Senate Passes Proceeds Of Crime Bill For Second Reading

The Senate on Tuesday passed the Proceeds of Crime Bill for
second reading.

The Bill titled: “A Bill for an Act to provide for a
comprehensive legal and institutional framework for the recovery
and management of proceeds of crime or benefits derived from
unlawful activities, harmonize and consolidate the legal provisions
on the recovery of proceeds of crime and related matters, 2021” was
sponsored by Senate Leader, Yahaya Abdullahi (Kebbi North).

Abudullahi in his lead debate noted that the country has been
striving to put in place an appropriate Proceeds of Crime
legislation since 2007.

He said that efforts to develop a comprehensive bill have been
impeded by agency rivalry since 2011.

Abdullahi said: “Effort to sign the Proceeds of Crime Bill into
law in 2019 was delayed as a result of complaints by agencies that
claimed that the Bill is intended to take away their powers.

“There are many compelling reasons to put in place a
comprehensive legislation on recovered assets.

“During the evaluation of Nigeria in 2007 by the International
Financial Action Task Force (FATF), they observed in their report
that the legal framework for the recovery and management of stolen
assets in Nigeria is inadequate and do not comply with
international standards.

“At the same time, due to lack of centrally managed database on
recovered assets, it is difficult to track and maintain the actual
number of the seized assets, their location and their value.

“There have been reported and verifiable instances over the
years that showed that some recovered assets were being misused,
stolen or lost.

“Further investigations have shown that some of the agencies
opened multiple accounts for the payment of forfeited assets
without keeping proper records.

“It was against this background that Mr. President constituted
the Presidential Audit Committee on Recovery of Assets (PACRA) in
2017.

“Not surprisingly, the committee’s findings re-iterated the need
for comprehensive and more innovative approach in the management of
recovered assets in a transparent and accountable manner so that
these assets would become a source of revenue for the country as is
the case in many developing and developed countries of the
world.

“Following the submission of the report of PACRA in 2018, the
President directed that the following measures amongst other be put
in place pending the passing of the Proceeds of Crime Bill into
law.”

The measures according to him, include: “The establishment of an
Asset Recovery and Management Unit in the Federal Ministry of
Justice (ARMU/ FMOJ);

“The opening of a central asset recovery (final forfeiture)
account and a central (interim forfeiture) account in the Central
Bank of Nigeria. This is to enable the FGN track all recovered
assets and the benefits derived from them;

“Use of recovered assets/funds as a source of revenue in the
Appropriation Act of 2018 and in subsequent Appropriation
Acts.”

He added that the reason the country always have to sign these
agreements is to convince other countries that the government is
focused on the development of the country with the recovered assets
and that it will be accounted for in a transparent manner.

He said: “Proceed of Crime legislation is seen as one of the
vital conditions to secure Nigeria’s full membership of the
Financial Action Task Force (FATF).

“Nigeria’s application has remained elusive as the agencies
argue to retain their powers at the expense of national
interest.

“The Bill has however, taken into account the issues raised by
the LEAs in relation to their continuing engagement in civil
recovery without compromising the international applicable
standards in United Nations Conventions.

“It is a generally accepted that crimes, particularly those in
the category of economic and financial crimes are usually committed
for profit purposes.

“Asset deprivation attacks criminality through this profit
motive. In the same way that starving a thriving small business of
capital hampers its growth, removing assets from criminal
enterprises, including terrorist organizations, kidnapping
organizations and bandits who must necessarily undertake their
operations with funding from individuals within or outside the
country will certainly hinder and deter their illicit
operations.

“A strong asset recovery measure can also disrupt the activities
of these criminal organizations and reduce the level of insecurity
in the country.”

The Kebbi North lawmaker added that removing unlawful assets
also: “Engenders confidence in a fair and effective criminal
justice system and shows that nobody is above the law;

“Removes the influence of negative role models from communities;
deters people from crime by reducing the anticipated returns;

“Provides a powerful disincentive to commit crime in the first
instance; prevents reinvestment in criminal activity; and disrupts
organised criminal activity.”

Besides, he urged his colleagues to note that “virtually all of
the processes and procedures for recovery of proceeds and
instrumentalities of crime are, in accordance with international
practices, properly brought under judicial oversight and will no
longer be left to the whims and caprices of any agency.

“Also noteworthy are the specific statutory timelines
established under the proposed enactment to ensure that the
constitutional rights of the citizens are guaranteed in the
implementation of the recovery processes and procedures.

“Importantly, the exigency of Nigeria having in place this all
important piece of legislation cannot be over-emphasised as Nigeria
to date is still deficient in meeting this outstanding obligation
under Recommendation 4 on Confiscation and Provisional Measures of
the FATF Recommendations adopted by the FATF Plenary in February,
2012 and updated in June 2019.

“This FATF Recommendation requires countries to establish
mechanisms that will enable their competent authorities to
effectively manage and where necessary, dispose of property that is
frozen, or seized or has been confiscated and requiring that the
mechanisms to be established should be applicable both in the
context of domestic proceedings and requests to and by foreign
countries.”

Senators in their contributions supported the Bill and approved
that it be read a second time when it was put to voice vote by
Senate President Ahmad Lawan, at plenary.

Lawan thereafter referred the Bill to the Senate Committee on
Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal Matters for further legislative
work and to report back in two weeks.

The Senate on Tuesday passed the Proceeds of Crime Bill for
second reading.

The Bill titled: “A Bill for an Act to provide for a
comprehensive legal and institutional framework for the recovery
and management of proceeds of crime or benefits derived from
unlawful activities, harmonize and consolidate the legal provisions
on the recovery of proceeds of crime and related matters, 2021” was
sponsored by Senate Leader, Yahaya Abdullahi (Kebbi North).

Abudullahi in his lead debate noted that the country has been
striving to put in place an appropriate Proceeds of Crime
legislation since 2007.

He said that efforts to develop a comprehensive bill have been
impeded by agency rivalry since 2011.

Abdullahi said: “Effort to sign the Proceeds of Crime Bill into
law in 2019 was delayed as a result of complaints by agencies that
claimed that the Bill is intended to take away their powers.

“There are many compelling reasons to put in place a
comprehensive legislation on recovered assets.

“During the evaluation of Nigeria in 2007 by the International
Financial Action Task Force (FATF), they observed in their report
that the legal framework for the recovery and management of stolen
assets in Nigeria is inadequate and do not comply with
international standards.

“At the same time, due to lack of centrally managed database on
recovered assets, it is difficult to track and maintain the actual
number of the seized assets, their location and their value.

“There have been reported and verifiable instances over the
years that showed that some recovered assets were being misused,
stolen or lost.

“Further investigations have shown that some of the agencies
opened multiple accounts for the payment of forfeited assets
without keeping proper records.

“It was against this background that Mr. President constituted
the Presidential Audit Committee on Recovery of Assets (PACRA) in
2017.

“Not surprisingly, the committee’s findings re-iterated the need
for comprehensive and more innovative approach in the management of
recovered assets in a transparent and accountable manner so that
these assets would become a source of revenue for the country as is
the case in many developing and developed countries of the
world.

“Following the submission of the report of PACRA in 2018, the
President directed that the following measures amongst other be put
in place pending the passing of the Proceeds of Crime Bill into
law.”

The measures according to him, include: “The establishment of an
Asset Recovery and Management Unit in the Federal Ministry of
Justice (ARMU/ FMOJ);

“The opening of a central asset recovery (final forfeiture)
account and a central (interim forfeiture) account in the Central
Bank of Nigeria. This is to enable the FGN track all recovered
assets and the benefits derived from them;

“Use of recovered assets/funds as a source of revenue in the
Appropriation Act of 2018 and in subsequent Appropriation
Acts.”

He added that the reason the country always have to sign these
agreements is to convince other countries that the government is
focused on the development of the country with the recovered assets
and that it will be accounted for in a transparent manner.

He said: “Proceed of Crime legislation is seen as one of the
vital conditions to secure Nigeria’s full membership of the
Financial Action Task Force (FATF).

“Nigeria’s application has remained elusive as the agencies
argue to retain their powers at the expense of national
interest.

“The Bill has however, taken into account the issues raised by
the LEAs in relation to their continuing engagement in civil
recovery without compromising the international applicable
standards in United Nations Conventions.

“It is a generally accepted that crimes, particularly those in
the category of economic and financial crimes are usually committed
for profit purposes.

“Asset deprivation attacks criminality through this profit
motive. In the same way that starving a thriving small business of
capital hampers its growth, removing assets from criminal
enterprises, including terrorist organizations, kidnapping
organizations and bandits who must necessarily undertake their
operations with funding from individuals within or outside the
country will certainly hinder and deter their illicit
operations.

“A strong asset recovery measure can also disrupt the activities
of these criminal organizations and reduce the level of insecurity
in the country.”

The Kebbi North lawmaker added that removing unlawful assets
also: “Engenders confidence in a fair and effective criminal
justice system and shows that nobody is above the law;

“Removes the influence of negative role models from communities;
deters people from crime by reducing the anticipated returns;

“Provides a powerful disincentive to commit crime in the first
instance; prevents reinvestment in criminal activity; and disrupts
organised criminal activity.”

Besides, he urged his colleagues to note that “virtually all of
the processes and procedures for recovery of proceeds and
instrumentalities of crime are, in accordance with international
practices, properly brought under judicial oversight and will no
longer be left to the whims and caprices of any agency.

“Also noteworthy are the specific statutory timelines
established under the proposed enactment to ensure that the
constitutional rights of the citizens are guaranteed in the
implementation of the recovery processes and procedures.

“Importantly, the exigency of Nigeria having in place this all
important piece of legislation cannot be over-emphasised as Nigeria
to date is still deficient in meeting this outstanding obligation
under Recommendation 4 on Confiscation and Provisional Measures of
the FATF Recommendations adopted by the FATF Plenary in February,
2012 and updated in June 2019.

“This FATF Recommendation requires countries to establish
mechanisms that will enable their competent authorities to
effectively manage and where necessary, dispose of property that is
frozen, or seized or has been confiscated and requiring that the
mechanisms to be established should be applicable both in the
context of domestic proceedings and requests to and by foreign
countries.”

Senators in their contributions supported the Bill and approved
that it be read a second time when it was put to voice vote by
Senate President Ahmad Lawan, at plenary.

Lawan thereafter referred the Bill to the Senate Committee on
Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal Matters for further legislative
work and to report back in two weeks.