If the story of Acting Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Ibrahim Magu, is told anytime, anywhere and anyhow, it will certainly not flow through the listener’s mind without the connotation of the biblical stone that the builders rejected, which eventually became the head at the chief corner. Perhaps, no other national issue has demonstrated the lowest watermark of Nigeria’s legislative process and subjected the country’s doctrine of the rule of law to ridicule like the confirmation process of the anti-graft boss, so the pundits say.
As the Senate is poised to debate and screen Magu in the days ahead, keen observers say they are waiting to see what will happen to due process. The thinking is that it is the constitutional powers of President Muhammadu Buhari that is being put to test here. It borders on whether the Senate possesses the statutory power to reject the valid appointment of Magu since the action of the president is in accordance with the EFCC (Establishment) Act, 2004.
Just as the Senate was getting down with the business of confirming Magu, the Department of State Services (DSS) wrote to the Red Chamber, claiming that the EFCC boss had failed integrity test. Relying on the said letter dated October 3, 2016, the upper legislative chamber rejected the nomination of Magu by Buhari as the substantive chairman of the EFCC. The Senate cited “security reports” as the basis for Magu’s rejection.
The DSS presented two reports to the Senate. The first one addressed to the acting Clerk of the National Assembly, Mohammed Sani-Omolori, in reference to a letter by the Senate, dated September 21, 2016, demanding for Magu’s security check listed several malpractices allegedly committed by Magu. The DSS said his confirmation would frustrate the anti-graft drive of the Buhari-led administration.
One of allegations levelled against Magu by the secret service is that he paid the sum of N40 million for his rented apartment at the cost of N20 million per annum. It added that the accommodation was not paid for from the commission’s account but by a presidential appointee, who had been under investigation. The DSS alleged that after renting the apartment for Magu, his friend awarded a N43m contract for the furnishing of the accommodation.
“In the light of the forgoing, Magu has failed the integrity test and will eventually constitute a liability to the anti-corruption drive of the present administration”, the report signed by Folashade Bello for the Director General (DG) of the DSS recommended.
Curiously, another report signed by the same Folashade Bello on behalf of the DG DSS but addressed this time around to the Senior Special Assistant to the President (Senate) on National Assembly Matters, Ita Inang, found its way to the Senate. In this report, also in reference to a letter by the Senate, dated September 21, 2016, demanding for Magu’s security check, the DSS stated that although they found some incriminating things against Magu, he should however be cleared on grounds of his excellent performance and be given a chance to pilot the affairs of the commission.
“In the light of the foregoing, Magu’s integrity may be in doubt. Nonetheless, in view of his achievements since assumption of office in acting capacity, it may be expedient to give him benefit of the doubt and be considered”, the DSS stated in the second report.
This is the absurdity the Senate is harping on in dragging its foot over Magu’s confirmation. What is more shocking is that the DSS went ahead to make recommendations, something strange in the security parlance – that a security agency would make recommendations after screening a candidate. Experts say they too are as despondent as Nigerians in trying to comprehend the underlying motive behind this double standard adopted by the country’s secret police: a situation where it issues one report suggesting that clearing the anti-corruption boss would augur ill for Buhari’s anti-graft war and then releasing another describing Magu as having performed excellently so far and should therefore be favourably considered for the post of substantive chairman of the EFCC.
But in a bid to draw the distinction between logic and practical reasoning, analysts have adduced divergent views on this development. While some say it cast a spell in the eyes of even the ordinary man for the DSS to toy with such matter of grave consequence to national security, others believe that there is a well written script designed to frustrate President Buhari’s anti-corruption war.
There is a congruence of opinion among the pundits that whether they like it or not it is the presidency that is on trial and not Magu. To this effect, they argue that what Nigerians expect from President Buhari is a complete reorganisation of the DSS before they subject the nation to further embarrassment. Their advice to the presidency is that no-matter the style employed to remove the country from the fangs of corruption- whether they like, let them call it dictatorship- provided results are achieved at the end, it doesn’t matter.
Keen observers of the confirmation saga aver that, while it is worrisome and absurd to hear this kind of conflicting issues coming from the DSS and the upper chamber of the legislative arm of government, it didn’t come as surprise to them. The idea is that before now Nigerians knew the set of lawmakers they have, who are just there to protect their interest and their businesses, instead of the interest of those they represent.
“It is now very glaring that majority of them (Senators) had soiled their hands and are not ready to follow due process; hence, their failure to give Magu a fair and just hearing. I implore the President to do the needful by releasing Nigerians from the hands of these so called Senators playing on our intelligence. The Senate should realise that ratification of Magu’s appointment is not a thing to be politicised, considering the external support Nigeria is presently enjoying to wage war against corrupt elements domiciled in the corridor of power”, Mark Ogbudu, a public commentator told LEADERSHIP Friday.
Like Ogbudu, some other analysts say they are appalled that President Buhari has referred the matter to the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice for investigation. They wonder what manner of investigations the president is talking about “when it has already been established beyond doubt that the DSS did a very shoddy investigation.
“I do not want to be uncharitable by saying that the DSS lied against Magu deliberately. The buck stops on Mr. President’s table and unless he asserts his full authority, this will be a resounding victory for corruption and almost certainly signal an end to this administration’s avowed anti corruption stand”, a political analyst who does not want his name in print stated.
There are others who have applauded President Buhari’s political will to remain adamant on the matter. They posit that it was for this reason they supported him because they knew he is tough and cannot be consumed by political manoeuvres of the legislators and the so called cabals within the executive arm of government, considering his military background.
But recalling former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s administration, this set of close watchers argue that Buhari still has to do more to check the excesses of certain individuals or group within the corridor of power. The thinking is that during Obasanjo’s regime, the moment he gives you an appointment, he is there to protect you, no matter who you must have stepped on in the course of discharging your duties.
Has Magu’s performance proven that he he is actually the man for the job? This question has been settled by the second report released by the DSS in which it prayed the Senate to proceed with Magu’s confirmation on grounds of his excellent achievements. Besides a sister security agency, the Nigeria Police Force had recently commended the acting chairman of the EFCC for his courage and commitment to the fight against corruption in Nigeria.
The commendation on December 5, 2016 came from the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Ibrahim Idris when he received the EFCC boss who led senior officials of the commission on a visit to the force headquarters. The IGP said, “We are proud of you; I have gone through the track records of the EFCC. I am proud of the EFCC under your leadership. I am happy with what you are doing.
“I appreciate your courage. Be rest assured that as you fight corruption, corruption will fight back; but always know that we are with you and we shall be there for you at all times to ensure that you succeed”.
Now that the matter has taken a legal dimension, what is left is to see how the court will decide. Two groups, the Incorporated Trustees of Save Nigeria Group and the Incorporated Trustees of Kingdom of Human Rights Foundation International, have filed a different suit before a Federal High Court in Abuja, asking the court to compel President Buhari to nominate some one else for Senate’s confirmation as the substantive chairman of the EFCC on the grounds of Senate’s rejection of Magu.
They want the court in suit No FHC/ABJ/ CS/ 1072/ 16 to prohibit and restrict the president from further re-nominating Magu as the EFCC chairman, following Senate’s rejection of his nomination.
But simultaneously, a constitutional lawyer, Mr Oluwatosin Ojaomo, had filed his own suit before the same court, praying Justice Tsoho to make a declaratory order, deeming that the Senate has confirmed President Muhammadu Buhari’s appointment of Magu as the chairman of the EFCC on grounds of the provisions of the EFCC (Establishment) Act, 2004.
In his originating summons in suit No FHC/ABJ/CS/59/17, the plaintiff is also asking Justice Tsoho to hold that the Senate does not possess the statutory power to reject the valid appointment of Magu since the action of the president is in consonance with the EFCC (Establishment) Act , 2004.
In his 19-paragraph affidavit in support of his application, the lawyer is further asking the court to hold that Magu has been validly nominated. He contended that the Senate can only demand additional information on him in accordance with the statutory requirements as stipulated by the EFCC Act.
The plaintiff is also asking the court to hold that the role of the Senate in the appointment of validly nominated EFCC chairman in the person of Magu by Buhari is to ensure that the latter’s action is in conformity with the requirements as stipulated in section 2 (1) (a) (I) (ii) (iii) of the EFCC Act.
According to the plaintiff, once this requirements have been fulfilled by Buhari, the Senate is statute -barred from rejecting a presidential appointee (Magu), insisting that no such provision is made for rejection of a presidential nominee for the office of the EFCC chairman in the said EFCC Act.
As it stands, the ball is in President Buhari’s court to determine whether as Commander-in-Chief, he could be overruled by lawmakers after making a statutory appointment in accordance to constitutional provisions or stand firm and prove to Nigerians that he made no mistake in appointing Magu as the DSS may be trying to paint it to look like. The courts are also there to decide whether the doctrine of due process and rule of law is still potent in the country. Only time will tell.
Now that Buhari has renominated Magu and the matter is before the Senate again, it is hoped that the lawmakers will do the needful and rise above partisan interests. They should know that the game is up and the fight against corruption is a collective one irrespective of political and religious persuasions.