|
Is Kwankwaso Above EFCC? By Abubakar Abbas
The question is neither academic nor philosophical. It is simply one of those questions that even a lay man can easily grasp the meaning and come up with an instant answer. The question is doing nothing other than asking the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the main, but solid reason behind the Commission's soft handling, or to many extents, shunning away from treating the case of a financial mismanagement engaged by the former governor of Kano state, Alhaji Rabi'u Musa Kwankwaso, sent to it by the incumbent government of the state, under Mallam Ibrahim Shekarau.
Many people see this shunning away by the EFCC as a clear case of breaking away from the very rule that establishes the Commission. That is EFCC Establishment Act of 2004. Some of the relevant places that this Commission is either overtly or covertly running away from are, Part II, Section 6, Sub-Section (b) of the Commission's Establishment Act of 2004. It says and I quote, "The Commission shall be responsible for-the investigation of all financial crimes including advance fee fraud, money laundering, counterfeiting, illegal charge transfers, futures market fraud, fraudulent encashment of negotiable instruments, computer credit card fraud, contract scam, e. t. c. " So also the same Part and Section, Sub-Section (h), which stipulates that, ". . . . . . the examination and investigation of all reported cases of economic and financial crimes with a view to identifying individuals, corporate bodies or groups involved. " By refusing to respond to the Kano state government's demand of enquiring further from the former governor and present Minister of Defence, Rabi'u Musa Kwankwaso, on issues surrounding embezzling the public purse, as contained in the White Paper issued by Mallam Ibrahim Shekarau's led government, the EFCC is totally against its established rule. And this is detrimental to the anticipated success of the Commission.
Nigerians expect EFCC to always be apolitical in the discharge of its duties. But very unfortunately the reverse is trying hard to be the case. The Commission is busy going from one state to the other apprehending government officials. If you heard so so Commissioner of so so state is apprehended today over an alleged mismanagement of public treasury, you then heard so so Secretary of the State Government of another state is being under the net of the Commission.
The question I am asking is why other alleged corrupt people are left unattended by the Commission? The selective nature of all sorts of punishment is a great setback to the Commission. The analogy here is not hypothetical. Mallam Ribadu should know this. All the necessary documents were sent to the Commission by the Kano state government over charges against the former governor, Rabi'u Musa Kwankwaso, for more than 8 months back. But up to the time I am writing this line nothing is being done about the case. The Commission did not say anything, either to the state government or the listening public. Please Mallam Nuhu Ribadu do not waste your time chasing shadow. The real culprits are all over the place. And the alleged charges against them are with proofs and evidences.
We all know that before the issuance of the White Paper against the former governor, the present governor Mallam Ibrahim Shekarau constituted a Commission of Inquiry that would inquire into certain activities of the Kano state government between 29th May, 1999 to May 28, 2003. The Commission was sworn in by the Chief Judge of Kano state, on the 9th of March, 2004.
I am giving all the historical antecedents in order to let my readers read between the lines. I would want my readers to fully understand that all the normal procedures were followed before the case was sent to the EFCC. So the issue of procedural misplacement does not even arise. All procedures to establish charges against Kwankwaso were followed. So why the unnecessary delay?
The only explanation I can understand, as far as good reasoning is concerned, is EFCC is not interested in people that are so dear to Chief Olusegun Obasanjo. Do not mind people like than former Inspector General of Police, Alhaji Tafa Balogun and the like. They were close to Obasanjo, agreed. But not so dear to him. Not all people that are close to you are so dear to you. Take it or reject it, simple.
All the charges sent to the EFCC against Kwankwaso, by the Kano state government, are, but in their complete picture. Let me take my readers to giraffe some of the charges against Kwankwaso as it are contained in the White Paper. I want to present the charges as they were given to the Commission of Inquiry by the state government as Terms of Reference. I do present as follows:
A) Ecological Fund:
ii-To inquire into the
utilization of such fund in
iii-To inquire and
determine the actual amount of
B) Withdrawal of N62,
689, 700 meant for Scholarship
i-To inquire into the
circumstances that led to the
ii-To determine whether
the withdrawal of the said
C) Disbursement of N97,
524, 000 to Non-Governmental
i-To inquire into the
circumstances that led to the
ii-To determine whether
the withdrawal of the said .
D) Loan/Grant to Kano
State Investment And Properties
i-To inquire and
determine the actual amount of
The legal notice covering the above Terms of Reference was gazetted in the Kano State Gazette No. 1 Volume 36, dated 8th March, 2004. So I wonder what evidence EFCC is still looking for as far as these charges against Kwankwaso are concerned. Has the Commission started making any inquiry over the case? Then what kind of investigation does it involved itself in? There were many cases that were reported to the EFCC long after Kano state government took Kwankwaso's case to the same Commission, and the perpetrators were since being apprehended. Is Kwankwaso different? I advice that EFCC should not dent its image just like that. THE BALL IS NOW IN MALLAM RIBADU'S COURT!
Abubakar
Abbas,
|