Beyond the Grandstanding: an Open Letter to Professor Dora Akunyili - By Osita Mba

Dear Professor Akunyili




Like most Nigerians, I have followed the very public spat between your good self and your ministerial colleague, the former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister for Justice and incumbent Minister for Special Duties, Mr Michael Aondoakaa, with considerable interest. As someone that called for the removal of Mr Aondoakaa as Attorney-General as far back as November 2008 because of my belief that he lacked “the requisite integrity, ability, experience and maturity required of the person holding that high and important office,” I consider whatever embarrassment you cause him in relation to his alleged libellous statement as part of his thoroughly deserved comeuppance.



However, although there is no reason to suggest that you will not pursue a libel case against him to its logical conclusion should he fail to provide the clear apology you have requested, it remains the case that our politicians are notorious for threatening and indeed instituting defamation suits with fanfare in the full glare of the public only to abandon them quietly and in private subsequently. A case in point is the five billion naira libel suit instituted in 2004 by Chief Anthony Anenih against Chief Orji Uzor Kalu. Incidentally, that suit was filed on Chief Anenih’s behalf by Mr Aondoakaa’s successor as Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, Mr Adetokunbo Kayode.



Moreover, the decision to make the letters written to Mr Aondoakaa by your lawyers widely available to the public and the contents of the letters themselves appear to evince an intention to prove your incorruptibility in the court of public opinion, over and above the resolution of your private dispute with Mr Aondoakaa in the court of law. For example, the letter of February 11, 2010 refers to your “integrity” that “has been unimpeachable”; reveals that you have “been inundated with telephone calls and personal enquiries from numerous people ... concerning the implication that [you] did something wrong while [you were] the Director General of NAFDAC”; and concludes that you find it “totally unacceptable that [your] peers and generality of Nigerians have begun to question [your] integrity and now consider [you] a disreputable person”, all on account of the statement credited to Mr Aondoakaa.



Given the relegation of integrity and accountability to the background in our public life, your principled stance on the matter deserves the support of all right-thinking members of the Nigerian society. However, going by various comments in the media, there appears to be a consensus among the chattering classes that neither an apology from the discredited Mr Aondoakaa nor a successful libel suit against him in our increasingly unreliable courts will be sufficient to establish your unimpeachable integrity to the satisfaction of the Nigerian public. I note that this view is to a large extent supported by the law – it is a basic principle of the law of defamation that an alleged defamatory statement is presumed to be false unless the defendant can prove its veracity. Since there is no concomitant obligation on the claimant to prove the falsity of the alleged defamatory statement, a successful libel suit, while reflecting favourably on the character of the person defamed, does not necessarily prove his or her unimpeachable integrity either in the matter at hand or generally.



Fortunately, there are other more credible means available to principled public officers in your enviable position to establish their unimpeachable integrity in the court of public opinion.



1. Publication of Assets Declaration Forms



Paragraph 11(1) of Part I of the Fifth Schedule to the 1999 Constitution provides that every public officer shall (a) immediately after taking office and (b) thereafter at the end of every four years and (c) at the end of his/her her term of office, submit to the Code of Conduct Bureau a written declaration of all his/her properties, assets, and liabilities and those of his/her unmarried children under the age of eighteen years. Furthermore, section 149 of the Constitution requires a Minister of the Government of the Federation to declare his/her assets and liabilities as prescribed in the Constitution before commencing the duties of his/ her office.



Therefore, you would have submitted an Assets Declaration Form to the Code of Conduct Bureau on at least three occasions: (i) when you assumed office as the Director General of National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) on April 12, 2001; (ii) on the fourth anniversary of your assumption of office as the Director General of NAFDAC in April 2005; and (iii) on December 17, 2008, when you left NAFDAC to take up your current position as Minister of Information and Communications.



Paragraph 3 of Part I of the Third Schedule to the Constitution authorises the Code of Conduct Bureau to retain custody of these assets declarations and to make them available for inspection by any citizen of Nigeria on such terms and conditions as the National Assembly may prescribe. Although the National Assembly have failed to prescribe the terms and conditions for such compulsory public inspection, nothing stops any public officer that wishes to demonstrate his/her integrity from disclosing voluntarily the details of his/her Assets Declaration form. Indeed, President Umaru Yar‘Adua provided a copy of his Assets Declaration Form to the public after a few weeks in office, and after some dogged resistance the Acting (then Vice) President Jonathan followed suit shortly after.



I would respectfully suggest that, without prejudice to any libel suit against Mr Aondoakaa, the voluntary publication of your relevant Assets Declaration Forms will provide a more transparent and credible means of establishing your unimpeachable integrity during your tenure as the Director General of NAFDAC and beyond.



2. Section 44 of the ICPC Act 2000



Section 44(1)(a) and (b) of The Corrupt Practices and other Related Offences Act 2000 (“the ICPC Act”) empower the Chairman of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (“ICPC”), if in the course of an ongoing investigation he has reasonable grounds to believe that any offence under the Act has been committed, to require any person suspected of having committed such offence or any relative or associate of the person or any other person whom the Chairman has reasonable grounds to believe is able to assist in the investigation to furnish a statement in writing on oath or affirmation in order to:



(i) identify every property, whether movable or immovable, whether within or outside Nigeria, belonging to him/her or in his/her possession, or in which he/she has any interest, whether legal or equitable, and specifying the date on which each of the properties so identified was acquired and the manner in which it was acquired, whether by way of any dealing, bequest, devise, inheritance, or any other manner;



(ii) identify every property sent out of Nigeria by him/her during such period as may be specified in the notice;



(iii) set out the estimated value and location of each of the properties identified ... and if any of such properties cannot be located, the reason therefore;



(iv) state in respect of each of the properties identified ... whether the property is held by him/her or by any other person on his/her behalf or whether it has diminished in value since its acquisition by him/her or and whether it has been commingled with other property which cannot be separated or divided without difficulty;



(v) set out all other information relating to his/her properties, business, travel or other activities as may be specified in the notice; and



(vi) set out all his/her sources of income, including earnings and gifts or other assets for such period.



Section 44(1)(c) authorises the Chairman to require any officer of any bank or financial institution, or any person who is in any manner or to any extent responsible for the management and control of the affairs of any bank or any financial institution to furnish copies of any or all accounts, documents and records relating to any person to whom the above notice has been issued.



Furthermore, section 44(2) provides that where the Chairman has reasonable grounds to believe that any public officer who has been served with the written notice owns, possesses, controls or holds any interest in any property which is excessive, having regard to his/her present or past emoluments and all other relevant circumstances, the Chairman may by written direction require him/her to furnish a statement on oath or affirmation explaining how he/she was able to own, possess, control or hold such excess and if he/she fails to explain satisfactorily such excess, he/she shall be presumed to have used his/her office to corruptly enrich or gratify himself/herself and charged accordingly.



You will agree that a comprehensive statement on oath or affirmation provided by you to the Chairman of the ICPC under section 44 of the ICPC Act and satisfactorily verified as complete and accurate by him will provide the ultimate confirmation of unimpeachable integrity that your teeming fans will be proud to associate you with. Therefore, I have no doubt that if you prove yourself unable to disclose voluntarily your relevant Assets Declaration Forms as suggested above, appropriate steps will be taken to invoke the procedure under section 44 of the ICPC Act with a view to securing your place in history as the paragon of integrity in public life.



Yours sincerely



Osita Mba

How Aondoakaa Sold Murtala Muhammed Airport to Bi-Courtney

Fresh court documents obtained by Saharareporters has found out how Nigeria's most corrupt Attorney General, Michael Aondoakaa participated in the controversial handover of the General Aviation Terminal (GAT) of the Murtala Mohammed Airport in Lagos.



Mr. Aondoakaa, our impeccable source revealed, took huge bribe money from Mr. Wale Babalakin, the chairman of Bi -Courtney, the company now reputed for building sub-standard structures. Aondoakaa had worked with Bi-Courtney Aviation Services Limited to grant the company a 36-year concession to run the domestic wing of the Murtala Mohammed Airport after Bi-Courtney presented a carefully manipulated lease agreement that extended its tenure from 12 to 36 years.

During the Obasanjo's administration, Babalakin got Femi Fani Kayode to recommend that his lease on the airport be extended from 12 years to 36 years, but that proposal was rejected, but our sources revealed that Femi Fani Kayode did not reverse the lease agreements, leaving Bi-Courtney to use Aondoakaa to legitimize it.



Aondoakaa, after receiving N400 million from Babalakin, got Bi-Courtney to sue his office for breach of contract after claiming that it had the right to manage both the MMA2 and the GAT for 36 years starting from April 2004.



Curiously, Bi-Courtney did not include the Federal Aviation Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) and other agencies involved in airport management as well as affected airlines involved in the lawsuit even though its initial lease agreement was signed between FAAN and Bi-Courtney/ Stabilini Visioni. That strategy was deliberate. FAAN would have contested the lawsuit, but Aondoakaa's refused to diligently defend his office when put on notice about the suit. Aondoakaa sent his aide, a controversial lawyer, Anthony A Malik to pursue the case. But it was so poorly done that Justice Anwukere Chikere reflected his poor performance in the case note on page 22 in her ruling. Noting that the AGF, the sole defendant in the matter, did not contest Bi-Courtney's pleadings and averments.Lack of diligent prosecution was deliberate





Bi-Courtney then obtained a court judgement allowing it to forcefully take over GAT in a secret ceremony that had the airport workers protesting. The worker’s protests temporarily yielded some positive results, as the office of the National Security Adviser intervened and suspended the Bi-Courtney agreement but as soon Yar'adua returned from his sick bed in Saudi Arabia he reversed the decision of the NSA and ordered that Bi-Courtney take over the local wing of the Murtala mohammed airport in Lagos State.



The judgement also imply that the Lagos state government could operate airports in the state except Bi-Courtney allows it.

Culled from Saharareporters

How Aondoakaa sold MMA to Wale Babalakin's Bi-Courtney

In another of the mind-boggling manipulation and corruption stories involving the Attorney General, Saharareporters has found his hand in the controversial handover of the General Aviation Terminal (GAT) of the Murtala Mohammed Airport in Lagos.

Mr. Aondoakaa, our impeccable source revealed, took huge bribe money from Mr. Wale Babalakin, the chairman of Bi -Courtney, the company now reputed for building sub-standard structures. Aondoakaa had worked with Bi-Courtney Aviation Services Limited to grant the company a 36-year concession to run the domestic wing of the Murtala Mohammed Airport".



During the Obasanjo's administration, Babalakin got Femi Fani Kayode to recommend that his lease on the airport be extended from 12 years to 36 years, but that proposal was rejected.



In came Aondoakaa, who, after receiving N400 million from Babalakin, got Bi-Courtney to sue his office for breach of contract after claiming that it had the right to manage both the MMA2 and the GAT for 36 years starting from April 2004. Curiously, Bi-Courtney did not include the Federal Aviation Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) in the lawsuit. That strategy was deliberate. FAAN would have contested the lawsuit, but Aondoakaa's refused to diligently defend his office when put on notice about the suit.



Bi-Courtney then obtained a court judgement allowing it to forcefully take over GAT in a secret ceremony that had the airport workers protesting. The worker’s protests have so far yielded some positive results, as the office of the National Security Adviser has intervened and suspended the Bi-Courtney agreement until Yar'adua returns from his sick bed in Saudi Arabia.



Only last week, the Coalition Against Corrupt Leaders (CACOL), an umbrella body made up of 35 organizations fighting corruption in the country, joined the growing nationwide clamour for Aondoakaa to be relieved of his position. In a letter to Yar’Adua, it said CACOL had found the Attorney General “to be roguish, corruptible, insensitive and incompetent either as a Minister in any Ministry or (as) the Attorney-General.”



The letter was copied to the President of the Senate; the Speaker of the House of Representatives; the Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of the Federation (the position Aondoakaa officially occupies); the Chairman of the National Judicial Commission; and the President of the Nigerian Bar Association.


Culled from Saharareporters

UK Govt!....Please Extradite James Ibori & David Edevbhie!

Nigerians at home and in diaspora,


Take a stand NOW against corruption in Nigeria...send an email expressing your distaste for Aondoakaa's meeting with the British authorities now or in the future to protect Ibori, Edevbhie and Gohill (about to be prosecuted by the British govt) and asking for the extradition of James Ibori and David Edevbhie to stand trial for their crimes against Nigerians! The time is now....zero tolerance for corruption and AONDOAKAA MUST GO!..when?...NOW!!!



You can email the British Attorney General at correspondenceunit@attorneygeneral.gsi.gov.uk  or

complaints@attorneygeneral.gsi.gov.uk



Fax: 020 7271 2434



or call:



Ph: 020 7271 2492



UK Govt!....Please Extradite James Ibori & David Edevbhie!



Please note that the more complaints they receive the more encouraged they will be to protect our interests by bringing these criminals to justice!.....send your protest now!

"Attorney-General of the Federation, Michael Aondoakaa and the Three Thieves"

The recent events of the last few days left me wondering about the actual role of Michael Aondoakaa, the nation’s Attorney-General. For me, it is either someone failed to provide him with his job description when he was appointed as the A-G or he just loves been an usurper. It is no more news that the Federal Government has rejected a request by Britain for release of evidence needed for further investigation and prosecution of three Nigerian ex-governors in a London court for money-laundering. These formers Governors were alleged to have laundered proceeds from the sale of V-mobile shares - bought with government funds -  through private accounts in the United Kingdom. What is news however is the audacious move by the A-G to announce that none of the former Governors is currently investigation. According to the A-G, the Governors were investigated by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) but were exonerated of committing any crime in January 2009. But in a swift response, the EFCC, through its Media Adviser refuted the claims that the former Governors have been cleared of financial wrongdoings. According to the EFCC “The letter being referred to in these reports have no specific impact or reference to the cases of the three former governors as it was only an advice to a bank on the operation of a company’s account and as such cannot speak for substantive cases being investigated.

The situation now seems to have hit a stalemate. We have the A-G on one hand saying that former Governors have no case to answer. But on the other hand, we have the bullish EFCC denying that’s the case. So who do we believe?

Many will agree that Nigeria has now turned into a theatre of comedy, and the current movie on the red-carpet is “anti-corruption”. Two weeks ago, it was “Sanusi and the Banking five”. Now it is “Michael Aondoakaa, and the three thieves”. These comedians have become a very useful tool in providing the much desired distraction that Abuja politicians need. While tickets to these blockbuster comedies are sold in front pages of the newspaper, President Umaru Yar’Adua continues to have field day in Aso Rock doing nothing.

The biggest clown on the centre stage for now is no one else but the nation’s Attorney-General Michael Aondoakaa. The A-G reminds of our good old friend, the Late Alhaji Wada Nas, the Minister for Special Duties (whatever that means!) during the Abacha regime. Alhaji Wada Nas, was the “Chief Propagandist” for the Military Junta. He became a regular feature of Nigerian media headlines; the political pot of Nigeria at that time was so hot and smoking with such issues as the June 12 elections, Human rights abuses, Abacha’s self succession bid among other issues. He was always ready to take on debate to defend the government’s policies and approach to challenging situations facing Abacha’s regime, even these policies clearly devoid of common sense. But anyway, it wasn’t too long before Wada Nas became Wada “Nonsense”.

The A-G so far has been displaying the same character as that of the Late Alhaji Was Nas, He has been spewing out as much nonsense as Nas did, if not more. However the difference is that, while A-G has been using the ‘ruse of law” to rationalise his actions, Wada Nas wasn’t that clever. But really, for any military regime to acknowledge the “rule of law” is like shooting itself in the foot. Michael Aondoakaa is perhaps, the most pathetic and inept Attorney-General my generation as witnessed. I can’t help but question every time why and how he was awarded a Senior Advocate of Nigeria status. Aonodakaa is a disgrace to the National Judicial Council. If this is the type of people been awarded SAN, then I’m sorry to say that a great disservice has been done to the likes of Late Rotimi Williams, Graham- Douglas and Gani Fawehinmi. If Aondoakaa is what a SAN is all about, then I think every law graduate should be awarded one.

We need to ask the A-G when he became an investigator, prosecutor and adjudicator. We also need to know if, he is the “Attorney-General of the Federation” or Attorney-General of corrupt former Governors. Why can’t he just allow the law to take its cause? If he feels he has nothing to hide on behalf of the accused Governors, then let him provide the evidence requested by the British authorities. The fact is, the British authorities have no pronounced these Governors guilty. They have only been charged to court. So why not let them defend themselves, instead of acting as their solicitor and advocate.

And what does he mean by saying “that the proper place to prosecute the alleged offence is Nigeria because the ingredients of all the offence investigated were committed in Nigeria and that all the accused persons reside in Nigeria”. Yes the crime was committed in Nigeria, but if money from the sales of V-Mobile shares were actually transferred to a UK account, then a crime has been committed in the UK. Does the A-G know about the United Kingdom Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 at all? It doesn’t matter if the Nigeria authorities are not interested in pursuing the case. The UK law is no respecter of any individual or group of people The A-G should allow these individuals defend the allegations levelled against them.

It is also disgraceful and absurd that the A-G can descend so low to accuse the former EFCC boss Mallam Nuhu Ribadu of been the mastermind behind the British prosecution. What does he think the Metropolitan Police is? An appendage of Downing Street, or a section within the Justice Department, that can just be manipulated willy-nilly like he does with the EFCC and Nigeria Police Force. I’m happy that Mallam Ribadu has come out openly to deny these claims. Let’s even assume Ribadu is conspiring with British authorities. But how does that represent a treasonable offence? How can a man who has taken it upon himself to carry on with the anti-corruption crusade regardless of his official status be charged with treason? When did anti-corruption crusade become a treasonable offence? If Ribadu is charged with treason, the A-G deserves to face a firing squad for his recent actions. Also, what does the A-G consider as the nation’s interest? Is he saying that writing letter of support for corrupt former governors to shield them from prosecution is in national interest? Or is the use of the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty to thwart corruption cases is in national interest.

If the A-G is really interested in fighting the nation’s interest then there are few tasks he could spend his time on. He could use his office to expedite the proposed electoral reform. Also, there are hundreds of Nigerians on death row in Libya who will love to be defended by the “Chief Law Officer”.

Letter to EFCC Chairman, Mrs Farida Waziri

Dear Mrs Waziri,

Firstly, I will like to wish you happy first year anniversary, as the Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

Madam, as you are aware, ‘corruption’ has been the bane of human and infrastructure development in Nigeria. I need not to educate you on how much of the nation’s wealth has been stolen and stashed overseas by many of our leaders since independence.

You will also agree with me that you were appointed as anti-corruption Czar at a very important time in the nation’s history. It was at a time, the nation lost one of its finest and passionate law enforcement officers in strange, but not unusual circumstances. This is in the person of Nuhu Ribadu. Whilst he had his flaws, your predecessor Nuhu Ribadu demonstrated that it was possible to fight the ‘beast’ called corruption. Up until 24 months ago, “the fear of Nuhu Ribadu was the beginning of wisdom”.

Although your apologists may say that you’ve only been in office for 12 months, but I think it is important that we start asking the right questions. As they say, “the signs of a good weekend should be obvious on Friday”. Firstly, should you have accepted the EFCC job? And secondly, what has been your achievement so far?

For me, your 12 months in office has been marred with nothing but sleaze. Your appointment in itself was controversial. The fact that you were appointed under controversial circumstances was enough to demonstrate that you were brought in to do your masters’ bidding. And so far, you have done perfectly well in protecting the interest of your lords and masters.

In a country with endemic corruption such as Nigeria, the position of EFCC Chairman is for people with unblemished moral integrity and financial accountability. However, it is on record that prior your appointment; you were retained as a consultant by many of the former Governors to help fight their corruption charges. This represents serious conflict of interest, and for this reason you should have been the last person to be appointed as the EFCC Chairman.

Madam - in the last 12 months - in concert with the Attorney-General you have successfully subverted the anti-corruption campaign. Under your leadership, the EFCC has now become an appendage of the Justice Ministry. You have colluded with Attorney-General to undo what Nuhu Ribadu achieved in five years, in less than 12 months! Only God knows what will happen by time you complete your tenure in four years time.

I also noted your recent comments, that 2010 will be hard for corrupt politicians. Madam, if I may ask, is there anything you will do differently in 2010? Because your track record at the EFCC is telling. Since your assumption of office, you have been unable to successful prosecute any of the former governors. All you do is to look for excuses and lay blames on the judiciary. If Nuhu Ribadu was able o secure court judgment against the likes of Tafa Balogun and Diepreye Alamieyeseigha, then what is your problem? Instead of getting on with your job, you keep asking for special courts to try corrupt individuals. For your information, Nuhu Ribadu did not ask for a ‘special court’ to prosecute corrupt individuals. For me, I can’t seem to understand the need for these special courts.

Madam, let the truth be told, you have failed in your role as the EFCC Chairman. You have failed to build on the foundation laid by your predecessor. Your ineptitude has only encouraged our leaders to continue to steal with impunity. Instead of concentrating on the task at hand, you look for every opportunity to launch scathing remarks against your predecessor. It is the likes of you and the Attorney-General that will continue to make Nuhu Ribadu a hero.

Madam, for how long will you and Attorney-General continue to destroy our nation? We have now become a ‘rogue’ state, thanks to your subversion of anti-corruption principles. We are now been perceived as a nation of time wasters when it comes to corruption, thanks to your ‘rule of law’ syndrome. Foreign countries will not even share intelligence with your agency due to lack of trust. You collude with Attorney-General to embark on wild goose-chase that is devoid of any sense of purpose. You even had the moral authority to criticise an organisation such as Human Rights Watch. Now that you have spent one year in office, can you point out any non-governmental organisation local or international that has commended you for job well done. The answer is NONE!

And by the way, whilst reading the transcripts of your one year anniversary media briefing, I noted that the name of the Ex-Governor of Delta State, Chief James Ibori was ‘conspicuously’ missing from the list of former Governors under investigation. Can we assume that it was an oversight? Or can we simply take it as an indirect confirmation that James Ibori is no longer under EFCC investigation?

Madam, please consider these issues very seriously. I want to believe that there is still ample time for you to redeem your image.

Kind regards


Concerned Nigerian

The Okiro Panel

The ongoing twist in the Halliburton bribery scandal seems to be never ending. Sometimes I ask myself, for how long will this government continue to take Nigerians for a ride? And as someone rightly said, the Halliburton bribery scandal is now ‘hallucinating’. This week’s inauguration of the Okiro Panel, set up by President Umaru Yar’Adua to investigate the bribery scandal, reiterates the obvious, that this government is a time waster when it comes to fighting corruption.

Haven’t we seen it all before? Once upon a time, there was the Pius Okigbo Panel which looked into the ‘1991 Oil Windfall’ during the Babangida regime. Then, there was the Oputa Panel, which look at human right abuses post-1966. Lately, we have also had the Uwais Panel on ‘electoral reform’. However, government’s track record on the release and implementation of Panel Reports has not been very convincing. The politics been played with the Uwais Panel report speaks volume about the insincerity of the Yar’Adua administration. And for me, the inauguration of the Okiro Panel might just spell doom for the current investigation of the Halliburton bribery scandal.

The investigation panel is headed by the Inspector- General of Police, Mr. Mike Okiro, and includes Chairman of the EFCC and a representative each from the Office of the National Security Adviser, Nigerian Intelligence Agency and the Department of State Security Service. One of the justifications for inaugurating the investigation committee was the need to get ‘vital’ evidence required to prosecute those found to have compromised themselves.

The questions we need to ask ourselves is, ‘do we need to set up a panel consisting of the Inspector-General of Police and EFCC Chairman before vital evidence can be obtained from the law courts’? We all know that this investigation started in the US, but was the US Director of FBI or CIA engaged to investigate Halliburton? I can remember reading anywhere that the US set up any ‘high level’ committee to investigate the allegations levelled against Halliburton. I want to believe that the US investigation would have been carried out by officers. This is considering that the former US Vice-President Dick Cheney was the CEO of Halliburton when these crimes were committed.

This is not the first time foreign companies have been found guilty of bribery in Nigeria. We are all aware of the AG Siemens and Wilbros cases. So, why was a panel not set up to investigate these cases? Or is the Halliburton case any different from the Siemens and Wilbros cases? My concern is that this panel will spend the next eight weeks wasting taxpayers’ money, while embarking on a wild goose chase. I wouldn’t be surprised, if their first assignment will be to fly across the Atlantic, claiming estacodes, all in the name of gathering evidence. For starters, it will do Nigerians a lot of good, if the government can disclose the how much budget is made available to this panel. We have already seen the Attorney-General junketing all over the since in the last few weeks ‘gathering’ evidence.

I’m right to believe that the investigation and prosecution of Halliburton in the US did not just start two months ago. For those who may not be aware, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission opened a formal investigation of Halliburton's involvement in the bribery scandal in June 2004. I also found out that, the Nigerian government ordered its own investigation in February 2004. This suggests that the Nigerian government commenced its investigation before that of the US Justice Department. So what was the outcome of the 2004 investigation? The fact that an investigation was carried out in Nigeria in 2004, and that no one was charged is also a confirmation that the previous Nigerian administration is an accomplice and can be accused of ‘cover up’.

My view about President Yar’Adua on corruption is, as genuine as he may look, this man will be shooting himself in the foot if he dares attempt to fight corruption. Either directly or indirectly, he his one of the biggest beneficiaries of corruption in the country. It is common knowledge that his election was bankrolled by some of the nation’s most corrupt individuals. As silly as it may sound, some of the PDP Presidential aspirants (who were heavily enmeshed in corruption) had to drop their ambitions and support President Yar’Adua after they were been threatened with prosecution.

Also, we are now been told that the Attorney-General cannot prosecute any individual without the approval of the President (!). I don’t know when the AG’s discretion to exercise prosecutorial powers became subject to the approval of the President. If that is case, why not appoint the President as, the Commander-In-Chief and Attorney-General of the Federation. If I can remember, we were once told that the EFCC, ICPC and the Police prosecutorial discretion are subject to the Attorney-General’s approval, in compliance with ‘rule of law’. And now that the AG has to seek the President’s approval, someone probably needs to explain to me where the separation of powers and ‘checks and balances’ lies in the government.

Considering this government’s track record, I think I can predict the outcome of this panel investigation. The panel will submit its report in eight weeks as planned. President Yar’Adua will inaugurate another panel, which is likely to be headed by the Attorney-General to review the findings of the report. Mr Attorney-General will then recommend that the evidence tendered in the US courts to charge Halliburton officials were not obtained through due process (what ever that means!) and therefore, it cannot be tendered in Nigerian courts. To affirm his support for ‘rule of law’, Mr President will accept the recommendation., and that will be case closed!

Michael Aondoakaa and the Halliburton Bribery Scandal

The more I look into the unfolding events of the Halliburton bribery case, the less I tend to see. I can almost bet on my mortgage that no single Nigerian individual will be prosecuted. The recent comments by the nation’s Attorney-General Chief Michael Aondoakaa cast further doubts on the intent of the nation law enforcement agents to prosecute the culprits. Let’s remind ourselves, this is not first high-profile bribery case involving multi-national companies. We are yet to see any successful prosecution in the Wilbros and AG Siemens bribery cases. A former petroleum Minister was fined five million Euros in France for money laundering few weeks ago in the Wilbros case. However, as I write, no action has been taken by the either the AG or the EFCC to at least question this individual. Considering the track record of the President Yar’Adua ‘anti-corruption’ crusade and supposed adherence to ‘rule of law’, why would anyone think the Halliburton case will be any different.

As we can remember, the US Justice Department indicted two citizens of the United Kingdom for their role in bribing Nigerian government officials to win a lucrative natural gas construction contract for Halliburton Corp. Last September, the Former CEO of Kellogg, Brown & Root (KBR) Jack Stanley pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit wire and mail fraud and conspiring to violate the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). The Justice Department noted that he paid more than $180 million in bribes to Nigerian government officials so KBR could win the Bonny Island liquefied natural gas plant contract.

Following these revelations, the Attorney-General (AG) and the Minister of Information have been very quick to make series of remarks and comments. The AG first noted that the government will sue all foreign companies involved in bribery cases in Nigeria for libel, because they have brought the name of the country into disrepute. Following that, the Minister of Information, Mrs Dora Akunyili noted that names of Nigerian officials indicted in the bribery case will be made public once received from the US Justice Dept. We were also led to believe that the AG has written to the US Justice dept three times regarding the indicted officials, but yet to receive any reply.

I will note that all sorts of names have been banded around in the media. I’m not interested to join in the speculations about who is or who is not involved. However, I want to advise the AG that he does less talking for now, as some of the comments he has been making recently can be considered to be ‘prejudicial’. The bribery case is still under investigation in Nigeria and therefore it is improper for him to be making such remarks and the nation’s Chief Law Officer.

The remarks being made by the AG, are the reasons why I want to believe that nothing will be achieved in this investigation, and the AG might only be paying a lip service to the ‘fight against corruption’. According to the AG, $150 million of the alleged bribe has been discovered in a Swiss account. While he refused to name the account holder, he was quoted as saying “…..government does not prosecute out of the newspapers' cuttings. If somebody said I voted $40 million for you, which is his own wish, and if the money does not reach you, can I come and prosecute you because in his book he wrote $40 million”. I find this statement damaging and insidious, and could potentially derail the current investigation.

I accept that the government cannot initiate prosecution based on newspaper reports and that ‘hard evidence’ is required. And in actual fact, the ‘burden of proof’ is on the government to demonstrate beyond every reasonable doubt that any named suspect was actually involved in the alleged bribery. You may call me a conspiracy theorist but I want to draw one important thing from that statement, which proves to me that the so-called AG/EFCC investigation is joke.

Initially, we were told that at least more than six top Nigerian officials were involved in the bribery scandal. But now, the AG noted the $150million has been discovered in one account. According the AG’s tone of language, he wants us to believe that the money might have been pocketed by someone. Also, that all named suspects might not even have collected any bribe in the first place, and the fact that they were named in the US trial is not good enough.

But my question is why the AG is so quick to jump to such conclusion? On whose behalf is he actually acting? The fact that there is no evidence to show that Mr X was paid A$million does not mean he is not guilty of the charge. The first thing that should be established in this investigation is ‘intent’. If Mr X has agreed to receive A$million, and for some reason he couldn’t be paid then he is culpable.

My concern is that the ongoing investigation will be based on whether money was actually received by the suspected individuals. As we can see with $150 million found in one person account, there is already a presumption of innocence. I agree that everyone is innocent until proven guilty. However it is for this reason why I think the AG should at least keep his mouth shut! This case is not just about money being paid or received. For the KBR officials to have named the Nigerian officials, there must have some form of agreement to collect and transmit bribes. By the way, the KBR officials are not Nigerians, and what do they stand to gain from name dropping? It is my understanding that KBR established a highly sophisticated network, which facilitated the bribe payments over a number of years. Therefore the evidence and statement provided at the US court is very crucial to the Nigerian investigation.

I’m not convinced that there is no ulterior motive to bury this case. My suspicion is, the investigation will only focus on the account holder. And since EFCC or the AG will not be interested in establishing whether there’s been collusion or intent to receive bribes, the major actors in the bribery scandal will be absolved from any wrongdoing.

Whatever be the case, the whole world is watching.