A Federal High Court sitting in Lagos today ordered the Federal
Government to “immediately release to Nigerians information about
the names of high-ranking public officials from whom public funds
were recovered and the circumstances under which funds were
recovered, as well as the exact amount of funds recovered from each
public official.”
The judgment was delivered today by Hon Justice Hadiza Rabiu
Shagari following a Freedom of Information suit number:
FHC/CS/964/2016 brought by Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability
Project (SERAP).
The suit followed disclosure last year by the Federal Government
of funds recovered from some high-ranking public officials and
private individuals.
In her judgment, Justice Shagari agreed with SERAP that “the
Federal Government has legally binding obligations to tell
Nigerians the names of all suspected looters of the public treasury
past and present.” Joined as Defendants in the suit are the
Minister of Information Alhaji Lai Muhammed and the Federal
Ministry of Information and Culture.
Justice Shagari also granted the following reliefs:
A DECLARATION that by virtue of the provisions of Section 4 (a)
of the Freedom of Information Act 2011, the Defendants are under a
binding legal obligation to provide the Plaintiff with up to date
information relating to the following:
To widely disseminate including on a dedicated website
information about the names of high-ranking public officials from
whom public funds were recovered since May 2015
The circumstances under which stolen public funds were
returned
SERAP is now processing a certified true copy of the
judgment.
Timothy Adewale, SERAP deputy director who argued the case on
behalf of SERAP and was in court this morning when the judgment was
delivered said “This is a victory for justice, rule of law,
transparency and accountability in this country. The judgment shows
the way forward in the fight against corruption and impunity of
perpetrators. We will do everything within the law to ensure full
compliance by President Mohammadu Buhari and Acting President
Osinbajo with this landmark judgment.
It would be recalled that the Ministry of Information last year
published details of the recoveries, which showed that the Nigerian
government successfully retrieved total cash amount
N78,325,354,631.82, $185,119,584.61, £3,508,355.46 and €11, 250
between May 29, 2015, and May 25, 2016. Also released were
recoveries under interim forfeiture, which were a combination of
cash and assets, during the same period: N126,563,481,095.43,
$9,090,243,920.15, £2,484,447.55 and €303,399.17. Anticipated
repatriation from foreign countries totalled: $321,316,726.1,
£6,900,000 and €11,826.11. The ministry also announced that 239
non-cash recoveries were made during the one-year period. The
non-cash recoveries are – farmlands, plots of land, uncompleted
buildings, completed buildings, vehicles and maritime vessels.
Subsequently, SERAP issued an FOI request and gave the Minister
of Information, Alhaji Lai Muhammed 14 days to disclose the names
of all suspected looters.
The request reads in part: “While we believe that suspects
generally are entitled to be presumed innocent until proven guilty
by a court of competent jurisdiction, SERAP opposes blanket
non-disclosure of names of high-ranking public officials from whom
some of the funds were recovered.”
“SERAP insists that the public interest to know is greater than
any other legitimate interest that the government might wish to
protect. The Nigerian government has an obligation to balance
whether the risk of harm to the legitimate aim (that is secrecy of
ongoing corruption investigation and presumption of innocence) from
disclosure of the names of public officials is greater than the
public interest in accessing the information.”
“According to public interest test, even if the government
demonstrates that the publication of the names of public officials
would substantially harm a legitimate interest, it is nevertheless
obliged to disclose the requested information if, as it is the case
here, the public interest in disclosure is sufficient enough to
overweigh the harm.”
“SERAP believes that the recoveries, specifically from
high-ranking public officials (and not private individuals), are
matters of public interest. Publishing the names of those public
officials will provide insights relevant to the public debate on
the ongoing efforts to prevent and combat a culture of grand
corruption and the longstanding impunity of perpetrators in the
country.”
“The gravity of the crime of grand corruption, the devastating
effects on the socially and economically vulnerable sectors of the
population, and the fact that recovery of huge funds from
high-ranking public officials entrusted with the public treasury
raise a prima-facie case and therefore amount to exceptional
circumstances that justify naming those high-ranking officials in
the public interest.”
“SERAP also argues that Nigerians are entitled to the right to
truth derived from the obligations of the government to carry out
an investigation of violations of human rights and crime of
corruption committed within its jurisdiction; to identify,
prosecute and punish those responsible; and to ensure that victims
have the simple and prompt recourse for protection against
violation of fundamental rights, as well as to ensure transparency
in public administration.”
“SERAP believes that the right to truth allows Nigerians to gain
access to information essential to the fight against corruption and
in turn development of democratic institutions as well as provides
a form of reparation to victims of grand corruption in the
country.”
“Publishing the names of public officials involved could go a
long way in preventing senior public officials from turning the
public treasury into a private cash box. SERAP argues that the
public interest in publishing the names of the high-ranking
government officials from whom funds were received outweighs any
considerations to withhold the information, as there would be no
prejudice against those whose names are published as long as the
information is appropriately framed and truthful.”
“There is a general public interest in promoting transparency,
accountability, public understanding and involvement in the
democratic process. While the government in some limited cases can
legitimately place restrictions on the public’s right to access
certain information, attempts of the Nigerian authorities to
justify the total closure of information related to the names of
public officials from whom funds were recovered on the basis of
“ongoing criminal investigation” and “presumption of innocence goes
far beyond the limitations allowed under international law, and
would promote secret recoveries.”
“The information being requested is not related to detailed
investigatory activities of anticorruption agencies regarding the
recoveries so far made. Similarly, the mere fact that the
information being requested is related to ongoing investigation
does not necessarily mean that the information could not be
disclosed. In addition, governmental agency has the obligation to
prove that the disclosure of the names of public officials would
disrupt, impede, or otherwise harm the ongoing or pending
investigations or presumption of innocence.”
A Federal High Court sitting in Lagos today ordered the Federal
Government to “immediately release to Nigerians information about
the names of high-ranking public officials from whom public funds
were recovered and the circumstances under which funds were
recovered, as well as the exact amount of funds recovered from each
public official.”
The judgment was delivered today by Hon Justice Hadiza Rabiu
Shagari following a Freedom of Information suit number:
FHC/CS/964/2016 brought by Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability
Project (SERAP).
The suit followed disclosure last year by the Federal Government
of funds recovered from some high-ranking public officials and
private individuals.
In her judgment, Justice Shagari agreed with SERAP that “the
Federal Government has legally binding obligations to tell
Nigerians the names of all suspected looters of the public treasury
past and present.” Joined as Defendants in the suit are the
Minister of Information Alhaji Lai Muhammed and the Federal
Ministry of Information and Culture.
Justice Shagari also granted the following reliefs:
A DECLARATION that by virtue of the provisions of Section 4 (a)
of the Freedom of Information Act 2011, the Defendants are under a
binding legal obligation to provide the Plaintiff with up to date
information relating to the following:
To widely disseminate including on a dedicated website
information about the names of high-ranking public officials from
whom public funds were recovered since May 2015
The circumstances under which stolen public funds were
returned
SERAP is now processing a certified true copy of the
judgment.
Timothy Adewale, SERAP deputy director who argued the case on
behalf of SERAP and was in court this morning when the judgment was
delivered said “This is a victory for justice, rule of law,
transparency and accountability in this country. The judgment shows
the way forward in the fight against corruption and impunity of
perpetrators. We will do everything within the law to ensure full
compliance by President Mohammadu Buhari and Acting President
Osinbajo with this landmark judgment.
It would be recalled that the Ministry of Information last year
published details of the recoveries, which showed that the Nigerian
government successfully retrieved total cash amount
N78,325,354,631.82, $185,119,584.61, £3,508,355.46 and €11, 250
between May 29, 2015, and May 25, 2016. Also released were
recoveries under interim forfeiture, which were a combination of
cash and assets, during the same period: N126,563,481,095.43,
$9,090,243,920.15, £2,484,447.55 and €303,399.17. Anticipated
repatriation from foreign countries totalled: $321,316,726.1,
£6,900,000 and €11,826.11. The ministry also announced that 239
non-cash recoveries were made during the one-year period. The
non-cash recoveries are – farmlands, plots of land, uncompleted
buildings, completed buildings, vehicles and maritime vessels.
Subsequently, SERAP issued an FOI request and gave the Minister
of Information, Alhaji Lai Muhammed 14 days to disclose the names
of all suspected looters.
The request reads in part: “While we believe that suspects
generally are entitled to be presumed innocent until proven guilty
by a court of competent jurisdiction, SERAP opposes blanket
non-disclosure of names of high-ranking public officials from whom
some of the funds were recovered.”
“SERAP insists that the public interest to know is greater than
any other legitimate interest that the government might wish to
protect. The Nigerian government has an obligation to balance
whether the risk of harm to the legitimate aim (that is secrecy of
ongoing corruption investigation and presumption of innocence) from
disclosure of the names of public officials is greater than the
public interest in accessing the information.”
“According to public interest test, even if the government
demonstrates that the publication of the names of public officials
would substantially harm a legitimate interest, it is nevertheless
obliged to disclose the requested information if, as it is the case
here, the public interest in disclosure is sufficient enough to
overweigh the harm.”
“SERAP believes that the recoveries, specifically from
high-ranking public officials (and not private individuals), are
matters of public interest. Publishing the names of those public
officials will provide insights relevant to the public debate on
the ongoing efforts to prevent and combat a culture of grand
corruption and the longstanding impunity of perpetrators in the
country.”
“The gravity of the crime of grand corruption, the devastating
effects on the socially and economically vulnerable sectors of the
population, and the fact that recovery of huge funds from
high-ranking public officials entrusted with the public treasury
raise a prima-facie case and therefore amount to exceptional
circumstances that justify naming those high-ranking officials in
the public interest.”
“SERAP also argues that Nigerians are entitled to the right to
truth derived from the obligations of the government to carry out
an investigation of violations of human rights and crime of
corruption committed within its jurisdiction; to identify,
prosecute and punish those responsible; and to ensure that victims
have the simple and prompt recourse for protection against
violation of fundamental rights, as well as to ensure transparency
in public administration.”
“SERAP believes that the right to truth allows Nigerians to gain
access to information essential to the fight against corruption and
in turn development of democratic institutions as well as provides
a form of reparation to victims of grand corruption in the
country.”
“Publishing the names of public officials involved could go a
long way in preventing senior public officials from turning the
public treasury into a private cash box. SERAP argues that the
public interest in publishing the names of the high-ranking
government officials from whom funds were received outweighs any
considerations to withhold the information, as there would be no
prejudice against those whose names are published as long as the
information is appropriately framed and truthful.”
“There is a general public interest in promoting transparency,
accountability, public understanding and involvement in the
democratic process. While the government in some limited cases can
legitimately place restrictions on the public’s right to access
certain information, attempts of the Nigerian authorities to
justify the total closure of information related to the names of
public officials from whom funds were recovered on the basis of
“ongoing criminal investigation” and “presumption of innocence goes
far beyond the limitations allowed under international law, and
would promote secret recoveries.”
“The information being requested is not related to detailed
investigatory activities of anticorruption agencies regarding the
recoveries so far made. Similarly, the mere fact that the
information being requested is related to ongoing investigation
does not necessarily mean that the information could not be
disclosed. In addition, governmental agency has the obligation to
prove that the disclosure of the names of public officials would
disrupt, impede, or otherwise harm the ongoing or pending
investigations or presumption of innocence.”
Read more https://nairalaw.com/court-orders-buhari-osinbajo-to-tell-nigerians-names-of-all-suspected-looters/