Editorial: Bizarre Court Verdict on Ibori’s $15m Loot Print Email LAST UPDATED ON 29 OCTOBER 2013 The controversial court judgment last Friday, that the $15 million bribe allegedly given by former Delta State Governor, James Ibori, to former Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) Chairman, Nuhu Ribadu, should be forfeited to the federal government because the Delta State government could not prove that Ibori stole the money from its coffers, is bizarre and laughable to say the least; and certainly a sad commentary on the Nigerian judiciary; to which much has been entrusted and from which much is expected. The greatest tragedy is that the verdict, once again, defeated the expectation of Nigerians, and what this suggests is that, it should be appealed and over-turned in the overriding public interest. Delta State, through its Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Charles Ajuyah (SAN), had filed an affidavit claiming that the money, which has been in CBN custody since April 2007, belongs to Delta and its people. However, in his judgment, Justice Gabriel Kolawole of the Federal High Court, Abuja ruled that: “the claimant (Delta State) has not sufficiently proved that the money belongs to them; they failed to establish that they are entitled to the money…In the light of Ibori’s denial that he gave $15 million to anyone, the money becomes an unclaimed property. It has become an illegal proceed and is hereby forfeited to the federal government. The claimant needs to do more to prove that the money belongs to them. The claim must be proved beyond Ibori’s denial that he ever gave any money as bribe to anyone…The Delta State Government has to show that an audit of the state account was carried (out) after Ibori’s tenure from 1999 to 2007 and found that the money was missing from the state’s account. It did not do any investigation by way of audit and come to a conclusion that the money was missing… The claimant should have produced the asset declaration form of Ibori from 1999 to 2007 when he functioned as governor of the state. It is not enough to claim that no one is more connected to the money than Delta State.” There is a lot to take away from the judgment, which has once again; put the judiciary in a needless controversy. For the avoidance of doubt, the bizarre ruling not only stands logic on its head; it is indeed preposterous and a travesty of justice that exposes the judiciary to shame. In the first instance it raises jurisprudential questions of jurisdiction and starre decisis. It is a well-established and immutable fact that Ibori was arrested and prosecuted for corruption in Nigerian courts. It is also a fact that Ibori confessed to corruption charges, including the $15 million bribe in a British court where he entered a guilty plea and was sentenced to a 13-year jail term in April last year. It is also a matter of public record that Ibori has not retracted his guilty plea in the Southwark Crown Court where Nuhu Ribadu, recently testified in Ibori’s ongoing asset confiscation trial; telling the court that Ibori stole at least $500 million, representing 50% of revenue allocation that accrued to Delta state during his two terms in office. In his emotional testimony, Ribadu detailed how Ibori offered him the $15 million bribe in large sacks of cash at the Abuja home of Andy Uba; and told the UK court that he took possession of the cash, and then deposited it at the Central Bank of Nigeria. Against this background, can it be honestly contended that there was not enough corroborative evidence of the facts that the money was stolen from Delta State? Why did Justice Kolawole find it more convenient to aver that “it will amount to fallacy to assume that Chief James Ibori cannot have that kind of money?” Knowing how Nigerian governors run their states as their private estates; do we need an audit of Delta State accounts to establish that Ibori stole the $15 million from the State, even after Ibori has confessed of doing just that in the UK? On what basis did Justice Kolawole establish that Ibori’s confessional statement or Ribadu’s testimony was unreliable and that such statements failed to satisfy the court that the loot belongs to Delta State? Granted that the prosecution failed to produce Ibori’s asset declaration, was Justice Kolawole insinuating that Ibori stole the money from somewhere else? What operated in the mind of Justice Kolawole in dismissing the confession of Ibori whether or not, he made such in Nigeria; as immaterial outside Ibori’s denial that he ever gave the bribe? Ibori’s confession which was corroborated by Ribadu’s testimony are the relevant statements of fact in his plea bargain; and consistent with other facts which have been ascertained. Therefore, any ruling granting the money to any other entity than Delta State is improper. It is worth reminding Justice Kolawole that but for the English court, Ibori was invincible as he got away with every allegation made against him and was freed by the courts in Nigeria. Ironically, the offences of which he was acquitted by Nigerian courts were the same offences that earned him his conviction and imprisonment in the UK. Justice Kolawole’s ruling therefore raises the question of whether Nigerian courts are actually courts of justice as they are called, or mere courts of law. For a court of justice according to the law, sentiments have no place at all. It is a popular view in legal circles that sentiment or a semblance of it is never allowed to filter into justice. And this is why Justice Kolawole came across in this case as no more than a court of law determined to espouse legal technicalities to arrive at a verdict to ingratiate himself to his patrons. His consideration of the law was to hand the $15 million to the federal government whether or not there was any justification. He capitulated pathetically to the strong wind of sentiment. The public indignation occasioned by this bizarre judgment and others like that leaves Nigerians feeling outraged at the way the judiciary has been turned to a haven of sorts for corrupt officials who no longer worry about their arraignment in court. The truth is that ignoring Ibori’s confession to the British court that he actually embezzled public funds reinforces public perception that Justice Kolawole was merely laboring for excuses. In all, what the judgment has done is to authenticate a miscarriage of justice against the people of Delta State, in a manner that calls to question the integrity of the judiciary. Public confidence in the judiciary has been on the decline and it appears to have reached the nadir as judges can no longer be trusted with the dispensation of justice. Nigerians are bewildered by a system that makes itself vulnerable to all sorts of abuse and manipulation potent enough to asphyxiate justice.
Posted on: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 10:42:53 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015