Edugate: Intensifying Anti-Graft War

The prompt order issued by President Bola Tinubu to Nigeria’s anti-graft agencies for a comprehensive investigation into the financial operations of the Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty Alleviation is not only commendable but a much-needed step towards tackling the systemic corruption prevailing in the nation. The resultant suspension of its minister, Dr Betta Edu, further signifies the gravity of the issue and the commitment towards rectifying it.
However, the scandal has evoked an underlying decadence that seeped deeply into the country’s socio-political fabric, demanding far more than sporadic actions to deal with isolated incidents. The President should seize the opportunity presented by the uproar arising from the opprobrium to instigate a full-scale anti-corruption crusade. He should conduct a thorough scrutiny of every government department and their financial affairs.
Edu reportedly directed the Accountant-General of the Federation, Oluwatoyin Madein, to execute a transfer of N585million to a private account. This account allegedly belongs to Bridget Oniyelu Mojisola, purportedly identified as the Project Accountant for Grants for Vulnerable Groups by the ministry. The matter took a new turn when Madein said she declined Edu’s request, citing the regulation that public money cannot be paid into private accounts.
The suspended minister was implicated in yet another leaked memorandum for allegedly authorising N72million to her aides as part of the 2023 grant for the vulnerable group programme in Kogi State. This funding was intended for expenses such as flight tickets, airport taxis, local running costs, and Duty Tour Allowance, even though the state does not have an airport. Moreover, several companies were reportedly paid about N3billion as consultancy fees for the verification of the National Social Register (NSR). More worrisome is a leaked memo indicating that the Chief of Staff to the President actually approved the expenditure of N3billion from the COVID-19 Palliative Fund for the payment of consultants hired by Edu to verify the NSR.
This raises numerous ethical questions: Why invest so much money in consultants when the nation struggles with fiscal deficits? Why hire consultants while local talents remain underutilised and jobless? And more importantly, is there a tangible return on investment that can be traced to these expensive consultancy services? The absence of satisfactory answers to these questions indicates a blatant erosion of governance’s ethical elements — fairness, justice, empowerment, and most essentially, accountability.
The reverberations caused by Edu’s conduct and her subsequent suspension by Tinubu, bring to the fore the ongoing tumult in the nation’s political architecture. This uproar presents a stark reminder of the corruption and lack of accountability that has pervaded the political space.  Tinubu, compelled, perhaps by the commotion resonating across the country, suspended Edu. Following this, penultimate Tuesday, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) interrogated her in Abuja. These events are emblematic of a renewed call for transparency in governance.
The President’s swift response may underscore his commitment towards promoting accountability in governance. But it also presents an opportunity for a cogent critique of the seemingly hasty action taken. Was this move just to assuage the outraged citizenry, or is it a signpost towards a sustained campaign against corruption and bad governance? While Tinubu’s action resonates with Nigerians and civil society organisations, it also raises questions about the transparency and accountability measures within his administration. That his Chief of Staff gave the nod for such expenditure leaves too many unanswered questions.
Even so, the EFCC’s subsequent interrogation of Edu in Abuja marks another noteworthy turn of events. This approach suggests a maturing investigative process geared towards achieving justice and equity. Simultaneously, it also indicates a potential shift in the fight against corruption within Nigeria. Again, we could argue that while such practices may lend credibility to the government’s commitment to transparency, they also expose underlying political intentions.
It is alleged that New Planet Project Limited, a company owned and operated by the Minister for Interior, Olubunmi Tunji-Ojo, has been linked to Edu’s malfeasance. Ojo was awarded a contract worth N438.1million to serve as a consultant for the reputedly fraudulent National Social Register project, which aimed to verify 11 million homes in Nigeria within a month. The anti-graft agency must investigate him to ascertain the level of his involvement.  Like Edu, Ojo should be suspended to facilitate a thorough inquiry.
Scrutinising the Tunji-Ojo scandal earnestly might lead us to various contemplations. We might start by questioning the ‘conflict of interest’, as the line between Ojo’s private and public interests seems blurred. As Interior Minister and proprietor of New Planet Project Limited simultaneously, it spills the question of whether national interest is sacrificed for personal gain. The contract might as well have been a smokescreen to siphon public funds, hence harnessing the wheels of corruption.
The Humanitarian Ministry has arguably been bedevilled with corruption allegations. The immediate past minister, Sadiya Umar-Farouq, is being probed by the EFCC, over an alleged N37billion fraud. The funds, intended for the betterment of Nigerians, were laundered through a contractor’s 38 different bank accounts. In 2020, the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) said it uncovered N2.67billion meant for the ministry’s school feeding programme in private bank accounts.
Unfortunately for Nigeria, a bulk of the poverty alleviation funds are loans. The country had borrowed $800million from the World Bank to cushion the removal of petrol subsidies through cash transfers to 50 million vulnerable citizens. The leveraging of loans for poverty mitigation programmes puts the nation in a precarious financial position, primarily if these funds are not appropriately utilised or fail to yield the expected socio-economic outcomes. As William Feather once noted, “borrowed money is the most potent form of mythology”, and Nigeria’s increasing reliance on loans to fund poverty alleviation schemes epitomises this concern.
The Edu case presents an arduous challenge; however, it is a challenge that offers a momentous occasion for reform. The choices made by the President will either bring about a promising dawn or cast an ominous shadow over the nation’s retrospective reputation. Tinubu must remember that his decisions will not only affect him but also the future of an entire country. If he takes a firm and rightful stand on these corruption matters, he can reassure Nigerians and the international community that the fight against corruption has truly begun.
And honestly, Mr President must not leave anyone found culpable in his government, no matter how highly placed.