Recovered loot: SERAP starts contempt suit against FG, others
(Nigeria) Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, SERAP,
has initiated contempt proceedings against the Federal Government, Mr. Abubakar
Malami, SAN, Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, and
Alhaji Ahmed Idris, Accountant-General of the Federation “for failing to comply
with the judgment ordering publication of the spending of recovered stolen
funds since return of democracy in 1999.”
The form 48, contempt suit was filed before the Federal High
Court, Lagos by SERAP’s Executive Director, Mr Adetokunbo Mumui “following the
service on Mr Malami and Alhaji Idris of the certified true copy of the
judgment of March 24, 2016 by Justice Muhammed Idris.”
The Form 48, notice of consequence of disobedience of court
orders reads in part: “Unless you obey the orders of the court contained on the
reverse side of this process you shall be deemed to have disobeyed the orders
of the court and shall be liable to committed to prison for contempt.”
Mumuni said, “Despite the service of the certified true copy
of the judgment on both the Attorney General of the Federation and the
Accountant-General of the Federation they have failed and/or neglected to
acknowledge the judgment let alone obey it. It’s unacceptable to take the
court, which is the guardian of justice in this country, for a ride. A
democratic state based on the rule of law cannot exist or function, if the
government ignores and/or fails to abide by Court orders.”
The 69-page judgment in suit no: FHC/IKJ/CS/248/2011 signed
by Honourable Justice Mohammed Idris reads in part: “Transparency in the
decision making process and access to information upon which decisions have
been made can enhance accountability.”
“Obedience to the rule of law by all citizens but more
particularly those who publicly took oath of office to protect and preserve the
Constitution is a desideratum to good governance and respect for the rule of
law. In a constitutional democracy like ours, this is meant to be the norm.”
“In respect of the SERAP reliefs on recovered stolen funds
since return of democracy in 1999, the government had kept mute. Let me say
that they have no such power under the law.
“There is public interest in public authorities and
high-profile individuals being accountable for the quality of their decision
making. Ensuring that decisions have been made on the basis of quality legal
advice is part of accountability.
“I am of the view and do hold that the action should and
does succeed in whole. Documents relating to the receipt or expenditure on
recovered stolen funds since return of democracy in 1999 constitute part of the
information which a public institution and authority is obligated to publish,
disseminate and make available to members of the public. The government has no
legally justifiable reason for refusing to provide SERAP with the information
requested, and therefore, this Court ought to compel the government to comply
with the Freedom of Information Act, as the government is not above the law.”
“Judgment is hereby entered judgment in favour of SERAP
against the Federal Government as follows:
*A declaration is hereby made that the failure and/or
refusal of the Respondents to individually and/or collectively disclose
detailed information about the spending of recovered stolen public funds since
the return of civil rule in 1999, and to publish widely such information,
including on a dedicated website, amounts to a breach of the fundamental
principles of transparency and accountability and violates Articles 9, 21 and
22 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and
Enforcement) Act.
*A declaration is hereby made that by virtue of the
provisions of Section 4 (a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2011, the 1st
Defendant/Respondent is under a binding legal obligation to provide the
Plaintiff/Applicant with up to date information on the spending of recovered
stolen funds, including:
(a) Detailed
information on the total amount of recovered stolen public assets that have so
far been recovered by Nigeria;
(b) The amount that
has been spent from the recovered stolen public assets and the objects of such
spending;
(c) Details of
projects on which recovered stolen public assets were spent.
* An order of mandamus is made directing and or compelling
the defendants/respondents to provide the plaintiff/applicant with up to date
information on recovered stolen funds since the return of civilian rule in
1999, including:
(a) Detailed
information on the total amount of recovered stolen public assets that have so
far been recovered by Nigeria;
(b) The amount that
has been spent from the recovered stolen public assets and the objects of such
spending;
(c) Details of
projects on which recovered stolen public assets were spent.
It will be recalled that SERAP had on March 28, 2016 sent a
copy of the certified true copy of the judgment to Mr Malami and Alhaji Idris
urging them to use their “good offices and leadership to ensure and facilitate
full, effective and timely enforcement and implementation of the judgment.”
SERAP letter reads in part “Given the relative newness of
the Buhari government, the effective enforcement and implementation of the
judgment will invariably involve setting up a mechanism by the government to
invite the leadership and high-ranking officials of the governments of former
President Olusegun Obasanjo, former President Umaru Yar'Adua, and former
President Goodluck Jonathan to explain, clarify and provide evidence on the
amounts of stolen funds recovered by their respective governments (from abroad
and within Nigeria), and the projects (including their locations) on which the
funds were spent.
“SERAP therefore, believes that the swift enforcement and
implementation of this landmark judgment by the government of President Buhari
will be litmus test for the President’s oft-repeated commitments to
transparency, accountability and the fight against corruption, and for the
effectiveness of the Freedom of Information Act in general.
“The enforcement and implementation of the judgment should
not be delayed as to do this is to continue to frustrate the victims of corruption
in the country since the return of democracy in 1999, and will threaten to
undermine the authority of our judicial system.
“SERAP trusts that you will see compliance with this
judgment as a central aspect of the rule of law; an essential stepping stone to
constructing a basic institutional framework for legality, constitutionality,
the rule of law practice and culture in the country. We therefore look forward
to your positive response and action on the judgment.”
Comments
Post a Comment