘Nigerian security services’. Oritsejafor did not deny that the aircraft was his, but noted that it was leased to ‘Green Coast Produce Limited’ through another firm, Eagle Air Company, in which he has interests.Nigerian government officials claimed to have […]

The detainees told South African investigators that the money was meant to procure arms for the ‘Nigerian security services’. Oritsejafor did not deny that the aircraft was his, but noted that it was leased to ‘Green Coast Produce Limited’ through another firm, Eagle Air Company, in which he has interests.
Nigerian government officials claimed to have provided the South African authorities with documents to show that the transaction was legitimate.
On Tuesday, both houses of the National Assembly, rising to the growing expression of public concern, were sufficiently moved to seek to address the issue.  But in a surprise ruling that angered many members and stoked public outrage, the Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives,  Mr Emeka Ihedioha, who was presiding, squelched further discussion of the matter, labelling it ‘a security issue’.
Adding to the scepticism of the government’s explanation, the South African authorities released a statement pointing to inconsistencies and inaccuracies in the Nigerian position and announcing the seizure of the cash which they insisted was transported in violation of all existing international currency regulations.
 It is clear from all this that a breach of international rule occurred in the transfer of that amount of cash into South Africa, which, like any law-and-order society, has so far taken the right decision in impounding the cash and asking for coherent explanation. The matter is raising several questions as to how such amount in cash was moved out of Nigeria without our Customs Service knowing.  Why would an aircraft, registered as private, be deployed to not only a commercial undertaking but a highly sensitive mission as the procurement of arms in a foreign country? Why would any security agency worthy of the label abandon decorum and discretion to hire an aircraft, belonging to a controversial and hugely divisive figure, to procure arms in a delicate time such as this country is at the moment?   How did the plane and its cargo of dollars manage to depart from Nigeria undetected in the first place?   There are simply too many gaps in the official line on the issue that it is a forlorn hope to expect that this administration would take practical steps to provide a reasonable explanation. But that’s precisely what is required, at the very minimum.  Was the mission a failed one at money laundering? Perhaps it was not the first time, but only this time the mission got busted.  Or perhaps it could indeed have been on a mission to procure arms, but not for the government’s security agencies.
In the context of the ongoing debate over allegations by an Australian, who the government had engaged in the past to negotiate with the Boko Haram insurgents, that certain persons known to be close to government were the sponsors of the activities of the sect, the episode that the South Africans have uncovered needs to be thoroughly investigated. If any infractions are found, all the persons involved must be punished, no matter who they may be and who in government they may be close to. The government should revisit the issue of the proliferation of private jets in Nigeria in order to ensure that they are not used to breach our laws and open us to international ridicule as in this particular case.  Nigeria may have forfeited the money, about 1.5 billion naira, to South Africa, but the bigger problem is the loss of face in the eyes of the international community as a nation of thieves and racketeers. This is unacceptable, and why any attempt to sweep it under the carpet should be resisted.