Inquest, Probe Or Shadow-Chase? …Trial Of Suspected Treasury Looters

Buhari and Prof Sagay

Last week, after countless assurances by the Federal Government that it has details of where rogue politicians stashed away stolen public funds, President Mohammadu Buhari announced that formal trial of suspects would soon commence. But from the nature of speeches, and body language of the nation’s ruler, those involved do not seem to be mere suspects; they appear to me, convicts already.
After a meeting Buhari held with members of the National Peace Committee, headed by a former Military Head of State, General Abdulsalami Abubakar, where, the subject was discussed, members emerged with valid concerns.
Catholic Bishop of Sokoto, and spokesperson of the Peace Committee, Father Mathew Kukah expressed deep concerns over the way and manner the Federal Government was handling the issue of probe.
“This is not a military regime. This is a democracy, where, investigations and  valid trial by competent courts of jurisdiction are expected to discharge their constitutional responsibilities and not probes and incarcerations|”.
Kukah is troubled that a lot of trial is going on, on pages of newspapers, apparently tilting towards the body-language of the incumbent president, which he fears, would diminish the gains of a united, peaceful and hopeful nation, achieved following the patriotic concession by former President Goodluck Jonathan in course of the 2015 general elections.
“No amount of billions could buy the peace and stability which that singular act of patriotism Jonathan exhibited, earned us as a people”, Kukah told a panel of interviewers on channels television.
“If the Federal Government has specific cases, they should hand-over to constitutional authorities to investigate and charge suspects to court for trial, and not use the process as a substitute for governance,” he said, adding, “the people want actions, signs of good governance and indeed governance and not spend all the time on threats and vilifying key actors of the immediate past administration”.
Kukah said that government should start something by forming a credible cabinet of Ministers and not spend all the time heating –up the polity with probes and threats of probes, when what is required is proper investigation of the affected issues and then trials.
Father Kukah is not alone. Former Head of State, Abdulsalam Abubakah himself said, no sane Nigerian would be against an objective recovery of stolen public funds, but warned that the rule of law must be followed.
That indeed is the crux of the matter. Early  last week, President Buhari assembled a team of criminologists and academics headed by Prof. Sagay to investigate the same issues, the federal government had claimed, it had answers to. After his US trip, Buhari told Nigerians that he had details of all dubious transactions, foreign bank accounts where stolen funds from crude sales were lodged. They also know the location of such banks, some tankers impounded in foreign lands and indeed the former public officials involved.
Government even said it had details of how Nigerian crude was shared among public officials and sold by individuals and proceeds paid into their personal accounts. And that all such details were within government’s grasps. If that is so, what is the duty of the Sagay Committee, now calling on people to come and confess?
Is the committee a replacement of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), a Probe Panel or a Judicial Commission, without a serving or retired judge or is the Committee to confirm the claims of the Buhari government, so as to justify any further action it might take, thereafter, including incarceration?
Nigeria operates the accusatorial process of prosecution, by which, an accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Its opposite is the inquisitorial process by which an accused is presumed guilty until he or she proves himself or herself innocent.
The nature of public comments on a matter yet to be properly investigated and suspects put to trial, cuts the picture of condemned criminals. What this does is that institutions finally entrusted with the trial of such cases go the extra mile to ‘re-affirm’ what the master had already told the public, so that the master is not portrayed as a liar.
Infact, many Nigerians believe that no trial will be just enough to guarantee justice to those already convicted by the government. This is because, the government whose duty it is to transfer information to the judicial arm for proper trial has already assumed the position of judge in their own cases, if official public comments on the issue are any leads to go by.
No one wants to question Buhari’s integrity or resolve to fight corruption. But there are indeed civilized ways of doing it, in a democratic dispensation.
Whatever ‘facts’ government has or thinks it has amount to mere suspicion and the affected Nigerian or foreigner a mere suspect. Such ‘facts’ should be properly investigated by a competent constitutional institution, in this case either the EFCC or ICPC or both. It could also include other constitutionally approved security institutions.
Then follows facts analysis. Where the facts are weighty enough to get conviction, the suspect is then charged to court for trial, with government and its agencies represented as prosecutors. It is only in a Military regime, that government prosecutes, makes the laws and also serves as judge in its own case.
It is indeed only in such instances, that the nature of pre-trial vilifications and condemnation on pages of newspapers will sell, not in a democracy where, the judiciary must be allowed to perform its constitutional duty.
This is why many agree with the National Peace Committee, particularly its spokesperson, Bishop Kukah, that the way government was going about its war against corruption was grossly undemocratic and could merely succeed in heating-up the polity. A polity claimed by the patriotic concession of defeat by a serving President, only to be the target of a vicious probe and threat of probe.
In My Agony last month, I pointed to one reason why African leaders prefer to die in office rather than hand over power. It is the fear of the unknown indeed of the uncertainities after power. It is surely for those, the incumbents do every and anything to protect their seats and become despots.
For such sit-tight rulers, human life, national stability,  peace and indeed unity are not considerations. The only consideration is self-survival. It is this same consideration that for years made democracy a mirage in Africa. What is going on in Burudi, the blood birth, the unrest and the fear of more deaths, all stem from the same individual insecurity and the unwillingness to let go of power.
This indeed was what President Jonathan saved Nigeria, by simply picking the phone to congratulate Buhari, even before the final results of the February 28, Presidential election results had been announced. Rather than ordering loyal soldiers to enemy areas, as most despots would do or kidnapping the INEC Chairman and forcing him to announce favourable results, Jonathan did the honourable things, not knowing that he was mortgaging the future of his supporters, his ethnic group, his family and friends and indeed all other Nigerians who identified with his ambition. He thought, it was a personal sacrifice for peace, unity and survival of a nation, long predicted to be heading towards its last days, by prophets of doom.
It was a sacrifice which all the billions allegedly stolen could not buy. It was a sacrifice which all the human blood saved could hardly quantify. It is indeed a sacrifice which does not deserve political vendetta, vindictiveness and hate in recompense. This indeed is the worry of the National Peace Committee which played a role, in assuring President Jonathan that history would never forget his rare demonstration of love for nation, of selflessness and of uncommon statesmanship.
To be rewarded with the nature of official public vilification and demonization being dramatized by beneficiaries of Jonathan’s sacrifice, is the height of ingratitude posterity hardly ignores.
My Agony is that many of those playing the drums for the dancing bird, fail to remember, that today, was the tomorrow many talked about yesterday. And as usual, this same today will be yesterday some day.
Methinks, the best difference Buhari can present to Nigerians is how he utilizes the four-year mandate granted him and not spend most part of it demonizing others before him, against the dictates of a line in our national anthem ‘the labour of our heroes past, shall never be in vain’.
If to Buhari, Jonathan is a villain, to many Nigerians, like Kukah and My Agony Jonathan remains a national hero, fountain of democracy and beacon of national peace and unity, who deserves respect and honour. Nothing less.

Soye Wilson Jamabo