JamzNG Latest News, Gist, Entertainment in Nigeria
Nigeria’s international reputation is influenced not only by the population, economic potential, cultural influence and achievements of the Nigerian people around the world, but also by the strength of its institutions and by situations that arise when politically powerful individuals are accused of serious abuses. If the controversy continues to end without a clear resolution from the relevant institutions, then the fallout will not last long in Nigeria. A recent example of this can be seen in Osun.
When claims were made that the viral video was attributed to Senator Francis Fadahunsi, the National Human Rights Commission demanded that he be dismissed and arrested as it considered the statement to be a directive to attack members of the Accord Party. Tony Ojukwu, NHRC Executive Secretary, called the alleged statements a “permit to kill” and called for action by law enforcement agencies. It would be unacceptable for allegations about a sitting senator and possible political violence to simply disappear after a short period of public outcry. Similar concerns were raised in the National Assembly.
Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan leveled serious allegations of corruption, misuse of committee funds and the use of one’s influence in the legislature. He accused DPR members and civil servants of dividing operational funds intended for committee activities, and there were also allegations regarding how supervision and legislative affairs were carried out. Additionally, there are allegations that MPs paid between ₦1 million and ₦3 million to have bills, motions and petitions submitted to the National Assembly. These claims give civil society organizations more reason to continue demanding answers.
SERAP is just one of a number of organizations carrying out this work, along with BudgIT, CISLAC, Yiaga Africa, Enough is Enough Nigeria, Connected Development, human rights groups and investigative newsrooms. In June SERAP requested that Senate President Godswill Akpabio and House Speaker Tajudeen Abbas should refer allegations regarding constituent project funds worth over ₦6.3 billion to the EFCC and ICPC so that the allegations can be investigated and possibly prosecuted. These allegations, which stem from the Federation’s Auditor General’s 2022 annual report, involve payments to private accounts, procurement irregularities, unrecorded expenditure, and money related to projects said to have been abandoned or not implemented. The broader problem is that although civil society is able to continue to uncover problems, they are unable to realize the necessary consequences.
SERAP also requires the identification of contractors and beneficial owners suspected of receiving public funds without implementing the project, as well as the recovery of funds found to have been misused. They gave the leadership of the National Assembly seven days to take action and threatened legal action if no action was taken. This sequence is now a well-known one in Nigeria: audit revelations, civil society demands, another petition, another lawsuit, and then a long time before there is a definitive result. The same problem also arises when Nigerians try to get information from their own government.
The Freedom of Information Act in Nigeria aims to increase government openness by ensuring citizens can obtain records held by public institutions. In reality, journalists, civil society organizations, and the general Nigerian public still experience delays, rejections, and a lot of red tape when applying for information that is, in many cases, easily accessible. Rights enshrined in law are greatly diminished when citizens must continually fight against public institutions to implement them. This is especially clear in the case of Mary Habila.
The police investigated the cause of Habila’s death and finally carried out an autopsy. However, members of the public who wish to know the findings of the investigation are asked to submit freedom of information requests. The average citizen has to submit an FOI request to find out the results of an investigation into a much-discussed death making transparency laws appear to be another obstacle between the state and the public. This becomes even more apparent when Nigeria’s system of freedom of expression is compared with the rights enjoyed by Nigerians in power abroad.
President Bola Tinubu invoked the protections afforded by the American Freedom of Information Act as legal action continues over the release of US law enforcement records relating to him. Its legal representatives have appealed against the system’s privacy provisions under which institutions must justify their decisions and disputes over disclosure can be referred to an independent tribunal. In Nigeria, citizens generally face more difficulties in obtaining information from public institutions under the FOI laws in force in their country. These differences highlight the institutional trust that Nigeria still needs to build.
It seems uncomfortable that a president from Nigeria could benefit from the strength and reliability of transparency mechanisms in other countries while citizens in Nigeria struggle to make their own transparency laws work. Strong institutions not only protect the government but also give citizens real ways to challenge government decisions and request information. Laws are meaningful when relevant institutions comply with them, courts enforce them, and the public knows that persistence will pay off. Similar gaps were also seen on the law enforcement side in other recent cases in the United States.
Lukman Owolabi Ganiyu, a former USCIS officer, and Adeniyi Akeem Somoye were recently arrested following accusations by federal authorities of being involved in a scheme related to immigration applications and illegal payments. The investigation, conducted by USCIS, the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General, and the FBI, illustrates how institutions can investigate individuals accused of abusing the systems they are supposed to administer. The fact that both men were from Nigeria was a source of discomfort for many Nigerians, but the more important lesson was the way the institutions responded after the allegations were made. Incidents like this certainly influence the way institutions in Nigeria are viewed compared to institutions elsewhere.
Nigeria does not appear weak just because its public officials are investigated, questioned or exposed; It only looks tenuous when politically connected individuals are repeatedly able to escape serious charges while investigations continue, public records remain difficult to obtain, and watchdog groups are left to make request after request. Investors are watching whether the regulations are predictable, international partners are assessing whether enforcement is trustworthy, and Nigerians living abroad are starting to form opinions based on what is happening in the country. The reputational damage caused by impunity is not only caused by individual scandals being reported.
Nigeria already has the EFCC, ICPC, police, judiciary, Auditor General, and various legislative oversight bodies, as well as SERAP, BudgIT, CISLAC, Yiaga Africa, journalists, and a number of other civil society organizations. The problem is not that there are no institutions or communities willing to ask difficult questions. Their work loses effectiveness when the results of their investigations do not produce conclusive results and when their proximity to power makes it more difficult to hold society accountable. A nation shows strength when its institutions can reach those in power; On the contrary, continued impunity sends the opposite message.
By: Abidemi Adebamiwa
