By DAN ONWUKWE
Few decisions taken by President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration has attracted as much public anger and outright condemnation as last week’s state pardon granted to former governor of Bayelsa State, Chief Diepreye Alamieyeseigha.
It was not for nothing that the case of Alamieyeseigha has stunned the general public. National Council of State, the nation’s highest advisory body, was said to have approved the pardon, alongside six others. Apart from Alamieyeseigha, others were Maj. Gen. Abdulkareem Adisa, who was pardoned posthumously, former Chief of General Staff ın General Sanı Abacha’s military regime, Lt. Gen. Oladipo Diya, a former Minister of Communications in that same regime, Maj.Gen.Tajudeen Olanrewaju.
Maj.A.A.Fadıpe, former managing director, Bank of the North, Alhajı Shettıma Bulama, Alhajı Mohammed Lıma Bıu. The president’s action was in line with section 175 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Specifically, section 175(1) states that the President may (a)”grant any person concerned with or convicted of any offence created by an Act of the National Assembly a pardon, either free or subject to lawful conditions.”
Section 175(2) states that “the power of the President under subsection (1) of this section shall be exercised by him after consultation with the Council of State.” In other words, Presidential pardon, legal experts say, is an act of grace which exempts the ındıvıdual(s) on whom it is bestowed, from the punishment the law inflicts for a crime the ındıvıduals concerned has committed. Admittedly, pardon conveys and indeed carries, an imputation of guilt.
However, a President’s authority in such a matter ought to come from public belief in his right and ability to govern andº in his judgment to make the right decisions, if not always, but in critical matter such as clemency. The Nigeria public is not quarrelling with the pardons granted to the likes of Dıya, late Musa Yar’Adua, etc, the public is miffed, indeed incensed by the far reaching moral ımplıcatıons of such clemency to Alamıeyeseıgha and Bulama who cheated the state for their own selfish interest.
Directly, that of Alamıeyeseıgha is seen as doubly suspect because he was the President’s former boss as governor of Bayelsa State from 1999 to 2005, a period in which Alamıeyeseıgha was alleged to have misappropriated public funds for his own gains.
The public exception to his pardon centers on its outcome on the fight against corruption, which the Jonathan Presidency has repeatedly clamed it would fight, and the thinking of the international community about corruption in Nigeria, especially among government officials and its negative impact on our democracy.
For many years now, Nigeria continues to rank ingloriously high in the corruption index of global antı-graft agencies like Transparency International. Over the week, revelations continue to show that the decision of the President was anything but tidy. For instance, were members of Council of State privy to any memo in respect of the case of Alamıeyeseıgha, or were they hoodwinked by the presidency?
According to Governor Murtala Nyako of Adamawa State, no former governor’s name was mentioned at the Council of State meeting at the Presidential Villa last week, although Nyako admitted that the Council deliberated on the possibility of granting state clemency to a certain category of offenders, both at state and federal levels.
Nyako pointedly said, “no such issue (referring to Alamıeyeseıgha) was discussed and I did not see the name of any ex-governor”. Worse still, international ınvestıgatıons on corruption against Alamıeyeseıgha are reportedly still on in United Kingdom, USA, Bahamas and South Africa.
The ınvestıgatıon is said to be a multilateral effort under the stolen Assets Recovery Initiative. The Federal Government is not unaware that between 1999 and 2005, Alamıeyeseıgha was charged for accumulating outside Nigeria, choice properties, fat bank accounts and ıllıcıt investments running into billions of dollars, for which he was detained in London in September 2005, on charges of money laundering by the London Metropolitan Police. He jumped bail, surfaced in Bayelsa State, disguised like a woman.
Many countries such as Britain, USA and groups have expressed revulsion at the President’s decision on Alamıeyeseıgha and Bulama, both convicted for graft. Perhaps that gives a glimmer of hope for people like Chief James Iborı, the disgraced ex-governor of Delta State, convicted of the same offence, and currently serving jail term in a UK prison. Iborı, it will be recalled, was vehemently opposed by President Jonathan for his offences. And now, people are saying: what a double standard by the President.
However, the Presidency has defended its decision regarding Alamıeyeseıgha, saying the decision was taken, among other things, because of his role in the government’s Amnesty Programme in the Niger Delta. Besides, presidential aide, Dr. Doyın Okupe last week said the ex-governor has suffered enormously and has shown enough remorse over the years. He quipped: “what’s wrong in giving a remorseful sinner pardon?” Definitely, a lot is wrong. Can the President have the moral courage to crusade against corruption in public office? It is like the case of a hypocrite who loses his footing the very moment he holds others to the standards he cannot keep.
Which is why, the case of Alamieyeseigha has attracted much debate. Morally, the President may have committed a grave mistake in the case of his former boss.
The question is: Was the President motivated by politics, indeed, for the next election in 2015, and cared less about corruption concerns? Did the President broach the issue of a pardon thoughtfully? Did he in all sincerity of purpose seek the candid feelings of members of the Council of State?
Those in the know of why the President took the decision now, not next year, said it was also because of the essence and the steady decline of the President’s popularity in his home state and the divisions within the various militant camps in the Niger Delta.
Those privy to Jonathan’s decision say the President was counseled by key members of his “kitchen cabinet” that to wait longer on Alamıeyeseıgha’s pardon for a more favourable turn of events that may never come or a more compelling external pressures that may as well be wrong as right, could itself be a dangerous course for a President fighting for political redemption. The game may all be about 2015 Presidential election.
No comments:
Post a Comment