Eniola Akinkuotu, Oladimeji Ramon and Ade Adesomoju
The Chairman, Presidential Advisory
Committee Against Corruption, Prof. Itse Sagay, has faulted a former
Minister of National Planning, Dr. Abubakar Suleiman, regarding the
culpability of former President Goodluck Jonathan in the current
anti-corruption cases.
Suleiman, who is the spokesperson for the Peoples Democratic Party Ministers’ Forum, had said in a Sunday PUNCH
interview that Jonathan could not be held liable because no stolen
funds had been traced to the ex-president’s personal bank accounts.
The ex-minister had said, “All these
issues of corruption under Jonathan happened between March and April
last year. It was purely an election issue. Nobody has traced any money
to Jonathan’s account up till now, but money was traced to Abacha’s
accounts.”
However, Sagay told one of our
correspondents during an interview on Sunday that although he could not
say if there was a case against Jonathan or not yet, the ex-President
could be held liable if it could be established that Jonathan made
illegal approvals for funds to be paid into other people’s accounts.
He said if, for instance, it could be
established that Jonathan gave the Central Bank of Nigeria a directive
to pay someone money and the person was not deserving of that money,
then the ex-President could be indicted.
Sagay, who is a Senior Advocate of
Nigeria, added, “Only the EFCC can say if Jonathan is culpable. Guilt in
criminal law requires proof and there must be evidence. So, what I
would say is that if a case can be established against Jonathan as
regards public funds, then he has a case to answer.
“I don’t know if that has been done. I
have not seen anybody who says he was given the money by Jonathan
himself although one can say that instructions to any institution that
public funds should be released to other people for purposes, which
those funds were not designated, is in itself a criminal affair.
“So, it is not only when money is found
on you that you have a case to answer. If you are a person in authority,
and you issue directives to people under you, who are keeping public
funds like the Governor of the Central Bank, and an illegal order is
given to him for the release of funds, that, in itself, will raise a
case for Jonathan to answer if in fact he issued such an order.”
Another SAN, Mr. Yusuf Ali, said it was
too early to exonerate anyone as investigations into corruption that
took place under the previous administration were still ongoing.
Ali stated, “The whole process is
ongoing. Investigations are still ongoing. Until somebody is convicted,
nothing bad can be said about such person. I believe when we get to the
bridge, we shall cross it.
“There is no point for anybody to be
excited or be happy for now until the whole story is in the open.
Investigations are ongoing.”
On his part, a Lagos-based lawyer, Mr. Jiti Ogunye, described Suleiman’s statement as provocative and highly irresponsible.
Ogunye said the fact that a number of
persons, who served under the Jonathan administration, were facing
criminal trial was enough grounds to charge the former President with
conspiracy.
According to Ogunye, Jonathan, as the
head of the executive arm, had liability for everything done by his
subordinates because the buck stopped at his table.
Ogunye said, “That statement by him is
provocative and highly irresponsible. And the reason I say that is that
former President Goodluck Jonathan was the head of the executive arm of
government at the time he presided over the affairs of the country.
“All the officials that are being held
to account and during whose trials, as we speak, Nigerians are now
learning about the mind-boggling stealing or looting of public
treasury, were answerable to him; they were running his errands and
therefore Nigerians expect that being the person on whose table the buck
stopped as of the time he was the President, that he would be able to
superintend them and ensure that those his subordinates didn’t loot the
nation’s treasury.
“It’s too early in the day for any
Suleiman or anybody to give the former President or any other member of
that administration a clean bill of health. When you are talking about
no money has been traced to former President Goodluck Jonathan, what
does it mean?
“On his instruction and while he was
running for office, people turned our national security vote into a
bazaar and they were giving this money out to his allies and acolytes.
So, whose errand were those people running when they were distributing
the money? Who wanted to become the President then? And based on those
revelations alone, he is culpable, contrary to the claims of Suleiman
that nothing has been traced to him.
“Can’t the former President be charged
with conspiracy? He can, on the basis of those revelations because for
what purpose was the money given to those people? On the strength of
that alone, a charge of conspiracy can be sustained against the former
President.
“For anybody to be annoying Nigerians
with such a statement that nothing has been traced to the former
President, one wonders what he was thinking. This is not theatrics, we
are talking about things that have wrecked this country and then people
are engaging in ludicrous polemics.”
No comments:
Post a Comment