First, President Obasanjo must be commended for finally inaugurating the Anti-Corruption Law Commission. Coming on the heels of our country being adjudged by Transparency International to be the most corrupt nation on Earth, it is a welcome development.
Secondly, our sincere hope is that a cardinal principle of modern jurisprudence, that you are "innocent until proven guilty" has not been jettisoned anywhere in this law. I do not believe that this principle should be compromised ANYWHERE in this new anti-corruption law, nor is it
compromised, to my best understanding.
To charge a person is NOT to presume that he is guilty. The burden of proof is on the PROSECUTOR first to show that there is ab initio, prima facie reason to drag a person to
court, and AFTER LAYING ALL THE FACTS BEFORE THE JUDGE and quizzing the accused on the facts, the burden of proof is then on the accused to show that he is not guilty as charged - in this case he has not acquired wealth illegally.
In effect, the anti-corruption law does not allow any accused to plead the 5th - or the Xth, whatever the number is in Nigeria which allows silence of the accused without a presumtion of guilt - otherwise he is presumed guilty.
I believe that this is fair, provided every one knows the law. Although I am agreeable with the principle of non-self-incrimination, that should be the exception rather than the rule.
Thirdly, my pro-democratic instincts lead me to worry about violations of human rights. One hopes that this commission will ensure that the anti-corruption law is not a recipe for a fishing expedition, an unwelcome dragnet on the lives of perceived enemies of the state, real and imagined.
It is in that context that any criticism must be justified.
Those fears of violations of human rights remain, and rightly so. Note even below that the instinct to be over-reaching - suggested by an original and outrageous plan to officially "tap" phones of the majority of law-abiding citizens; I am not foolish enough not to know that such
tapping does go on unofficially - had to be scratched due to the vigilance of human rights groups and senators.
Kudos to them, the hapless senators especially :-).
Fourthly, now let us look at the practical aspects of "suspecting that an official is wealthy beyond his means." This must be because at least:
MEANS TEST A
the official's bank account(s) appears fatter than his means.
the official's movable (cars, boats, planes, etc.) and immovable assets (land, houses, businesses, etc.) appear more numerous and pricey than his means.
his donations of money, either by cash spraying or by announcement of donation to a social function or political or social movement appear beyond his means.
Also, note that by "means", we mean the totality of:
MEANS TEST B
legal money (eg salaries and benefits) that the offical makes from his official work;
legal money he made from business BEFORE he attained his present official work;
inherited money.
Again, these distinctions are important, if we are not to scare independently and legally wealthy people from government service, simply because some people suspect them of being too wealthy for the office they are CURRENTLY in, forgetting that they had a life BEFORE the office.
Fifthly, for this anti-corruption law to be truly successful, may I suggest that the Means Tests A and B that I outlined above require BEFOREHAND or at least SIMULTANEOUSLY:
ANTI-CORRUPTION REFORMS MEASURES consisting of:
banking reform, to ensure that all banking transactions above a certain amount (say N200,000) are reported to some agency;
income and property tax reform, so that all Nigerians pay progressively according to what they earn and own beyond say some evaluated amount;
donation-reporting and electoral reform, so that donations are both reported and taxed; after all, a donation is an income earned by the recipient, and is hence taxable;
full and publicly-ascertainable declaration of assets before and after attainment of government position - President Obasanjo himself has not done this PUBLICLY, and he should lead by example;
clearly defined process of project initiation and contract awarding at all official levels.
This is much broader than the commission's charge that "to examine the practices, systems and procedures of public agencies and parastatals and can direct them to make changes "where they are found to facilitate fraud"
I can assure you that when all of those reforms are in place, the penchant to be corrupt will be reduced NOT because Nigerians have become suddenly more religious - as if that were possible - but because the opportunities for corruption will be reduced, and the probability of being caught and punished under the Anti-Corruption law will be increased substantially.
Those of us who live abroad are already familiar with these requirements, but in developing countries, and certainly in Nigeria, we always think that we can put the cart before the horse, and just make laws and "Voila!", corruption will cease.
Guides
