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 a 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 cashbox. 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.”