A
friend who hails originally from the South Western segment of Nigeria by name
Mr. Babatunde Adeniji Abimbola called me from California, the United States few
hours back to break the story that the Nigerian Federal Government through
the office of the Federal Attorney General and minister of Justice Mr. Mohammed
Bello Adoke[SAN] has successfully negotiated an out of court settlement with
the authorities of Liechtenstein necessitating a landmark agreement
for the return of a whooping sum of 167 million euros ($227 million) to
Nigeria, ending what is considered in legal circle as a drawn-out battle by the
Federal Government to recover cash looted by former military dictator, late
General Sani Abacha.
For
those who may have collective amnesia, General Sani Abacha, who died in 1998 in
suspicious circumstances, is suspected of having looted the Central Bank of
Nigeria (CBN) to the tune of about $2.2 billion when he ruled from November
1993 to June 1998. His military regime faced international sanctions following
persistent cases of brutal human rights violations and forced disappearances of
patriotic Nigerians opposed to military dictatorship.
Shockingly,
even with the sanctions regime slammed on his junta by the international
community, some rogue nations even in Western Europe facilitated the
looting and concealment in their own national banking institutions of these
humongous amount of money stolen from the public till of Nigeria.
Global
reporters recalled vividly that Nigeria first requested help from Liechtenstein
in 2000 to recover the cash stashed there but the tiny principality of some
37,000 people grudgingly returned paltry sum of 7.5 million euros to Nigeria in
late 2013, but the restitution of the bulk of the cash has long been blocked
by lawsuits brought by companies linked to Abacha’s family. These law suits
which predated the current Federal Government have indeed cost the Nigerian
government huge legal fees.
It
would also be recalled that many of the companies with suspected links to the
Abacha family were sentenced in 2008 to repay money proven to have been
taken from Nigeria’s national budget, but four of the firms filed a complaint
with the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.
But
with the benefit of hindsight that negotiated settlement and/or what is called
plea bargaining in legal parlance could hasten the recovery of these huge sum,
the Nigerian Government accepted negotiations between it and the government of
Liechtenstein. Legal observers stated that because of this rapprochement, the
four litigants bent on frustrating the recovery back to Nigeria of these stolen
money ended up withdrawing their complaints in May, “clearing the path for
repatriation of the assets once and for all,” Vaduz, a spokesperson said in a
statement circulated to the media recently.
The
World Bank had agreed “to monitor the use of the repatriated assets,” the
statement said. It is reported in global media circles that the current
Nigerian Coordinating Minister of the Economy Mrs. [Dr] Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala was
instrumental to the setting up of a unit within the World Bank which played
role of a mediator in making this agreement possible with the patriotic zeal of
the Federal Attorney General on behalf of the Nigerian State. By and large,
this agreement is a pan-Nigerian and globally acclaimed legal landmark
achievement which should deservedly be praised.
This
agreement which has ended the seemingly unending litigation that has spanned
fifteen years bears the hallmark of a professionally well articulated and well
thought out mechanism which in the longer terms will be tremendously beneficial
to Nigeria since the World Bank has graciously accepted to play the role of an
unbiased umpire to monitor the use to which these huge amount of money
belonging to the Nigerian people but stolen by the late military tyrant and his
family members but now successfully recovered through the expert and tireless
activities of the minister of Justice and the Nigerian Federal Attorney Mr.
Mohammed Bello Adoke [SAN] who has the confidence of the current President Dr.
Good Luck Jonathan.
Obviously,
this landmark legal achievement made by the current Federal administration has
understandably brought to the front burner the larger controversial issue of
the merits and demerits of plea bargain as a tool for adjudication especially
in corruption related cases. Those who support it always make reference to
most developed societies like the United States which has used this legal
method to achieve fruitful conclusion of thorny cases that would have cost the
American taxpayers huge revenue in pay outs for legal proceedings.
What
then is plea bargain? Wikipedia the online free encyclopedia has it
that plea bargain is an agreement in a criminal case between the prosecutor and defendant whereby
the defendant agrees to plead guilty to a particular charge in
return for some concession from the prosecutor.
On
the other hand, a plea bargain is simply an agreement between the defendant -
the person accused of a crime - and the prosecution where both parties agree to do something for
some type of benefit.
Prosecution
simply means the act or process of holding a trial against a person who is
accused of a crime to see if that person is guilty, as is notoriously known
around legal circles.
In
plea bargains, prosecutors usually agree to reduce defendants' punishment. Legal
writers say prosecutors often accomplish this by reducing the number or
severity of the charges against defendants. The person [accused] is
given the opportunity to negotiate.
In
some plea agreements, the prosecution agrees to drop some criminal charges or
reduce the level or severity of a crime in exchange for a defendant's guilty
plea. Negotiating a plea bargain can be complicated. Because, you can be
forced to say what is not, so say observers.
In
most cases, prosecution is better. Though it takes longer time, it helps save
finance, it also makes the person serve his jail terms in other to reprimand
him and avoid occurrence of his crime, so say observers. Those who support plea
bargain say the merits far outweighs the demerits. By and large, plea bargain
has its pros and cons but whereby the public interest would be better served by
plea bargaining, observers say it is better to make hay while the sun shines
since justice delayed is justice denied.
This
good news on the Abacha loots which will now be successfully retrieved and
return to the people of Nigeria is a big plus for this current administration
because there is really no benefit allowing the matter to drag on ad infinitum
while the financial resources belonging to the Nigerian people are allowed to
be deployed by the receiving jurisdiction to develop their own economy at the
disadvantage of Nigeria and Nigerians.
Objective
observers will understand that posterity will reserve a place of pride for the
current Federal Attorney General and minister of Justice for achieving this
remarkable achievement that has added financial benefits for Nigerian
government to transparently deploy these huge resources for the service of
public good and the promotion of better infrastructure for the Nigerian people
equitably in the full view of independent observers from home and abroad. What
else is transparency?
All
those who jumped into hasty conclusion to criticize the Federal Attorney
General and minister of Justice for withdrawing the matter it filed locally to
recover N446 billion did not give the government the benefit of the doubt that
it is inconceivable that the same government that has recovered so much will
now play politics with the legal proceedings for the benefit of one of the key
suspects in the Abacha loots' matter.
When
on 18th of June the matter was withdrawn from the Justice Mamman Kolo-led Abuja
High Court by the office of the Federal Attorney General and minister of
Justice, the Court was told clearly that the Nigerian Government had further
and better material not unrelated to the whole issue of the huge public fund
stolen and hidden away in foreign jurisdiction by the late General Sani Abacha
and his family. Some Persons who derive joy in carrying out smear
campaign against the person of the current minister of justice have indeed
kicked off their rumour peddling job even without waiting to hear from the
Federal Government if the settlement that has now allowed Nigeria to recover
the said huge foreign denominated amount of money from five companies
associated with General Abacha's family has anything to do with the Nigerian
side of the case that has now been withdrawn.
+ Emmanuel
Onwubiko; Head; Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria blogs@www.huriwa.blogspot.org;
www.huriwa.org.
19/6/2014
No comments:
Post a Comment