CORRUPTION SUCCESSES AND FAILURES IN NIGERIA
Corruption is a form of dishonest or unethical conduct by a person entrusted with a position of authority, often to acquire personal benefits.
All over the world, the negative effects of corruption cannot be over emphasized. Many nations have strategized means of fighting corruption because of its dangerous impact to the society and the world at large. Corruption is like cancer. It has eaten deep into the fabrics of our great nation. Virtually all areas of our national economy have been affected.
In Nigeria, the anti-graft legislations and enforcement agencies have always existed in one form or the other right from colonial times. But it was Obasanjo’s second coming in 1999 that ushered in the present all-out war against corruption and abuse of office. Upon assumption of office as civilian president, Obasanjo declared it was not going to be “business as usual”. Certain factors were responsible for Obasanjo’s anti-corruption posture. First was rapacious looting that characterized successive military administration culminating in Abacha’s money stashed in foreign banks. The second was the need for the country to redeem its image and extricate itself from the pariah status which corruption had earned it in the committee of nations; the third was the need to secure a measure of debt forgiveness from the Paris Club. The Fourth was the consistent ranking as one of the most corrupt countries in the world by Transparency.

THE SUCCESSES OF THE FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTION
During the regime of Obasano, some laudable steps were taken to make good his threat of “no business as usual”:
(i) Commenced the process of recovery of looted funds from foreign banks;
(ii) Set up ad-hoc panels of inquiry to investigate and report on allegations of
corrupt practices especially failed contracts
(iii) Caused the ICPC and subsequently the EFCC to be established for investigation and prosecution of persons implicated in corrupt practices
and economic crimes;
(iv) Initiated reform of the public sector through privatization and
commercialization of government business ventures; monetization of
benefits of public servants, guaranteeing pensions and retirement
benefits;
(v) Signed international anti- corruption instruments such as the UN
Conventions, the AU convention , the ECOWAS protocol ; and
(vi) Ceased every opportunity to reaffirm zero tolerance for corruption and
the need for ethical and values reorientation.
ICPC, EFCC and the War against Corruption under Obasanjo-
The first anti-corruption agency to be set up by the Obasanjo administration was the ICPC which focused on the public sector. Upon its establishment in 2000, the Commission earnestly began to exercise its powers and discharge its functions.
In the aftermath of 9/11and the global war against terror the EFCC was set up to combat the threats posed by money launderers and other organised trans-border
criminals operating in Nigeria.
FAILURE OF CORRUPTION FIGHT IN NIGERIA
The ICPCC and EFCC could not solve Nigeria’s corruption problem. That Obasanjo recorded only two high profile convictions: Mr. Tafa Balogun (IGP) and Mr. DSP
Alamieyeseigha. Despite their best efforts, the perception of the public was that the agencies were overwhelmed by the problem, thus the ICPC was seen as a toothless bulldog while the EFCC was an Alsatian readily turned loose on political opponents.
Three main reasons have been adduced for this apparent failure bythe agencies to deliver on the mandates and meet the highexpectations of Nigerians. The first has to do with poor funding; thesecond is slow judicial process; and the third is lack of political will resulting in selective deployment of the agencies for political ends especially towards the end of the administration when indictment by the EFCC was deployed to frustrate the political ambition of the formerVice President, Atiku Abubakar, and his associates.
Also,Yar’dua vowed to continue with war against corruption but insisted that it was not going to be a “no holds barred” war as it was degenerating to
under Obasanjo. Yar’dua’s zero tolerance for corruption was going to be within the
context of respect for rule of law and human rights. However, it was observed that
the change of approach resulted in a “slow- down” of the war. Complaints became
rife that the war was losing momentum by the day. Some reasons have been put
forward as accounting for the deceleration and loss of the grounds
gained under the Obasanjo era:
• Slow down in the prosecution of top public officials-
• Harassment of former anti-corruption crusaders-
• President Yar’dua’s close relations with ex-governors-
• Anti-corruption campaign as non-priority
Slow down in the prosecution of top public officials- There was the perception that the Yar’dua government was vacillating concluding the conclusive prosecution of top government officials already investigated under the Obasanjo administration, especially the ex-Governors and other Politically Exposed Persons (PEPs). Harassment of former anti-corruption crusaders- Another criticism is that Yar’dua deliberately set out to harass and hound Obasanjo’smain anti-corruption crusaders into exile. The cases of Malam el-Rufai and Mr. Nuhu Ribadu were cited in support of this assertion. But it
must be noted that Malam el-Rufai left office as Minister of the FCT at the end of Obasanjo’s administration and was later indicted by the Senate for acts bordering on abuse of office for personal gain. The Senate conducted a public hearing in pursuant to its oversight powers in the Constitution, the EFCC picked up from there and sought to
charge the el-Rufai to court but he was unavailable to face the charges then, because he was attending a course of studies abroad. It will,therefore, not be a fair to say that he was being harassed because of he was an anti-corruption crusader. In the case of Mr. Ribadu.
furthermore, In the run up to the 2007 General Elections, it iwas generally believed that some of his fellow governors then facilitated his emergence as the PDP candidate and subsequent election as President, thus it was only natural that they should remain his political allies. It did not help matters that some of this people happen to be Governors already investigated by the EFCC waiting to be charged to court. There was justifiable disquiet in many circles when the namesof some of this people, especially Mr. James Ibori, did not appear on the EFCC’s list of “Ongoing High Profile Cases”. The attitude of the EFCC to the Yar’dua’s allies heightened the perception that rather than fight an all out war against corruption, the Commission was pandering to the dictates of the government in power.

Hmmm

There should be a Constitutional Provision for ONLY SIX COMMISSIONERS TO INITIATE, PROSECUTE AND EXECUTE CASES FOR ICPC AND EFCC.
AND THE SIX COMMISSIONERS ARE:-
Mr. President,
The VP,
Senate President,
The Speaker of The HOR,
The CJN and
The CJ of Appeals.
So help us God of Corruption, Tribalism and Political Discrimination