The Federal Government has advised Nigerians against visiting the United States of America at the moment except for crucial matters as a result of the lack of clarity in the country’s new immigration rules.
The advisory was sequel to the barring of some Nigerians, with valid US visas, from entering the US in recent weeks.
“At least, four Nigerians with valid visas were denied entry to the US within the last two weeks and sent back to the country on the next available flights,” the Senior Special Assistant to the President on Foreign Affairs and Diaspora Matters, Abike Dabiri-Erewa, said on Monday
In a statement on Monday, Dabiri-Erewa advised Nigerians without any compelling or essential reasons to visit the US to consider delaying their trip “until there is clarity in the new immigration policy.”
She added, “In the last few weeks, the office has received a few cases of Nigerians with valid multiple-entry US visas, being denied entry and sent back to Nigeria.
“In such cases reported to the office, the affected persons were sent back immediately on the next available flights and their visas were cancelled.”
She reminded Nigerians in the Diaspora to abide by the rules and regulations of their host countries and be good ambassadors of the country.
Francis Adekola, who was affected by the immigration restriction, explained that he was prevented from attending a friend’s wedding in Mississippi on February 15, 2017.
Narrating his bitter experience, Adekola said he was detained for over 10 hours before he was placed on aircraft and returned to Abuja via Johannesburg.
He said, “I travelled to the US on February 15, but when we got to the Atlanta airport, where I was to connect another flight, I was asked to step aside at the check-in counter by an armed border protection officer.
“He walked me to the luggage section and searched my wallet and bag. He also collected my telephone (set) and went through the contents: SMSes, pictures, WhatsApp chats, everything.”
Adekola, who recently finished his Ph.D at a Canadian university, said he was informed by the immigration agent that he did not have strong ties in Nigeria and that he might not go back home if allowed into the US.
Though he was allowed to speak to someone in the US, he stated that he was still prevented from entering America.
Adekola added that his mobile was not returned to him until he got to Johannesburg.
“My documents were not released to me until the plane was airborne on its way to Abuja even though my home was in Lagos,” he said.
He explained that he saw some nationals of other countries, who were also denied entry to the US, noting that the wasted trip cost him over N1m in airfare.
The US embassy could not be reached for comment as it had yet to respond to an email, sent to it, seeking its reaction to the barring of Nigerians.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs was also unavailable for comment.
Its spokesman, Clement Aduku, did not return calls to his mobile and had yet to respond to an SMS as of the time of filing this report on Monday.
Trump signs new executive order
The US President, Donald Trump signed an executive order on January 27, 2017, barring people from seven, Muslim-majority countries from travelling to the US for 90 days.
It also stopped all refugees for 120 days and Syrian refugees permanently.
The ban caused global outrage as well as chaos across the US before it was frozen by a legal ruling.
The US Mission to Nigeria had earlier assured Nigerians that the executive order on immigration would not affect Nigerians, noting that visa applicants would continue to get two-year multiple entry visas as before.
It also said the order would not affect the validity of visas held by Nigerians, noting that its visa policy to Nigeria had not changed.
The US Ambassador to Nigeria, Stuart Symington, and the US Consular Chief, Meghan Moore, had explained to journalists on February 3, 2017 that the US visa policy was based on reciprocity, stressing that Nigerians would not be discriminated against.
Trump signs new travel ban, exempts Iraq
Meanwhile, Trump signed a new executive order on Monday barring immigration from six Muslim-majority countries, dropping Iraq from the January’s previous order, and reinstating a temporary blanket ban on all refugees.
It removed language in the original order that indefinitely banned Syrian refugees and called for prioritising the admission of refugees, who are religious minorities in their home countries.
That provision drew criticism of a religious test for entry and would have prioritised Christians over Muslims fleeing war-torn countries in the Middle East.
The new ban, which takes effect on March 16, also explicitly exempts citizens of the six banned countries, who are legal US permanent residents or have valid visas to enter the US – including those whose visas were revoked during the original implementation of the ban, senior administration officials said.
“We cannot compromise our nation’s security by allowing visitors entry when their own governments are unable or unwilling to provide the information we need to vet them responsibly or when those governments actively support terrorism,” Attorney General Jeff Sessions said on Monday.
The new measures will block citizens of Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen from obtaining visas for at least 90 days.
The order also suspends admission of refugees into the US for 120 days, directing US officials to improve vetting measures for a programme that is already widely regarded as extremely stringent.
Trump signed the executive order in the Oval Office outside the view of reporters and news cameras, after more than three weeks of repeated delays, the latest of which came after White House officials decided last week to delay the signing to avoid cutting into positive coverage of Trump’s joint address to Congress.
The traditional ruler of Afaraukwu Umuahia Autonomous Community and father of the detained director of radio Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, HRM Eze Israel Kanu, has fingered the leader of the Biafra Independent Movement (BIM), Chief Ralph Uwazurike, as the architect of his son’s ordeals.
The monarch made the allegation during a chat with newsmen in his palace after the traditional marriage of his daughter, Princess Chinwe Kanu.
He said that Uwazurike was behind the continued detention of Nnamdi Kanu at the Kuje Prison, Abuja.
According to him, Uwazurike’s grouse with Kanu was because he had exposed his (Uwazurike’s) poor handling of funds raised by members of the Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB) when he was the leader of the group.
The monarch also accused Uwazurike of tipping off security agencies about Kanu’s movement before they arrested him in Lagos upon arrival from London in 2015.
The 84-year-old traditional ruler expressed shock that Uwazurike would suddenly turn against Kanu who he had pursued the Biafran agenda with.
He therefore asked Ndigbo to hold both the Federal Government and Uwazurike responsible should anything untoward happen to Kanu.
The monarch, who said his health had continued to deteriorate since the arrest and detention of his son, appealed to the Federal Government to release his son to prevent his (father’s) early death.
He insisted that his son committed no crime to warrant his continued detention, saying that people have the right to self-determination if they no longer feel comfortable in their present association.
Meanwhile, IPOB has accused the South East governors of showing no commitment to the struggle for the release of Kanu.
It expressed sadness that the governors have refused to identify with Kanu’s cause whereas their counterparts in other geopolitical zones always speak out on any issue affecting their subjects or region.
The Zonal Coordinator of the Lion Zone of IPOB in Ikwuodia, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Mr. Emeka Mbamarah, made the allegation at weekend during the traditional wedding ceremony of Kanu’s younger sister, Princess Chinwe Kanu at Afaraukwu Ibeku Umuahia, Abia State.
He wondered why no governor from the South East had considered it necessary to visit Kanu at the Kuje Prison while they are junketing round the country to honour birthdays of some politicians responsible for Nigeria’s woes.
The Federal Government and former president, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan, yesterday traded words over the kidnap of Chibok schoolgirls and the rescue efforts.
While the Federal Government, speaking through Information and Culture Minister, Lai Mohammed, had asked Jonathan to stop passing the buck on the missing Chibok girls of Borno State and accusing his administration of playing politics with the abduction, the former president said the minister attempted, as spokesman of the then opposition party, to frustrate his government’s effort to rescue the abducted girls.
In a press statement released on his behalf, Mohammed accused Jonathan of allowing the Boko Haram insurgency to escalate, while urging him to stop engaging in finger-pointing over the issue of the Chibok girls abducted under his watch.
The minister said such finger pointing was an unnecessary distraction from on-going efforts to secure the release of the girls, who have remained in captivity for long.
According to him, ‘‘while former President Jonathan reserves the right to defend his administration, he should not engage in finger-pointing by saying, in a statement, ‘some people who have obviously been playing politics with the issue of the Chibok girls will stop at nothing to further their interest.’”
Mohammed said if anyone ever played politics with the issue of Chibok girls, it was Jonathan’s administration under whose watch the girls were abducted.
He recalled how the then opposition All Progressives Congress (APC) repeatedly alerted Nigerians of the dangerous game being played with the insurgency by the Jonathan government.
He said: “After the girls were kidnapped and the Jonathan administration did nothing for all of 15 days or made any determined efforts to rescue them thereafter, our party, the then opposition APC, told the nation several times that the whole Boko Haram crisis was allowed to escalate by the PDP-controlled Federal Government so they can use it as a political tool ahead of the 2015 elections.
“In a statement on September 8, 2014, we said: ‘President Jonathan-PDP’s political manipulation of the Boko Haram has to be understood as part of its poker-like calculus for clinging on to political power ahead of the 2015 elections. The Boko Haram crisis is readily used by the PDP to rationalise the Jonathan government’s abdication of its constitutional responsibilities, including visits and assistance to areas affected as well as effective response to abductions (e.g. the GEJ government was silent over the Chibok girls kidnaps for over 15 days).’”
The minister further said that the APC had been vindicated two and half years after by the report by a United Kingdom newspaper that claimed President Jonathan rebuffed an attempt by the British government to help rescue the girls.
“We hope the former president will now refrain from stoking further controversy over the lingering abduction issue and allow the government of the day to focus on its on-going negotiations to secure the release of the Chibok girls,” he said.
Reacting to the minister’s comments, on behalf of the former president, Reno Omokri, former aide to ex-President Jonathan, said Mohammed lied about the last administration’s response to the kidnap of the Chibok girls.
According to him, “my response to his lies is as follows: Opinions are subjective but facts are sacred. The facts are that then President Jonathan immediately sprang to action to rescue the kidnapped Chibok girls and it was precisely the fallacious Lai Mohammed, whose words I caution the international community to take with a pinch of salt, that attempted to frustrate the efforts by the then government to rescue the girls.”
While releasing his facts, Omokri said: “Below are factual timelines with dates, names and location. I challenge Lai Mohammed to rebut them with his own facts.”
He stated that on March 12, 2014, the then minister of state for education, Mr. Nyesom Wike, wrote the governors of Borno, Yobe and Adamawa and advised them not to hold the West African Senior Secondary Certificate Examinations in areas susceptible to the Boko Haram insurgency, which was ignored by Borno State governor.
He said: “April 14, 2014: Contrary to the advice given by the Peoples Democratic Party-led Federal Government of President Goodluck Jonathan, the All Progressives Congress-led government of Governor Kashim Shettima, for reasons best known to it, chose to ignore that advice and held the WASSCE examinations in Chibok, a mainly Christian town that was susceptible to attacks from the Islamic extremist group, Boko Haram.
“On the day in question, the girls of Government Girls Secondary School, Chibok, were kidnaped by Boko Haram while preparing to write their final physics examinations.
“Curiously, both the Principal of the school and her Vice were not on the school’s campus, as the girls were inside a dormitory. The Principal of the school, Hadjiya Asabe Kwambura, later claimed to have gone to Maiduguri for a ‘medical check up’ on the day of the abduction. It seemed very inauspicious for a principal of a school to schedule a non emergency ‘medical check up’ for a time when the school she presided over was having, perhaps, its most important activity of the year, school leaving examinations.
“This same woman later changed her story when she told Fox News that she had gone to Maiduguri to buy medicines and was informed by her daughter about the kidnap. But how did her daughter, a student of the school, avoid being kidnapped? It is noteworthy that this particular principal was never reprimanded or disciplined or in anyway made to take responsibility for this obvious dereliction of duty by the Borno State government, which owns the school.
“Flash forward to April 2, 2016: Governor Kashim Shettima confessed in an interview with Premium Times that he, the chief security officer of the state, did not inform then President Jonathan when the girls were kidnapped for reasons best known to him.
“April 17, 2014: Exactly three days after the kidnap, President Jonathan, who had not been formally informed of the issue because of the deliberate refusal of the APC-led government of Borno State to brief him, called for an emergency meeting at the Presidential Villa after the military independently alerted him.
“Multiple dates in April, 2004: The military, principally the Air Force, were given conflicting information as to what direction the fleeing terrorists took when they captured the girls. Were these conflicting information a deliberate effort to send the military on a wild goose chase?”
He said on May 2, 2014, “Jonathan sets up a fact finding mission to determine the facts of the kidnap and stresses that the mission’s work would not interfere with search and rescue efforts.” “ After consistent confused and contradictory information from the Borno state Government and various other authority figures, the Presidency invited the principal actors in the Chibok saga to the Presidential Villa to ascertain the truth. The Presidency was shocked at the non-appearance by officials of the Borno State government. The governor’s wife, who was invited, shunned the event and when the then First Lady, Dame Patience Jonathan, saw the scanty representation fromBorno, she famously exclaimed: ‘na only you waka come’?”
Omokri said: On “October 15, 2014, during the Presidential declaration by then candidate Muhammadu Buhari, now the incumbent President, Audu Ogbeh, at that time the Director General of the campaign (he was later replaced) said on live television that the pressure group, Bring Back our Girls, led by a virulent critic of the Jonathan administration,
Oby Ezekwesili, also said that the #BBOG campaign is led by ‘members of our party, the APC.’ This is an exact quote and reflects the politicization of the saga. “From the above, it is clear that Nigeria’s minister of information, Alhaji Lai Mohammed has an estranged relationship with the truth.”
Five communities in Nnewi South Local Government Areas of Anambra State have cried out to Governor Willie Obiano to come to their rescue over deplorable state of their roads.
They claimed the roads have led to the erosion in most pasts of the area. They are also seeking improved on all spheres of infrastructure in the communities.
Representatives of the communities from Akwaihedi, Ebenator, Utuh, Ezinifite and Osumenyi which make up Mbanese, laid their complaints, on Tuesday, to officials of ‘Stakeholders for Willie Obiano for 2nd Tenure’ team.
The team has Chief Ekene Enefe as its national coordinator, who had invited them to a town hall meeting at Omaigwe civic centre, Osumenyi.
Town union executives present and other members of the affected communities thanked Governor Obiano for the areas he has done well and asked him to count on their votes in the forthcoming November 18, 2017 governorship election in the state.
Also, they insisted that their support for his second tenure would be dependent on his response to their call for help.
Mr. Cosmus Ezeotubulu from Ebenator community said the gully erosion in their own area had buried over 15 houses and destroyed so many economic trees since it started over twenty years ago. He regretted that former Governor Peter Obi awarded a contract to fix the erosion menace but was later abandoned by the contractors.
The five communities pinpointed health facilities, electricity transformers, transforming their customary courts from their present colonial to a modern look, provision of fertilizers to boost their agricultural produce and befitting rural markets as among the essential needs of the rural populace.
Chief Enefe had earlier told members of the communities that the purpose of the visit was to tell them what Governor has been doing develop in every part of Anambra and for them to articulate their own problems to be presented to the Governor for his attention.
He reminded them when Anambra indigenes in diaspora were doing their daughters’ and sons’ weddings outside the state as a result of security challenges which he said Governor Obiano had reversed on assumption of office “and has been able to introduce a deference in governance through agricultural revolution, prompt payment of workers’ salaries and pensions and a lot of other dividends of democracy.”
He appealed to them for their support for the Governor’s second term bid to continue to attend to all their needs.
Reacting to the communities requests, Governor Obiano, who was represented by his Senior Special Assistant on Internally Generated Revenue, Mr. Uchenna Okafor. gave a firm promise that their demands would receive express attention of the Governor. He told them that the Obiano administration was people oriented and would make sure that every community was taken care of within the capacity of the resources available.
Some of the dignitaries on the occasion were the Speaker of Anambra State House of Assembly, Hon Rita Maduagwu, member representing Nnewi South Constituency I, Hon Kinsley Iruba, member representing Oyi Constituency, Hon Vivian Okadigbo, over fifty members of Ndi Nze na Ozo (titled chiefs) from the five communities, former lawmaker in the Old Anambra State House of Assembly, Chief Fred Unigwe who made a special appeal to Governor Obiano to make a budgetary allocation for old people in the state
This is to inform the Biafra public that an arrangement to organise a unity meeting for all the Leaders of Pro Biafra groups has been concluded. You are by this announcement to contact Rev Leon Ugwu via 080311844710 if you have not been reached. This announcement should be treated with utmost urgency.
Thank you.
Ndubuisi Anaenugwu Director- Directorate of Information, CG-IPOB
IK Ogbonna, said to be a media aide to Imo State Governor, Rochas Okorocha, claims that the native doctor used by notorious slain criminal, Vampire has been arrested in Aba, Abia State
The Catholic Church has sparked outrage in India after it blamed “consumerism” and bodily “temptations” for the alleged rape of a 15-year-old girl.
Priest Mathew Vadakkacheril, from Kerala in India, was accused of raping the child and later arrested.
The girl was allegedly raped several times and became pregnant, according to India Today. The child has since been delivered at a private hospital and since taken to an orphanage, reportedly without the mother’s consent.
Yet it is the response to the incident among the Christian community in India that is now making headlines.
A Christian weekly magazine, which is backed by a Catholic Sabha or association, blamed the alleged victim for the event and said Mr Vadakkacheril may have momentarily “forgotten his position”.
Father Paul Thelekat from the Bishops’ Council, also commented on the incident and blamed consumerism for the rape.
– Femi Fani-Kayode has accused some members of APC of being behind the abduction of Chibok girls
– He condemned the allegation that Jonathan refused Britain’s help to rescue the girls
Femi Fani-Kayode has raised serious allegation that some men from President Muhammadu Buhari’s camp in the All Progressives Congress (APC) were responsible for the abduction of Chibok girls.
More than 200 girls were abducted during the administration of Goodluck Jonathan in April 2014 and while some of them have been rescued, the whereabouts of others remain unknown especially with the clearance operation in Sambisa forest where they were believed.
The Guardian UK had reported that the British government had reached out to Jonathan to help in rescuing the Chibok girl but he refused
In reaction, Fani-Kayode took to his official twitter page to describe the allegation as childish.
He also claimed that while he girls were actually kidnapped during Jonathan’s administration, some elements in the APC were responsible.
The General Overseer of Omega Fire Ministries Worldwide, Apostle Johnson Suleman, on Monday distanced himself from the arrest and detention of Stephanie Otobo by the police last Friday, March 3, 2017 over alleged blackmail.
The allegation against Suleman came about one month after his interrogation by the Department of State Services over alleged incitement in his sermon in which he advised that Fulani herdsmen who came near his church should be killed.
The cleric in a statement by his Communications Manager, Phrank Shaibu in Abuja, said there was no amorous relationship between the said Otobo and himself, including a promise to marry her.
According to Shaibu, the lady was allegedly arrested by operatives acting on a tip off that she had repeatedly tried to blackmail Suleman, including demanding N500 million from him, failing which she threatened to expose a purported amorous relationship between her and the Pastor.
Our correspondent reported that a legal practitioner, Festus Keyamo, had demanded N500m on behalf of Otobo and also accused Apostle Suleman of allegedly procuring policemen to intimidate and detain his client unlawfully, having earlier promised to marry her.
Shaibu said Keyamo was misled into believing that there was an amorous relationship between Apostle Suleman and Otobo, addding that the lady was “caught up by her own machinations as she was arrested while trying to withdraw money paid into her account by the church in a sting operation coordinated by the police.”
He said, “Unknown to Keyamo, the police was alerted following several attempts by the said lady to blackmail Apostle Suleiman. The police also recorded her conversations while making the frivolous demand.
“The high point of the drama was her attempt to withdraw money paid into her account at the instance of the police. The lawyer should know that his client was arrested by the police with abundant evidence confirming that she is, indeed, a serial blackmailer.”
Shaibu also denied Keyamo’s claim of an amorous relationship and a promise by Suleman to marry Otobo, wondering how such a transaction could have taken place without any iota of evidence.
He said, “Let me place it on record that the lady in question is a self-confessed stripper in a night club in Canada who, like thousands of people that seek help from Apostle Johnson Suleman, called to pretentiously convey her intentions to embrace Christ and also needed financial help to keep body and soul, as she no longer had a means of livelihood after quitting as a stripper.
“Does Keyamo or his serial blackmailing client have pictures of the visit by Apostle Suleman or his representatives to her parents?
“In any case, how could such a relationship have existed when the Apostle and the said lady have never met physically? “How could he have made a promise of a house and a lifestyle comparable to what she had in Canada when he has never been to her house or seen her physically as to have an idea of her living standards?”
According to him, Keyamo must have been misled or excited by the prospects of getting a whopping N500m, both reasons for which two letters were written and sent to Suleman.
Barely two months after its introduction, whistle-blowing has been yielding results. The Federal Government has so far recovered billions in naira and millions in dollars. The most stunning recovery was from former Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) Group Managing Director Andrew Yakubu, who allegedly kept $9.7million and £74,000 in a fireproof safe in a community in Kaduna State. Is the policy sustainable without the National Assembly passing a law to support it? Lawyers suggest ways to strengthen the policy.
It sounds incredible. But in just two months, with its whistle-blowing policy, the Federal Government has recovered $151 million, N8 billion, $9.2 million and £74,000. When the policy was introduced, many probably never gave it a chance. Now, the recovery of this huge cash has left mouths agape.
Aside being a tool to strengthen the anti-corruption war, two things stand the policy out.
It provides the government an opportunity to raise cash by recovering loot it had no knowledge of; and it gives the whistle-blower access to substantial financial reward for exposing crime.
The Federal Executive Council (FEC) approved the policy last December 21.
The policy’s legislative counterpart, Whistle-Blower Protection Bill 2016, passed the second reading on the floor of the Senate last October 20.
The Bill is one of the five proposed laws sought to be employed by President Muhammadu Buhari as weapons in the fight against corruption.
Others are the Office of the Financial Ombudsman Bill 2015, National Convicts and Criminal Records Bill 2015, Electronics Transactions Bill 2015, and the Nigerian International Financial Centre Bill 2015.
The 2015 version of the Whistle-Blower Protection Bill was one of the 46 bills that the Seventh Senate passed into law within 10 minutes on the eve of the end of its tenure in 2015. They were not signed into law by former President Goodluck Jonathan.
Last December 19, Ben Akabueze, Director-General of the Budget Office of the Federation, said the government planned to infuse N258.6 billion from recovered loot in this year’s budget.
Two months into the policy’s implementation, billions have been recovered, according to Minister of Information, Alhaji Lai Mohammed.
On February 12, he listed some of the recovered cash to include $151 million, N8 billion and $9.2 million.
Mohammed said: ‘’When we told Nigerians that there was a primitive and mindless looting of the national treasury under the last administration, some people called us liars.
“Well, the whistle-blower policy is barely two months old and Nigerians have started feeling its impact, seeing how a few people squirrelled away public funds.
‘’Yet, whatever has been recovered so far, including the $9.8million by the EFCC, is just a tip of the iceberg.”
How the policy operates
The policy, co-ordinated by the Ministry of Finance, requires anyone with information about a violation, misconduct or improper activity that impacts negatively on Nigerians and the government to report it.
According to information on the ministry’s website, the disclosure is expected to be made voluntarily and in good faith, by telephone, e-mail or through “a secure online portal” where the status of the report can be checked.
The subject matter of the report may include mismanagement or misappropriation of public funds and assets (e.g. properties and vehicles), financial malpractice or fraud, collection/soliciting bribes and corruption.
Others are diversion of revenues, fraudulent and unapproved payments, splitting of contracts and procurement fraud (kick-backs and over-invoicing etc.)
The policy assures the whistle-blower of anonymity and confidentiality “to the fullest extent within the limitations of the law,” or full protection if the person chooses to be known.
It states further: “Any stakeholder who has made a genuine disclosure and who feels that, as a result, he or she has suffered adverse treatment in retaliation should file a formal complaint to an independent panel of inquiry, that shall be set up to handle such complaint, detailing his/her adverse treatment.”
The problem of reward
At first glance, the reward for whistle-blowers appears to be attractive: between 2.5 per cent and five per cent, but a closer examination of this provision raises several issues.
According to the ministry, “A whistle-blower responsible for providing the government with information that directly leads to the voluntary return of stolen or concealed public funds or assets may be entitled to anywhere between 2.5 per cent and five per cent of amount recovered.
“To qualify for the reward, the whistle-blower must provide the government with information it does not already have and could not otherwise obtain from any other publicly available source to the government. The actual recovery must also be on account of the information provided by the whistle-blower.”
Thus, for a whistle-blower to be entitled to a reward, the information supplied must prompt the holder of the stolen or concealed public funds or assets to return them to the government voluntarily.
What happens where the information supplied is authentic, but the holder of the loot refuses to give it up voluntarily and the government is only able to recover the loot through litigation or some other means? Does this imply that the whistle-blower will get nothing in this circumstance?
For instance, a Federal High Court in Kano on February 14 ordered the forfeiture to the Federal Government of $9,772,000 and £74,000 recovered from a former Group Managing Director of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), Mr. Andrew Yakubu.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) said it recovered the money on February 3, from a building owned by Yakubu in Kaduna, following a tip off by a whistle-blower.
If Yakubu fails to overturn the forfeiture order on appeal, does the recovery of the money by judicial means imply that the whistle-blower won’t get any reward?
Similarly, a telecoms firm has gone to court to claim ownership of the N8.4billion traced by detectives to an Ecobank account, following a tip-off from a whistle-blower. Has the court case damaged the whistle-blower’s chances of getting a reward?
Chief Gani Adetola-Kaseem (SAN) suggests that a whistle-blower legislation would make things clearer.
He said: “If the policy is a law, that will make it clearer to people and you can pin the government or anybody to the provision of the statute. I agree that for that reason, if you have the statute, i.e. an act of the National Assembly duly signed and assented to, it’ll make things clearer.”
Also, the whistle-blower’s information source must also not be a public one that the government has access to. One implication is that there will be little motivation for anyone to draw the government’s attention to the availability of such information.
However, according to the minister, not every whistle-blower appears to be interested in a reward.
Speaking in Abuja, at the inauguration of Human Rights Radio on February 13, he cited a whistle-blower who made a disclosure out of patriotism.
‘’I want to put on record that the fellow through whom we recovered N1 billion in an account told us he does not want any commission from the government and that that is his contribution to the country.
‘’But, I can assure you that we are not going to renege on our promise to give appropriate commission to anyone who gives us information that leads to recovery of money through this policy,‘’ Mohammed said.
Protection of whistle-blowers
How will whistle-blowers be protected? The policy does not specify. It merely states: “Any stakeholder who whistle-blows in public spirit and in good faith will be protected, regardless of whether or not the issue raised is upheld against any party.”
It states further: “Any stakeholder (internal or external) who has made a genuine disclosure and who feels that, as a result, he or she has suffered adverse treatment in retaliation should file a formal complaint to an independent panel of inquiry, that shall be set up to handle such complaint, detailing his/her adverse treatment.
“If it appears that there are reasonable grounds for making the complaint, the responsibility will be on the party against whom the complaint of adverse treatment has been made to show that the actions complained of were not taken in retaliation for the disclosure.
‘’Where it is established that there is a prima facie case that a whistleblower has suffered adverse treatment (harassment, intimidation or victimisation) for sharing his/her concerns with the ministry, a further investigation may be instituted and disciplinary action may be taken against the perpetrator in accordance with the public service rules/other extant rules and a restitution shall be made to the whistle-blower for any loss suffered.”
The above appears to suggest that the policy is more concerned with stepping in after the whistle-blower has already suffered adversity as a result of his disclosure. Thus, there is really no protection from harm for the whistle-blower.
Danger of inadequate protection
All over the world, examples abound of whistle-blowers suffering harm or adversity following their disclosure of criminal acts by others.
Nigeria
On May 22, 2015, Mr. Aaron Kaase, a Principal Administrative Officer (Press and Public Relations) of the Police Service Commission (PSC) complained to the EFCC, as well as the Independent Corrupt Practices and other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), alleging N275 million fraud against the PSC.
The ICPC investigated and cleared the chairman of the PSC, Mr Mike Okiro, of any criminal infraction.
It was, however, reported that Akaase was suspended indefinitely without salaries. He also allegedly faced threats to his life and family daily.
Also, last Wednesday, the University of Ilorin (UNILORIN) management suspended two lecturers for alleged “insubordination and causing disaffection within the university’’.
But the duo alleged that they were being victimised for exposing corruption in the institution.
South Africa
On March 14, 2009, Moss Phakwe, an African National Congress (ANC) municipal councillor was assassinated.
He and a colleague, Alfred Motsi, had attempted to expose corruption in the Municipality and delivered evidence to ANC Secretary-General Gwede Mantashe and to the Office of the South African President.
Another meeting took place with Co-operative Governance Minister Sicelo Shiceka in Rustenburg, attended by Phakwe, Motsi and former Rustenburg mayor Matthew Wolmarans on March 12, 2009. Phakwe had spoken last and handed his dossier to Shiceka.
Before he did so, he had looked at Wolmarans and said: “Hate me, but don’t hurt me.”
Two days later, early in the evening of 13 March, 2009 Phakwe’s body was found slumped over the steering wheel of his car with two bullet wounds.
On July 17, 2012, Wolmarans was convicted and jailed for 20 years for Phakoe’s murder.
United States of America
In 1996, Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, a former senior policy analyst for the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), filed complaints alleging that a company from the United States was mining vanadium in South Africa and harming the environment and human health.
The EPA did not respond, and Coleman-Adebayo reported her concerns to other organisations. Subsequently, the EPA refused to promote her and she filed a suit against the agency, alleging racial and gender discrimination.
On August 18, 2000, a federal jury found EPA guilty of violating her civil rights on the basis of race, sex, colour and a hostile work environment, under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Her experience inspired passage of the Notification and Federal Employee Anti-discrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (No FEAR Act).
India
In October 2005, Shanmughan Manjunath, a former manager at Indian Oil Corporation Ltd (IOCL), spoke against adulteration of petrol. He was shot dead on November 19, 2005, allegedly by a petrol pump owner from the state of Uttar Pradesh
Prevention of abuse
One of the reasons the bill failed to fly in the sixth and seventh Senate was because of the fear that it could be used as a tool for witch-hunt.
It was also argued that the bills did not make provision for malicious and false whistle blowing.
So, what happens to a whistle-blower whose allegation is found to be false, malicious and hateful, thereby damaging someone’s reputation?
The policy seeks to prevent abuse by referring false disclosures to law enforcement agencies. It also does not stop aggrieved persons from seeking damages for defamation.
It states: “A first level review will always be carried out to determine credibility and sufficiency of information received. If you report false or misleading information, it will be referred to the enforcement agents for investigation and possible prosecution.’’
Lawyers urge National Assembly to pass bill into law
Lawyers are united in their support for the policy. They suggest that passing it into law would ensure its sustenance.
Seyi Sowemimo (SAN) said: “It is important that it should have legal backing because the policy is also supposed to offer some protection to those who do the whistle-blowing, so that no adversity will come to them and then, of course, I expect that there will be some reward for those who engage in the whistle-blowing.
“So, it’ll help if there’s some legal backing to assure people that yes, this money will come and, really, in a country like Nigeria, if we want this kind of policy to be sustained, it is better to pass it as a law, so that it won’t depend on whether the man who is at the helm of affairs is interested or not in pursuing that policy. It will be law, it will be binding on anybody including the government and as a matter of policy. The National Assembly should not waste time in passing that legislation.”
The Chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association Ikorodu Branch, Levi Adikwaone, said a legislation would offer greater protection for the whistle-blower.
He said: “For the practice of whistle-blowing to be successful, steps must be taken to protect the whistle-blower. The corruption in Nigeria makes it difficult for whistle-blowing policy to be an effective weapon in the hands of the people to assist the government.
“At the University of Ilorin, two lecturers are suffering because of whistle-blowing. They exposed corrupt practices allegedly committed by the management of the school and the next thing is they were dealt with. Now, what is their succour, their fate?
“So, if we have whistle-blowing as a policy, there should be laws to back it up, so that if anybody should expose a crime, such citizen must never suffer on account of that and if that citizen suffers as a result of that, there must be compensation. There should be an enabling environment to ensure that the prospective whistle-blower enjoys protection.”
Malachy Ugwummadu, president of the Committee for the Defence of Human Rights (CDHR), hailed the policy’s implementation as a “direct response to the frustrating and debilitating state of affairs and corruption in Nigeria. It is reported that the huge amounts already recovered from various private homes came from just three whistle blowers.
“Thus, what changed that the government could recover such amounts without a single arrest or prosecution? Two things: first, the percentage reward incentive attached to any credible information and second, the security of the information and informant. With every policy in Nigeria, emphasis should now be placed on strategies to prevent the abuse of such information.
“In effect, it is a welcome development. A country that has comprehensively enacted an Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015 which expressly provides for plea bargain, parole system, community/suspended sentencing, etc. is gradually moving away from punishment focused criminal justice system to recovery/restitution driven system,” Ugwummadu said.
