As Mr Abdulmumin Jibrin threatens to expose more alleged systemic
corruption in the investigative hearings and oversight functions of the
House of Representatives, Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project
(SERAP) “has called him a whistleblower because of his public interest
disclosures on alleged budget padding and fraud in the House of
Representatives in the context of his work in the House as a member.”
Mr Jibrin yesterday threatened to reveal more alleged “systemic corruption
among the leadership of the House of Representatives including in the
House’s investigative hearings and oversight functions; as well as to
disclose the internal budget of the House.”
The statement released today and signed by SERAP executive director
Adetokunbo Mumuni the organization said that, “We encourage Mr Jibrin to
tell Nigerians more about his allegations of systemic corruption in the
House of Representatives. Mr Jibrin will be doing a positive act of ‘good
citizenship’ by revealing how exactly is the House profiting from its
investigative hearings and oversight functions; and disclosing the House’s
internal budget.”
“Allegations of budget padding and fraud in the legislative functions
threaten and harm the public interest, and may amount to crimes against
humanity especially given the alleged systemic and widespread nature of
the crimes in the House,” SERAP said.
According to SERAP, “We are seriously concerned that Mr Jibrin is not
being appropriately treated or protected by the authorities to remedy the
exposed threats or harm to him. No whistleblower should ever be penalised
simply for making a public interest disclosure. SERAP strongly believes
that every individual should feel safe to freely raise public interest
concerns, just as Mr Jibrin has done in disclosing information on alleged
budget padding and fraud in the House of Representatives.”
The statement reads in part: “Unless the government of President Muhammadu
Buhari grants Mr Jibin the appropriate protection deserving of a
whistleblower, encourage him to disclose corruption in the House’s
investigative and oversight functions, and promptly act on those
allegations, a significant opportunity to protect the public interest
would be missed. Buhari should send a strong message that retaliation or
victimisation of whistleblowers will not be tolerated under his watch.”
“As a matter of law, this government has an obligation to promptly
investigate public interest disclosures by a whistleblower such as Mr
Jibrin, and where necessary bring those suspected to be responsible to
justice.”
“The primary focus shouldn’t be that Mr Jibrin broke ranks with an
allegedly corrupt system in the House of Representatives within which he
has operated for many years, but rather the public interest disclosures he
has repeatedly made and promises to make.”
“Encouraging whistleblowers to speak up improves public services and
strengthens public accountability. Therefore, it is in the interests of
all Nigerians that allegations of corruption in the investigative hearings
and oversight functions of the House of Representatives should be promptly
revealed, investigated by an independent body and suspected perpetrators
brought to justice.”
“By suspending Mr Jibrin, SERAP believes that the House of Representatives
has acted improperly or attempted to cover up the alleged budget padding
and fraud rather than promptly addressing it by referring the allegation
to appropriate anticorruption agencies and institutions such as the EFCC
and the ICPC.”
“SERAP believes that the information being disclosed by Mr Jibrin amount
to public interest disclosures and in fact can contribute to strengthening
transparency and democratic accountability in the House of Representatives
in particular and the country as a whole.”
“SERAP calls on the government of President Muhammadu Buhari to urgent
propose a robust legislation on protection of whistleblowers in the
country pursuant to Nigeria’s international human rights and
anticorruption obligations and commitments, including the UN Convention
against Corruption to which Nigeria is a state party.”
“Suspension of Mr Jibrin by the House of Representatives amounts to
retaliation. Mr Jibrin’s status as a whistleblower is not diminished even
if the perceived threat to the public interest has not materialised, since
he would seem to have reasonable grounds to believe in accuracy of the
disclosures on alleged budget padding and fraud in the House of
Representatives.”
“SERAP notes that freedom of expression is a constitutional and
internationally recognized human right in Nigeria, and the country has
enacted the Freedom of Information Act which grants Nigerians the right to
seek and receive information such as the information about the massive
corruption in the House of Representatives being disclosed by Mr
Abdulmumin Jibrin.”
“SERAP believes that whistleblowing is very important in deterring and
preventing corruption, and in strengthening democratic accountability and
transparency in the country in general. Whistleblowing is indeed a
fundamental aspect of freedom of expression and freedom of conscience and
is important in tackling gross mismanagement of our commonwealth.
Whistleblowing can act as an early warning to prevent damage as well as
detect wrongdoing that may otherwise remain hidden.”
“Whistleblowing can also help ensure the effective compliance with
Nigeria’s international anticorruption obligations by allowing those
legally responsible for the alleged misconduct the opportunity to address
the problem and to account for themselves, and by more readily identifying
those who may be liable for any damage caused.”
“SERAP notes that the European Court of Human Rights has set out key
conditions in the case of Guja v. Moldova [GC], no. 14277/04, ECHR 2008,
to determine who is a whistleblower. These conditions were reiterated in
the case of Heinisch v. Germany, no. 28274/08, ECHR 2011 (extracts) and
again in Bucur and Toma v. Romania, no. 40238/02, 8 January 2013.”
“The first condition is whether the person who has made the disclosure had
at his or her disposal alternative channels for making the disclosure. The
second is the public interest in the disclosed information. The third is
the authenticity, accuracy and reliability of the disclosed information.
The fourth is the severity of the sanction imposed on the person who made
the disclosure and its consequences. And finally whether the disclosure is
made in good faith. All of these would seem to be present in this case.
Therefore, SERAP believes that the public interest in this matter
outweighs any perceived act of personal grievance by Mr Jibrin.”