Gents, your thoughts on this is needed

http://www.huhuonline.com/news287.html

WHY RIBADU’S DISMISSAL IS LEGALLY CORRECT
BY FESTUS KEYAMO

There has been so much legal and moral misinformation, emotions and sentiments flying around over the dismissal of Nuhu Ribadu from the Nigerian Police Force. Some of my friends have called to say that because I have started to prosecute some alleged corrupt persons on behalf of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission a few months ago, it may be misinterpreted that my support for Ribadu’s dismissal may be because I am anxious to please the E.F.C.C. I have laughed at such insinuations. Those who have followed my views know that my positions have been consistent for some years now, even when Ribadu was still Chairman of E.F.C.C.

For instance, as a reminder to Ribadu’s supporters who are now crying “denial of fair hearing”, some Nigerians woke up one morning early in 2007 to see a list released by Ribadu’s E.F.C.C., called “list of indicted politicians seeking elective offices”. Many of them were neither called to answer any question nor were they aware of any on-going investigation involving them. In my column in Sunday Sun of February 11, 2007, I called it the “Evil List”. I also took a swipe at Ribadu’s E.F.C.C. for doing the dirty bidding of Obasanjo and the P.D.P. Very many of my public comments, before and after then, notably on the inability of Ribadu to bring to book the likes of Andy Uba, Bode George, Kenny Martins, e.t.c. have shown my consistency on Ribadu’s E.F.C.C. for many years now. Again, despite the fact that I was well acquainted with Ribadu long before he became Chairman of E.F.C.C., I never applied or went to him, even once, for any brief when he was chairman of E.F.C.C.

But we have it on record that some very prominent lawyers who were consultants to the E.F.C.C. under Ribadu supported Ribadu all the way in breaking constitutional provisions when impeaching Governors and indicting persons to prevent them from contesting the 2007 elections. Some even said it was right for as small as six or even two legislators out of twenty four (24) to remove a Governor from office. Yet, no one accused them of being tongue-in-cheek because of the fat consultancy fees they were getting from the E.F.C.C.

Therefore, those uninformed persons who are inclined to pour invectives on anyone who dare support the dismissal of Ribadu from the Police Force are on very weak grounds in the argument. When anyone resorts to personal abuse in any controversy, it is most likely the person is losing ground in respect of the strength of his argument.

But despite my previous position on Ribadu, I have taken a passionate look at his dismissal from the Nigerian Police Force and I have come to the conclusion that the dismissal was legally correct and constitutionally sound. This is because as a lawyer and a victim of rights abuse many times by the authorities, I know that it is not in all cases that the authorities are wrong when they are in conflict with individuals. In some cases, the individuals may be wrong. In this case, some people in authority may have intended to “deal” with Ribadu, but Ribadu, due to a combination of bad advice and arrogance, presented himself on a platter of gold to be “slaughtered”, and the authorities readily took advantage. These are my reasons:


It however took the intervention of the United States Consulate before Asiwe was released on bail on the 4th of November, 2008.


The facts of the case is that sometime earlier this year, some police officers numbering about 139 were demoted in rank because their promotion, in the first place, was not sanctioned by the Police Service Commission that is constitutionally empowered to promote these Officers. Nuhu Ribadu was affected as he was demoted from A.I.G. to D.C.P., the rank which his course mates were still wearing. I am still at a loss as to what gave Ribadu the impression that he was the target amongst these other fine officers who lost their rank in similar circumstances. He must have felt more important than his colleagues because he had been placed on a high horse by the over-hyped attention he received for a few years. He never wanted to come down from that high horse.


Anyway, this demotion happened when he was undergoing a course at the National Institute of Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPSS). Ribadu, unlike his colleagues, did not accept the decision. He reacted by doing the following:


(i) Refusal to put on the Police uniform again, notably during the visit of his course mates to the President and Commander-in-chief, President Yar’Adua, and during the graduation at NIPSS. On both occasions he wore an “agbada”.


(ii) He instituted court actions against the Inspector-General of Police, the Nigerian Police Force, the E.F.C.C., the Attorney-General of the Federation, the Police Service Commission, etc. In all these, he did not get the consent of Government as required by law (we shall discuss the constitutionality of this later).


(iii) He refused to report to the office of the Inspector-General of Police after he finished his course, despite several signals sent to him.


(iv) He refused to report at his duty post in Benin to which he was posted after completing his course.


(v) He refused to report to the E.F.C.C. to give an account of his stewardship as directed by the Inspector-General of Police.


It is not in doubt that all of these acts mentioned above are known offences under the Nigerian Police Regulations and the Public Service Rules.


TThe controversy that has arisen is whether Ribadu was justified in behaving this way and whether the requirement of consent to institute legal action is constitutional. Let me address these preliminary issues first.


The excuse for and on behalf of Ribadu has been that since he did not accept his demotion and was challenging it in court, he did not know the uniform to wear and could not have resumed in a duty post not befitting of the rank he is claiming. But is that also the reason why he did not obey the summons of the Inspector-General of Police to report in his office?


Anyway, the point is that Nuhu Ribadu had sought an injunction in court to restrain the Inspector-General of Police from relating to him as a Deputy Commissioner of Police. The court turned down that request. As a result, it behoved on Ribadu to maintain the status quo ante. This has been defined in many judicial decisions as the position of both parties just before hostilities begin in court. In the case of Ribadu, that position was that Nuhu Ribadu had been demoted to a D.C.P. Afterall, that was why he went to court. He therefore had a duty to continue to relate with the Police Force with that rank, whilst awaiting the decision of the courts.


What he tried to do was nothing but self-help. It would have been a different thing if he had rushed to court to try and stop a planned demotion. In that case, the Police would have had a legal duty to maintain the status quo ante by relating with him as an A.I.G. Therefore, there was nothing wrong in Ribadu continuing to obey lawful instructions as a D.C.P., whilst awaiting the decision of the courts. His act in refusing to obey orders just because he was challenging an action in court was nothing but gross indiscipline. If all Policemen take the Force to court and stay away from duty to await the court decision, the Police Force will instantly collapse.


Now, the next question is whether it is unconstitutional to seek the approval of government, as a Civil Servant before instituting legal proceedings, as Ribadu did not do.


Regulation 367 of the Nigerian Police Regulations states as follows:


“ (1) Except with the prior approval of the Government, no police officer shall institute any legal proceedings in his own personal interest in connection with matters arising out of his public duties.


(2) A police officer who receives notice of the intended institution of legal proceedings against him in a matter arising out of his public duties shall immediately report the matter to the Inspector-General of Police for instructions.”


This regulation, it is submitted, is not a bar to legal proceedings. If it is a bar, then it would be against the provisions of the constitution, especially Section 6(6)(b). But it is merely a “condition precedent” to institution of proceedings.


A number of decisions, by the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court have held that such provisions are not unconstitutional.


The following cases are instructive in this regard:


(1) Gambari v. Gambari (1990) 5 NWLR (Pt. 152) 572 (2) Anambra State Govt. v. Nwankwo (1995) 9 NWLR (Pt. 418) 245 (3) Afolagbe v. Awuni (1999) 9 NWLR (Pt. 522) 536 (4) Shuagba v. U.B.N. Plc (1999) 11 NWLR (Pt. 627) 459


At this stage, one may argue that since the regulation subtly gives the Government the right not to give such consent to sue then the provision can be a bar to a right to litigate, and as such it is unconstitutional. However, it will be the refusal of the government to give consent to the action that will be unconstitutional and challengeable in court and not the provision requiring the consent. In this regard, the seeking of consent must be seen as merely routine, which will mean no more than to have record of such cases going to court.


Having dealt with these preliminary issues, it is necessary to consider what happened next. As was well reported in the media, the Inspector-General of Police then issued Ribadu queries regarding his conduct. This was followed by the setting up of a Force Disciplinary Committee, which was set up to try erring Police Officers, including Ribadu. As it turned out, Ribadu was invited, first in Kaduna to defend himself. He declined to appear. Another invitation was extended to him in Abuja. He again declined to appear. The Committee then submitted its report to the I.G.P who forwarded it to the Police Service Commission. The Commission met, considered the report and dismissed Ribadu from the Police Force.


The issue that has arisen since this decision is whether the procedure adopted in dismissing Ribadu was proper in law. To answer this question, one has to look at all the relevant provisions of the law.


AIt is not in doubt by all parties concerned, that the Police Service Commission has powers to discipline any Police Officer, which includes dismissal from the Force. The major complain has been the procedure adopted in doing this and whether it accords with the principles of fair hearing.


The Police Service Commission is one of the Federal Executive bodies established by Section 153 of the 1999 Constitution. Section 30 of the Third Schedule to the Constitution states as follows:


“The commission shall have power to – (a) appoint persons to offices (other than the office of the Inspector-General of Police) in the Nigerian Police Force; and (b) dismiss and exercise disciplinary control over persons holding any officer referred to in sub-paragraph (a) of this paragraph.”


Now section 160(1) of the 1999 Constitution, which deals with how these Federal Executive bodies will operate (including the Police Service Commission) states as follows:


“(1) Subject to subsection (2) of this section, any of the bodies may, with the approval of the President, by rules or otherwise regulate its own procedure or confer powers and impose duties on any officer or authority for the purpose of discharging its function.”


Question: Does the Police Service Commission have rules for regulating its own procedure?


The answer is that the provision of Section 160(1) of the 1999 Constitution is replicated, albeit in a slightly different language, in Section 46(b) of the Police Act, which states as follows:


“46. Power to make regulations The President may make regulations on the recommendation of – (a) …………………… (b) the Police Service Commission with respect to appointments to offices in the Force, promotion, transfer, dismissal and disciplinary control of officers.”


Pursuant to this section, the Police Service Commission, with the approval of the President, made the Nigerian Police Regulations, 1968. Part XVI (or 16) of the Regulations provides for Discipline. Regulation 369 states as follows:


“369 Disciplinary proceedings against superior police officers (1) Superior police officers, in addition to the code of conduct set out in Part XV of these regulations shall, where applicable, be subject to the discipline prescribed by chapter 4 of General Orders for officers holding offices in the Civil Service of the Federation save that where provisions are made in respect of the same matter by both the said Chapter 4 of General Orders and Part XV of these Regulations the provisions of Part XV of these regulations shall apply.


(2) Where a superior police officer is charged with any misconduct contrary to the provisions of Part XV of these regulations or of chapter 4 of General Orders, the conduct of any disciplinary proceedings shall be in accordance with the rules specified in Chapter 4 of the General Orders and the competent authority shall be the Nigerian Police Council of the Federation.”


The General Orders referred to therein are now known as the Public Service Rules, 2006. And Chapter 4 referred to therein is now chapter 3 dealing with discipline.


“It is submitted that since the Police Service Commission has not provided elaborate rules to regulate its proceedings for discipline, the Provisions of Chapter 3 of the Public Service Rules shall apply mutatis mutandis to the Nigerian Police Force.


Rules 03/03/02 of the Public Service Rules, 2006, partly provides as follows:


“As soon as a superior officer becomes dissatisfied with the behaviour of any officer subordinate to him, he shall be his duty to so inform the officer in writing, giving details of unsatisfactory behaviour and to call upon him to submit within a specified time such written representation as he may wish to make to exculpate himself from disciplinary action…”


I have cited this rule to show that a “superior officer”, in this case the Inspector-General of Police, can initiate the disciplinary proceedings against any of his subordinates by serving him a query and ensuring that the subordinate is heard regarding allegations against him. This is not against the provisions of Section 30 of the Third Schedule to the Constitution because by exercising this power, the Inspector-General of Police merely ensures that the officer is heard in respect of the allegations, but he does not usurp the constitutional powers of the Police Service Commission to impose sanction on the officer.

The provision of Section 369(2) above that the “competent authority” shall be the “Nigerian Police Council of the Federation” is null and void for its inconsistency with Section 30 of the Third Schedule to the 1999 Constitution which makes the Police Service Commission the appropriate authority.

Now in Ribadu’s case, in line with the Public Service Rules, the Inspector-General of Police set up a committee to ensure Ribadu got a fair hearing regarding the allegations against him. But in line with the Constitution, the Inspector-General of Police declined to exercise the power to dismiss Ribadu. Rather, he passed the proceedings and recommendations to the Police Service Commission which took the decision, in exercise of its constitutional powers, to dismiss Ribadu.

Let us note very well that the Police Service Commission can regulate its own procedure with the approval of the President. THERE IS NO STATUTE PRESCRIBING HOW THE POLICE SERVICE COMMISSION SHOULD ARRIVE AT A DECISION TO DISMISS AN OFFICER. Therefore, it has a discretion not spelt out by legislation on the matter. By virtue of Section 160 of the Constitution, the procedure adopted can be by “rules or otherwise”.

If the Police Service Commission then accepts the procedure whereby an officer is given fair hearing by the Police and the recommendation passed on to it to take the final decision, can we challenge that exercise of discretion by the Police Service Commission? The simple answer is NO. The superior courts have held in many cases that you cannot challenge the exercise of discretion by a body legally empowered to exercise that discretion. What is important is that in the procedure approved by the statutory body in exercising its discretion, the twin principles of natural justice are fully observed. These principles are nemo judex in causa sua (no one ought to be a judge in his own cause) and audi alteram partem (hear the other side).

In this case, Ribadu was given the full opportunity to defend himself (twice) and he declined to appear. The principle of fair hearing does not demand that you must be heard at all cost. All you need is an opportunity to be heard. If you fail to take the opportunity, then you cannot complain later that you were not heard.

Even in the case of Ribadu, since he is a member of a disciplined Force like the Police, failure to appear before the Force Disciplinary Committee itself is an act of gross indiscipline. It is a different thing if he had appeared, but on protest regarding the composition or powers of the Committee. This he did not do. If you disobey lawful orders within a disciplined Force, you are liable to be dismissed. There are no two ways about it. If Ribadu had been left alone, then all officers will take the Force to Court and cite Ribadu’s case as a bad precedent. No Inspector-General of Police worth his office will tolerate that kind of nonsense.

If you really look at it, what Ribadu’s friends are saying, in essence, is that Ribadu should be an “untouchable” because he is perceived to have fought a few people in the past. They are really saying he should get away with disobedience, insubordination, indiscipline, unaccountability - all because of some puerile argument that some “powerful forces” or “unseen hands” are after him. Please, spare me these arguments. Did those powerful “corrupt” forces tell him to disobey lawful orders? Did those powerful forces predict correctly how Ribadu would behave so that he would be charged and dismissed?

Many in this government may be accused of corruption and encouraging corruption. I will never defend them on that score. Infact, all previous governments, including the one Ribadu served, only paid lip service to the anti-corruption crusade. So I totally agree that accusation may not be incorrect.

But to say a Police Officer should be allowed to get away with insubordination because the government is anxious to prove it is prepared to fight corruption is arrant nonsense.

The pain and cry of Ribadu and his friends remind me of the pain and cry of the family and friends of those who were indicted by Ribadu and disqualified from the 2007 elections without hearing from them or giving them a fair hearing.


But two wrongs do not make a right. He was given a fair hearing unlike those he indicted. But he refused to take the advantage. The authorities were, therefore, right by showing him the way out of the Police Force.

Apologies for the long post. It's an interesting read, though.

I still don't know why Festus Keyamo is a leader of thought in Nigeria

Why is what he says news worthy?

mikeansy:

I still don't know why Festus Keyamo is a leader of thought in Nigeria

Why is what he says news worthy?

i'm sorry, but i'm going to have to call you out on this.
Why does someone have to be 'newsworthy' before you ponder what he says?

We're talking about the legality of Ribadu's dismissal. keyamo is a lawyer. I'm not, and i'm pretty sure you aren't too.
Pick issues with his logic and not with his personality.

his logic ke!!!

I guess u mean his platitudes

The pain and cry of Ribadu and his friends remind me of the pain and cry of the family and friends of those who were indicted by Ribadu and disqualified from the 2007 elections without hearing from them or giving them a fair hearing.


But two wrongs do not make a right. He was given a fair hearing unlike those he indicted. But he refused to take the advantage. The authorities were, therefore, right by showing him the way out of the Police Force.

the two paragraphs above summarized the long post.

Keyamo we all know has been outstanding in the fight against corruption and i still think he has points here to make.
there is no way ribadu's interests will overtake the interst of nigeria as a state.

it is only here in nairaland forum or in nigeria that an okada man will come out openly with or without reason to say a learned man is not making sense.
mike, am really sorry that in all your posts, you have failed to drive home any point no matter how irrelevant the point may be.
you only want to post because others are posting. give a point and make effort to drive ur point home.
Mr. Mike, in what way or ways can you possibly differentiate what ribadu is doing today from what his victims were doing in his eight years with obj outside not iving them fair hearing which was offered to him by this new group.

pdp has turned the country into a football pitch with their powers but one thing they need to be reminded is that despite the powerful stance in nigeria, there is a power that is greater than all powers who will definitely visit them one day.

for ribadu, he was once a chairman, now that he is a provost, he shld compare and contrast.

Chidicris you have never been able to stay on topic

I am not asking you to drive home any topic, just stay on topic for once.

I haven't had time to read the full quote, but if chidi's excerpt
is anything to go by. . . .then I think many still misunderstand
the apprehension of 'Ribadu supporters'', if I can be referred to
as such anyway.

This goes way beyond more than Ribadu the man. This is more
about the people who feel they are untouchable, a cabal whose hornet
Ribadu undoubtedly disturbed. A message is being sent, that we are simply
pawns, pieces on a board, while the Kings and Queens cart off the loot.

Ribadu's might have been selective justice, but we sure would be a lot better off
if we had finally got rid of those he selected.

I haven't had time to read the full quote, but if chidi's excerpt
is anything to go by. . . .then I think many still misunderstand
the apprehension of 'Ribadu supporters'', if I can be referred to
as such anyway.

This goes way beyond more than Ribadu the man. This is more
about the people who feel they are untouchable, a cabal whose hornet
Ribadu undoubtedly disturbed. A message is being sent, that we are simply
pawns, pieces on a board, while the Kings and Queens cart off the loot.

Ribadu's might have been selective justice, but we sure would be a lot better off
if we had finally got rid of those he selected.

Doyin13,
in as much as i am not in the same school of thought with u, i so much appreciate your stance as well as ur ability to drop ur points as this will give room for others to take their stance.

i am telling u this day that the era of showing a poor man who steal magi on crime fighters while real robbers parade in the corridors of aso rock is coming to an end.

to those who felt nigeria will be better with selective justice instead of non, i am here to inform you that selective justice is still in place just that the wind has finally blown the ill wind to ur sides.

the best thing to do in this situation is to remain silent and accept ur fate as the law of nemesis and karma are in play.

abacha was harsh to obj and obj revenged when he finally became president and no one cried why are we shouting for just the introductory part of ribadu's problems.

i am from imo state but i will ask you to read more about abia state where the then(kalu) gov was free with his minds. obj did everything possible to frustrate him including taking their oil wells and handing them over to akwa ibom thank God yar aua has finally returned them.

alams, kalu, ibori, igbinidion are not the problems of nigeria rather they were problems to obj and ribadu. tell us how these few men affected the regime in their failure to give nigerians power supply, security, good raods despite spending heavily on all these. how did these men contribute to the electorial madness of april polls.

we have decided to leave the object in pursuit of shadows.

who among us does not know about adedibu, chris uba, andy uba, tonny annenih, bode george, borrishade, fani kayode, obj etc. these are all the oustanding criminal and thugs of the last administration. in case any of us is confussed about their various roles, i will be on hand to relate u to issues.

ribadu knows more is coming his ways so the act of shouting at this early moment cannot distract the moves.

give example with politicians in your areas and their achievements an tell us what kind of houses and cars have they been using since 1999 till date.

the good news here is that God is at work and he will do the final wonder when another party will take over from pdp and then nigerians will be lead to secred places of pdp.

ribadu is a disgrace and will soon take aso rock to the court. other criminals that acted in the 1999-2007 movie of obj have either left the country or accepted their fate in good terms why is he crying foul play when he was part of the game.

@ ChidiChris,

Good reply.

Ribadu like you and I is not bigger than the law that put him in power.
Keyamo's dissect of the issue is clear, explicit and self explanatory.
The charade and farce characterised by his leadership of the popular anti-graft agency has been exposed.
I am definitely sure he (Ribadu) was not very sincere in executing his duties, thus his present situation and imbroglio.
Every bad thing in life has an end.
I am amazed that some group of people will advocate for Ribadu's wrong doing on the premise that it is better to undertake selective justice and opposition witchhunt to none at all.
That is gross.
He was given a mantle of leadership and entrusted with all of our trust, thus no excuse.
He tried his best though but lost the end.
This is the beginning of the end for an unwise, arrogant, egotistical, haughty and narcisstical fellow.
This is a lesson for us all.
Do not fool people because someday you shall be a victim.

@chidi

Are you saying selective justice be permitted now because it was the norm under Obj?

Surely, a better response would be to chase Ribadu and his Obj cohorts if they indeed erred
as well as the people who he persecuted whom you yourself admit erred as well.

I really do not care for Ribadu. If he has to go to the gas chamber for our country to be better
then I have no qualms sacrificing him.

But no, this punishment will do the opposite. It will only reinforce the belief of this all powerful
clique that they are untouchable.

The people love Ribadu not because we believe everything he did was consitutionally correct, but because of what he represented.

Any buffoon should know that there are certain untouchables in this country, and one cannot expect Ribadu to go after them. They are beyond his jurisdiction. With the remit he was given, he performed admirably, to the point that "The fear of EFCC was the beginning of wisdom".

I thought Keyamo was a stand-up guy. He should tow the line of his elder brother Gani.

The loss of Ribadu brought about a loss of faith, both in the Nigerian people and in the International Community.

doyin13:

I haven't had time to read the full quote, but if chidi's excerpt
is anything to go by. . . .then I think many still misunderstand
the apprehension of 'Ribadu supporters'', if I can be referred to
as such anyway.

This goes way beyond more than Ribadu the man. This is more
about the people who feel they are untouchable, a cabal whose hornet
Ribadu undoubtedly disturbed. A message is being sent, that we are simply
pawns, pieces on a board, while the Kings and Queens cart off the loot.

Ribadu's might have been selective justice, but we sure would be a lot better off
if we had finally got rid of those he selected.

I share similar view. We will continue ignoring the issues and make it about people to our own detriment. Instead of making the idea of holding someone responsible for bad fiscal management we make it about the person ivolved and if we like him or not; instead of making the issue about whether one was corrupt or not we make it about who they are and where they are from. This is all folly and to the detriment of the nation, simple as that. Nigerians will continue to cheat themselves out of progress if this continues because it seems highly placed people have perfected the act of taking advantage of such stupidity.

doyin13:


This goes way beyond more than Ribadu the man. This is more
about the people who feel they are untouchable, a cabal whose hornet
Ribadu undoubtedly disturbed. A message is being sent, that we are simply
pawns, pieces on a board, while the Kings and Queens cart off the loot.

Surely you see the irony in your post, considering the fact that Ribadu went nowhere near the untouchables you refer to. All the people arrested were disposable in one way or another.
Anenih, Bode George, Andy Uba, Danjuma, Jerry Useni, Babangida. . .all these people went scot free.

Who did he arrest? spent forces like Tafa balogun, out-of-favour governors like Alams? Yahoo crimelords like Ajudua with little political capital?

You people claim that our problem is from our leaders. Why did Ribadu do nothing to curb babangida who stole billions of dollars?
You claim Ribadu's dismissal is sending a wrong signal. What kind of signal is it when you arrest only the weak and leave the strong cabal to enjoy their stolen loot?

Please let someone asnwer the above question in bolded font.

Ibime:


Any buffoon should know that there are certain untouchables in this country, and one cannot expect Ribadu to go after them. They are beyond his jurisdiction.

There's little wonder why we're in such a sorry state when people have this kind of mindset. Ribadu was hired to head the EFCC, given sweeping powers and provided with an armed force to go with it. His jurisdiction involved proscuting all cases of Economic and financial crimes. We expected him to do just that. Pity some Nigerians have such low expectations.

Ibime:

With the remit he was given, he performed admirably, to the point that "The fear of EFCC was the beginning of wisdom".

Performed admirably? i think not. of all the Governors he claimed to have dossiers on, how many were prosecuted. At least he stayed on in the EFCC job for a while after the Governors lost their immunities at the end of their terms. Where were the flurry of arrests e led Nigerians to believe he was going to carry out?

Only the weak feared Ribadu. The inner PDP caucus moved unhindered.

Nigerians are easily satisfied with rhetoric. Play to the gallery and they'll be eating from your palms. Perhaps Yar'Adua should hire a better publicist.

texazzpete:

Surely you see the irony in your post, considering the fact that Ribadu went nowhere near the untouchables you refer to. All the people arrested were disposable in one way or another.
Anenih, Bode George, Andy Uba, Danjuma, Jerry Useni, Babangidaall these people went scot free.

Who did he arrest? spent forces like Tafa balogun, out-of-favour governors like Alams? Yahoo crimelords like Ajudua with little political capital?

You people claim that our problem is from our leaders. Why did Ribadu do nothing to curb babangida who stole billions of dollars?
You claim Ribadu's dismissal is sending a wrong signal. What kind of signal is it when you arrest only the weak and leave the strong cabal to enjoy their stolen loot?

Please let someone asnwer the above question in bolded font.

There's little wonder why we're in such a sorry state when people have this kind of mindset. Ribadu was hired to head the EFCC, given sweeping powers and provided with an armed force to go with it. His jurisdiction involved proscuting all cases of Economic and financial crimes. We expected him to do just that. Pity some Nigerians have such low expectations.

Performed admirably? i think not. of all the Governors he claimed to have dossiers on, how many were prosecuted. At least he stayed on in the EFCC job for a while after the Governors lost their immunities at the end of their terms. Where were the flurry of arrests e led Nigerians to believe he was going to carry out?

Only the weak feared Ribadu. The inner PDP caucus moved unhindered.

Nigerians are easily satisfied with rhetoric. Play to the gallery and they'll be eating from your palms. Perhaps Yar'Adua should hire a better publicist.

LOOOL.
Permit me to attempt to answer your question. I don't believe anyone is claiming Ribadu did a good job, well i am not anyway (except Ibime  ). You could argue that Ribadu played to the gallery and all of that, but the simple truth is that there was never before any "serious" attempt at actually addressing the issue of corruption in Nigeria, hence the support for the fight on corruption which you might be confusing with support for Ribadu. When corruption fighting is discussed i immediately think of the organisation EFCC and not Ribadu, hence the arguement that is was beyond Ribadu and more of a movement against corruption. I totally agree that the fight was not completely sincere and genuine and lots of people were not touched.

Expectations were great and to be honest reducing corrutpion in government in Nigeria to a miniscule ammount seems as simple as successfully prosecuting IBB and Obasanjo and a few more and making sure that these people see the inside of a jail for a considerable ammount of time then everyone knows you are serious and there is an actual fight. That or revert to the idea brought up before of death by stoning  . Expectations were great but given that Nigerians were lead to believe that there was an actual war on corruption, support was also understandably great. Do you want to fault people for that? What message has been sent by getting rid of Ribadu? The problem was not neccessarily that Ribadu was gotten rid of (not for me anyway), but simply how he was gotten rid off. Sending him of to school? LOL. In a country whereby people pretty much have no trust for government and see government officers from the president down as institutionalised thieves, deception was not the best way to go and it was quite patronising. It was symptomatic of what happened with the election tribunal. I was of the view that the election should have been scrapped because it was a disgrace and robbery, simple as. However the insulting part of the whole electoral fiasco was the reasons given for not annulling the monumental disgrace. People took consolation from the fact that just under half of the judges presiding over the case were "pro annulment" shows it was a "fair" and genuine hearing and attempt by the judiciary. How convenient that just over half of the presiding judges were pre "putting the nail in the coffin for democracy"? I instead decided not to buy into what i thought was a scripted play that was even too bad to make hollywood trash. So what message was being sent then and what message was being sent to Nigerians by the way Ribadu was handled? In its simplest form it said - We don't care about what anyone thinks or about getting your approval enough to be honest or sincere with you, you all aren't worth it. Thats what i took from it anyway.

texazzpete:



. Perhaps Yar'Adua should hire a better publicist.

Funny. . . .I have actually argued elsewhere he should.

The current revisionism aside, one cannot argue during his reign,
appreciation of his efforts were widespread. I had ordinary folks from
naija openly praising the efforts of the EFCC.

I simply do not agree the EFCC was all chaff under Ribadu. This organisation
had teeth albeit it was selective.

I am not naive to think Ribadu was the comprehensive panacea to the problem of
corruption in Nigeria. Frankly, Our best hope is at most a dent. Not even the popular
revolution you propose elsewhere will suffice, well intentioned as it is, but improbable
in succeeding.

I guess it is in the face of these insurmountable odds, that many of us are crying foul over
the ''persecution'' of Ribadu, It is not only a protest at his treatment. Ultimately it is a
protest against this government and the apprehension the faint flicker of hope I saw in many
faces and heard in many voices when Ribadu was head of the EFCC is all but extinguished.

The fight against corruption has not stopped. EFCC has not been eradicated.
Someday Ribadu will have to leave the agency. It is not his birthright.
Thus no reason to see Ribadu's plight as a sign to support or aid corruption.
I disagree that the issue is not about Ribadu.
It is obviously about him.
Keyamo's piece was from a legal point of view and the facts as represented.
The other sentiments by Ribadu's followers are based on commonsense.
Even a blind person is aware that Ribadu is being haunted by some wicked and powerful people in this country, but where are the facts? He needed not to play to the gallery with the way he even handled the whole situation.
Imagine statements like his posting to Benin was carefully orchestrated so that he can be assasinated.
Every staff of a Federal, Military or paramilitary organisation in this country knows that a staff order can transfer you anywherewithin the country. If he wasn't happy with the posting then he should have resigned instead of non-compliance.
His appointment was doomed to fail from the word go.
A subject of an evil machinery will be flushed with the head.
Even Yaradull is not permitted to preach anti-corruption.
Sooner than later he will be a victim of the plot that put him in  power.
What goes around comes around.

The solution to Nigeria's problem lies in:
True leadership.
Free and fair elections as seen in the US and neighbouring Ghana.
Sincere administration to a large percentage (it can never be 100%).
Intelligent members of the National Assembly.
A trusted Judiciary, free of bias.
And a sincere person to lead the anti graft agency, who fears less if his master gets axed while carrying out his duties (this is where Ribadu lost my sympathy for him)

Only then can we say we are ready to fight corruption.

poor men that stole magi always come alive on crime fighters yet billions of dollars pass through murtala mohamed on daily basis and someone is here to tell me about untouchables.
i do not know what you people see in ribadu because with the few months of the new efcc, bode george, borrishade and fani kayode have been invited, wow nothing can be more moving than moving these three heavy weights. this same ribadu told us that these men were clean o i wouldn't know who is the liar here.
yar adua have cancelled many contracts that he caled illegal by the last administration yet nobody is standing trials for all these. oil wells, nnpc, nigerian ports authority etc were all sold illegally without anyone linking them to orji uzo kalu, ibori or alams. why are we decieving ourselves. obj said he spent $16billion on power, who is the contractor? N300 billion on ibadan -benin expressway- who is in-charge? the death of our artoney general- who killed him?
achike udenwa as the former gov of imo state was the first gov to endorse third term and today he is a minister. odili gave up his presidential ambition to avoid efcc, marwa gave up his presidential ambition and avoided efcc as well as becoming an ambassadore, chris uba overthrew an elected gov in anambra and was made a member board of trustees in pdp as a reward, adedibu made oyo hell for oyo citizen and was praised by obj who told the youth of oyo state to emulate adedibu, obj told us that the april polls was going to be a do or die affair so where was the war on corruption fought.
orji uzo kalu's airline was refused lisence in nigeria but till date it has remained the presidential jet of gambia without any report of air misharp.
there was practically no war on corruption during obj's time rather there was war on oposition.

You have said as much to indict this government as much as the last government.

But you do ask a pertinent question.

Three heavyweights hitherto untouchables have been ''invited'', so why
is there still widespread incontinence over the EFCC in the new dispensation.?

Why does the current administration not convince in its fight against
corruption?

I reiterate, the fight against corruption under Ribadu was in itself probably corrupt
but I am sure you will agree there are few equals in our history and our long running
battle against corruption.

On the other hand, this government might make us forget him if his replacement is a
bit more forthright and stringent. Where once musicians ''lyricised'', ''Efcc go catch you
one day'', we now have in place, stare decisis (lol, i am getting carried away now), the Igbinedion
judgement.

I know this is not the appropriate thread to address the charges against Obj, but I apologise for the ensuing digression.
You mention the power probe and a certain 16 billion dollars spent. You sure are better informed than
I am. From all sources, it would seem no one is sure about the amount spent. It says a lot about the
accounting under Obj as much as it does the constitution of those who 'hunt' him. I have no doubt in my
mind favouritism and nepotism were rife under Obj, but if that is the lot he is guilty of, then I can breathe
a sigh of relief. Considering the naked pilfering we experienced under Abacha.

I am no Ribadu or Obasanjo fan. I do not care either way for the former, and I find the latter an egomaniac
and a bit too full of himself. But under their direction, there was an inkling, a faint flicker that has so shockingly
been extinguished, most egregiously with this Ribadu shenanigans.

Doyin, this your English na wa o! I concur.

Texx, you are completely ignoring the reality on the ground.

In nations such as ours, only the strong can prosecute the strong. Ribadu has no such power.

In a country where a corrupt judge can adjourn a case indefinitely until all material witnesses disappear, can you tell me that you are surprised with EFCC's conviction rate? Since when was justice swift in Nigeria?

Unless Ribadu has the backing of top political and military brass, there is no way he could ever go after Babanginda and such. Thats like a civil servant in Venezuela going after Chavez or some dude in Iran going after Ayatollah.

Like everything else in Nigeria, Ribadu can only work within a certain radius. IMO, he even did well to expand those boundaries, going after PDP bigwigs like Odili, Ibori and such.

No doubt EFCC was corrupt in it's dealings under Ribadu. . . but it gave us some hope.

Leave the guy abeg. Lets be realistic here. He is the first guy Nigerians ever believed in when it comes to the issue of corruption. I should think Gani knows best. We do not live in an utopia where the rule of law is followed. I believe that with the proper structures in place, Ribadu would have have the power to go after anyone that transgressed the law. But a wise man must always pick his fights carefully.

Your Troubling Silence-Letter to Festus Keyamo

THURSDAY, 08 JANUARY 2009 10:25 OMOYELE SOWORE
 
Dear Mr. Festus Keyamo:

I am personally sending you this mail regarding the corrupt activities of Mrs. Farida Waziri, the chairperson of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), even as I suspect you must have read some of our reports on Saharareporters.com detailing Mrs. Waziri's engagement in a variety of criminal acts bordering on corruption, abuse of office and outright theft of public funds since assumption of office in 2008.

Saharareporters.com has documented Mrs. Waziri's illegitimate activities since assuming office at the EFCC, and a number of these are attached to this mail.

You have spent some time justifying and defending the punishment meted out to Nuhu Ribadu, the former EFCC chairman. While this is your prerogative, we are disturbed that a vocal critic and anti-corruption activist of your stature has maintained stoic silence about the extensive acts of corruption and collusion with corrupt serving or former public officials perpetrated both by Mrs. Waziri and Nigeria's chief law officer, Attorney General Michael Aondoakaa. As one who admired your activist credentials, I must hope that your retainership with the EFCC has not become a stumbling block to your continued advocacy of justice and fight against corruption in all its appearances, guises and manifestations. It would be sad if your relationship with the EFCC becomes an excuse to shirk your responsibility as a self-avowed public conscience and commentator on matters of corruption, abuse of office and human rights violations.

In bringing these reports to your attention, I hope to challenge you to rise above any primordial interest that might have constituted a hindrance to your ability to speak up on the manifold corrupt activities involving both Mrs. Waziri and Mr. Aondoakaa.

I hope you would recognize that the times call for moral courage, and that the time to speak up and act is now.

Thanks and happy New Year!

Sincerely,

Omoyele Sowore

Below are some of the links to reports detailing Mrs.Waziri's corrupt activities.

1.http://www.saharareporters.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=382:how-farida-waziri-and-top-nigerian-editors-got-abuja-land-allocations&catid=76:hot-topic&Itemid=205

2.http://www.saharareporters.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=436:qmercedes-jeepq-bribe-efcc-chair-plans-arrest-of-supplier-as-efccs-international-image-plummets&catid=76:hot-topic&Itemid=205

3.http://www.saharareports.com/www/news/detail/?id=774

Source: http://saharareporters.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=441:your-troubling-silence-letter-to-festus-keyamo&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=18