The Federal High Court, Lagos has insisted on enforcement of the judgment<\/p>\n
ordering the government of President Muhammadu Buhari to publish widely
\nthe spending of recovered stolen funds since return of democracy in 1999.<\/p>\n
The details of the judgment are contained in the certified true copy sent
\ntoday by Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP to Mr.
\nAbubakar Malami (SAN), Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of
\nJustice.<\/p>\n
The 69-page judgment dated 24 March 2016 and signed by Honourable Justice
\nMohammed Idris reads in part: \u201cTransparency in the decision making process
\nand access to information upon which decisions have been made can enhance
\naccountability.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cObedience to the rule of law by all citizens but more particularly those
\nwho publicly took oath of office to protect and preserve the Constitution
\nis a desideratum to good governance and respect for the rule of law. In a
\nconstitutional democracy like ours, this is meant to be the norm.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI am of the view that on receipt of SERAP request, the government had the
\nduty to respond to same. If it does hold the information it must supply it
\nwithin 7 days from receipt of the request. Where a decision to withhold
\ninformation is taken, the government\/relevant authorities must inform the
\nplaintiff of its reason. In respect of the SERAP reliefs on recovered
\nstolen funds since return of democracy in 1999, the government had kept
\nmute. Let me say that they have no such power under the law.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThere is public interest in public authorities and high-profile
\nindividuals being accountable for the quality of their decision making.
\nEnsuring that decisions have been made on the basis of quality legal
\nadvice is part of accountability.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThe judiciary has no choice but to enforce compliance with the Freedom of
\nInformation Act. There is no doubt that the FOI Act is intended to act as
\na catalyst for change in the way public authorities approach and manage
\npublic resources and records. The judiciary cannot shirk its sacred
\nresponsibility to the nation to maintain the rule of law.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI am of the view and do hold that the action should and does succeed in
\nwhole. Documents relating to the receipt or expenditure on recovered
\nstolen funds since return of democracy in 1999 constitute part of the
\ninformation which a public institution and authority is obligated to
\npublish, disseminate and make available to members of the public. The
\ngovernment has no legally justifiable reason for refusing to provide SERAP
\nwith the information requested, and therefore, this Court ought to compel
\nthe government to comply with the Freedom of Information Act, as the
\ngovernment is not above the law.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cExamples of cases where there may be a public interest in the disclosure
\nof confidential information include: 1. Information revealing
\nmisconduct\/mismanagement of public funds. 2. Information which shows that
\na particular contract is bad value for money. 3. Where the information
\nwould correct untrue statements or misleading acts on the part of public
\nauthorities or high-profile individuals.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cFreedom of Information Act 2011 is meant to enhance and promote
\ndemocracy, transparency, justice and development. It is designed to change
\nhow government works, because we have all resolved that it will no longer
\nbe business as usual. What is done officially must be done in accordance
\nwith the law. Although the Freedom of Information Act requires no explicit
\npublic interest test, an assessment of public interest must still be made.
\nTherefore, all public institutions and authorities must ensure that they
\nprepare themselves for the effective implementation of the Freedom of
\nInformation Act.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cDisclosure of the information will not constitute an actionable breach of
\nconfidence if there is a public interest in disclosure which outweighs the
\npublic interest in keeping the information confidential. There is a public
\ninterest in ensuring public scrutiny of public authorities. If the
\nexemption under the Freedom of Information Act is wrongly applied and
\ninformation is incorrectly withheld, a public authority may face sanctions
\nunder the Act for not complying with the duty to provide information.\u201d<\/p>\n
In its letter to Mr Malami said asked him to \u201cyou use your good offices
\nand leadership to ensure and facilitate full, effective and timely
\nenforcement and implementation of the judgment by Honourable Justice
\nMohammed Idris of the Federal High Court, Lagos. The judgment ordered the
\nadministration of President Muhammadu Buhari to publish up-to-date
\ninformation on the spending of recovered stolen funds since the return of
\ncivilian rule in 1999.\u201d<\/p>\n
SERAP also said that, \u201cGiven the relative newness of the Buhari
\ngovernment, the effective enforcement and implementation of the judgment
\nwill invariably involve setting up a mechanism by the government to invite
\nthe leadership and high-ranking officials of the governments of former
\nPresident Olusegun Obasanjo, former President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, and
\nformer President Goodluck Jonathan to explain, clarify and provide
\nevidence on the amounts of stolen funds recovered by their respective
\ngovernments (from abroad and within Nigeria), and the projects (including
\ntheir locations) on which the funds were spent.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cSERAP therefore believes that the swift enforcement and implementation of
\nthis landmark judgment by the government of President Muhammadu Buhari
\nwill be litmus test for the President\u2019s oft-repeated commitments to
\ntransparency, accountability and the fight against corruption, and for the
\neffectiveness of the Freedom of Information Act in general,\u201d the
\norganisation also said.<\/p>\n
The organisation said that, \u201cThe enforcement and implementation of the
\njudgment should not be delayed as to do this is to continue to frustrate
\nthe victims of corruption in the country since the return of democracy in
\n1999, and will threaten to undermine the authority of our judicial system.<\/p>\n
\u201cSERAP trusts that you will see compliance with this judgment as a central
\naspect of the rule of law; an essential stepping stone to constructing a
\nbasic institutional framework for legality, constitutionality, the rule of
\nlaw practice and culture in the country. We therefore look forward to your
\npositive response and action on the judgment,\u201d the organisation concluded.<\/p>\n
It would be recalled that the court in suit no: FHC\/IKJ\/CS\/248\/2011
\nentered judgment in favour of SERAP against the Federal Government as
\nfollows:
\nA DECLARATION is hereby made that the failure and\/or refusal of the
\nRespondents to individually and\/or collectively disclose detailed
\ninformation about the spending of recovered stolen public funds since
\nthe return of civil rule in 1999, and to publish widely such
\ninformation, including on a dedicated website, amounts to a breach of
\nthe fundamental principles of transparency and accountability and
\nviolates Articles 9, 21 and 22 of the African Charter on Human and
\nPeoples\u2019 Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act<\/p>\n
A DECLARATION is hereby made that by virtue of the provisions of
\nSection 4 (a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2011, the 1st
\nDefendant\/Respondent is under a binding legal obligation to provide
\nthe Plaintiff\/Applicant with up to date information on the spending of
\nrecovered stolen funds, including:<\/p>\n
(a) Detailed information on the total amount of recovered stolen public
\nassets that have so far been recovered by Nigeria
\n(b) The amount that has been spent from the recovered stolen public
\nassets and the objects of such spending
\n(c) Details of projects on which recovered stolen public assets were spent<\/p>\n
AN ORDER OF MANDAMUS is made directing and or compelling the
\nDefendants\/Respondents to provide the Plaintiff\/Applicant with up to
\ndate information on recovered stolen funds since the return of
\ncivilian rule in 1999, including:<\/p>\n
(a) Detailed information on the total amount of recovered stolen public
\nassets that have so far been recovered by Nigeria
\n(b) The amount that has been spent from the recovered stolen public
\nassets and the objects of such spending
\n(c)
\nDetails of projects on which recovered stolen public assets were spent<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The Federal High Court, Lagos has insisted on enforcement of the judgment ordering the government of President Muhammadu Buhari to publish widely the spending of recovered stolen funds since return…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":47954,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[17],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-47952","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-exclusive"],"yoast_head":"\n