Lack of conviction in anticorruption war

The corruption and financial crimes cases trial monitoring committee (COTRIMCO) set up by the Chief Justice late last year has submitted its interim report. It blamed the prosecution, courts and prison service for delay in trails. But mainly it blamed prosecutor’s incompetence for the failure of the most of the cases.

Giving a briefing of the committee report, Soji Oye, Director of Information of the National Judicial Commission, NJC, “the Corruption and Financial Crimes Cases Trial Monitoring Committee has identified poor prosecution, absence of counsel for parties in court, reliance on irrelevant documentary evidence, multiplicity of charges, non-adherence to court rules/procedures, retirement/transfer of judges, re-assignment of cases to start de novo, amendment to charges after commencement of trial, and cumbersome record transmission process to Court of Appeal amongst others as some of the factors militating against speedy disposal of corruption cases.

This run counter to the frequent claims of president Muhammadu Buhari that the judiciary has been frustrating his administration’s fight against corruption. For instance, in July 2016, at the National Judicial Institute in Abuja blamed the judiciary – particularly lawyers and judges for the delays in the administration of criminal justice in Nigeria. Hear him: “I am worried that the expectation of the public is yet to be met by the judiciary with regard to the removal of delay and the toleration of delay tactics by lawyers.” “When cases are not concluded the negative impression is given that crime pays. So far, the corruption cases filed by government are not progressing as speedily as they should in spite of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act of 2015 essentially because the courts allow some lawyers to frustrate the reforms introduced by law.”

Equally, in 2016 the president, in a town hall meeting with Nigerians in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, alluded that the judiciary remained his main headache in the fight against corruption. He was quoted as saying then: “On the fight against corruption vis-à-vis the judiciary, Nigerians will be right to say that is my main headache for now. If you reflect on what I went through for 12 years when I wanted to be the President…In my first attempt in 2003, I ended up at the Supreme Court and for 13 months I was in court. The second attempt in 2007, I was in court close to 20 months and in 2011, my third attempt, I was also in court for nine months…All these cases went up to the Supreme Court until the fourth time in 2015, when God agreed that I will be President of Nigeria.”

True, the judiciary, like all institutions in Nigeria, is not immune to corruption and the erosion of values. There are proven cases of corruption in the judiciary and in most cases, the judiciary has often allowed the rich and highly connected law-breakers to easily escape justice while coming down heavily on the petty malfeasance of the poor.

However, we condemn the self-righteous posture of the President and the inability of his administration to record significant convictions on the judiciary. To lay all the blame for the non-conviction of corrupt officials on the judiciary is to be hypocritical at best. Like the COTRIMCO interim report laid bare, the inability of government to successfully see to the conviction of corrupt officials have more to do with the incompetence and lack of grit of the Nigerian state to effectively and diligently prosecute cases against erring officials than a corrupt judiciary. The judiciary is meant to be an arbiter, a referee of sort, and is not expected to take sides in disputes. The universal principle of “he who alleges must prove” applies to the government too. In most cases, shoddy, lazy and incompetent investigation and prosecution combine to scuttle the cases of the government. That cannot be blamed on the judiciary neither can the judiciary lessen the burden of proof on the government.

We must state that the most effective way to secure conviction of corrupt individuals is through diligent and thorough investigation and prosecution, coupled with the presence of an efficient, reliable and a firm court system that is not susceptible to manipulation and not an appeal to lawyers not to represent corrupt people or delay cases in court.

In climes like the United Kingdom and the United States, governments uphold the rights of every citizen to the services of a professional lawyer and at the same time vigorously prosecute and secure the conviction of those who go against the law. The key, as usual, is the dexterity, hard work, and diligence put into the investigation and prosecution of offenders and the efficient non-corrupt court system in those countries.

However, in Nigeria, shoddy investigation, lazy prosecution and a disorganised and compromised judiciary have combined to make nonsense of the justice system. No wonder then that while someone like James Ibori, the former governor of Delta State, was discharged and acquitted on an almost 160 count of corruption and mismanagement of public funds in Nigeria, he pleaded guilty to avoid trial on similar offences in the United Kingdom. But he also had the best of lawyers in the United Kingdom just as he had in Nigeria.

What the government needs to do is to comprehensively reform the judiciary and increase and strengthen its capacity for investigation and prosecution and not the condemnation and vilification that is fast becoming a past time of the President and his party.