Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has sued the
Federal Government over “failure to release the names of suspected looters
and the circumstances under which recovered stolen public funds were
recovered.”
The suit filed last Friday at the Federal High Court Ikoyi followed a
Freedom of Information request to the Minister of Information, Alhaji Lai
Muhammed asking him to use his good offices to “provide 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 originating summons with suit number FHC/CS/964/2016 was brought
pursuant to section 4(a) of the Freedom of Information Act, and signed by
SERAP executive director Adetokunbo Mumuni.
Joined as Defendants in the suit are the Minister of Information Alhaji
Lai Muhammed and the Federal Ministry of Information and Culture.
The Plaintiff is arguing that, “By a letter with reference No
MJ/FOI/GEN/014/1/54 and dated 21 June 2016, the Attorney General of the
Federation and Minister of Justice Abubakar Malami, SAN confirmed that the
FOI request by SERAP was brought to the attention of the Defendants for
handling. However, since the receipt of the FOI request and the
confirmation by Mr Malami that the request was brought to the attention of
the Defendants for handling, and up till the filing of this suit, the
Defendants have so far failed, refused and/or neglected to provide SERAP
with the details of the information requested.”
SERAP is asking the court to determine the question “Whether by virtue of
the provision of section 4(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2011, the
Defendants are under an obligation to provide the Plaintiff with the
information requested for.”
The suit reads in part: “By virtue of Section 1(1) of the FOI Act 2011,
the Plaintiff is entitled as of right to request for or gain access to
information which is in the custody or possession of any public official,
agency or institution. Under the FOI, when a person makes a request for
information from a public official, institution or agency, the public
official, institution or agency to whom the application is under a binding
legal obligation to provide the Plaintiff/Applicant with the information
requested for, except as otherwise provided by the Act, within 7 days
after the application is received.”
“The information requested by SERAP does not come within the purview of
the types of information exempted from disclosure by the provisions of the
FOI Act. The information requested for, apart from not being exempted from
disclosure under the FOI Act, bothers on an issue of National interest,
public concern, social justice, good governance, transparency and
accountability.”
“The Defendants will not suffer any injury or prejudice if the information
is released to the members of the public. It is in the interest of justice
that the information be released. Unless the reliefs sought herein are
granted, the Defendants will continue to be in breach of the Freedom of
Information Act, and other statutory responsibilities.”
“While the suspects generally are entitled to be presumed innocent until
proven guilty by a court of competent jurisdiction, the FOI Act implicitly
prohibits blanket non-disclosure of names of high-ranking public officials
from whom some of the funds were recovered.”
“It is further submitted 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.”
Earlier in its FOI request the Plaintiff said that “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 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.”
SERAP is seeking 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:
1.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
2.The circumstances under which stolen public funds were returned
No date has been fixed for the hearing of the suit.
It would be recalled that the Ministry of Information recently 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.