The World Bank has again asked for more time to release details on the<\/p>\n
spending of recovered loot by late General Sani Abacha. This followed the
\nbank\u2019s decision to refer \u201cportion of appeal by Socio-Economic Rights and
\nAccountability Project (SERAP) to the Bank Archives Unit for processing
\nfor public access.\u201d<\/p>\n
In a letter dated 8 August 2016 and sent to SERAP, the World Bank said,
\n\u201cIn response to your request under AI4288, we would like to inform you
\nthat we are working on your request as referred to the Archives by the
\nAccess to Information Committee in its decision on the appeal and need
\nadditional time to provide a more comprehensive response. We regret any
\ninconvenience for this delay.\u201d<\/p>\n
This development was disclosed today in a statement by SERAP executive
\ndirector Adetokunbo Mumuni. The World Bank\u2019s request for more time
\nfollowed the appeal SERAP lodged with the Bank on 5 February 2016 on the
\nground that the Bank\u2019s decision on its initial request did not reveal
\n\u201cimportant portions of the information requested on how Abacha loot was
\nspent.\u201d<\/p>\n
This is the second time the World Bank is asking for additional time to
\nprovide SERAP with details of spending of Abacha loot. It would be
\nrecalled that the bank in a letter dated 15 October 2015 and signed by Ann
\nMay of the Access to Information Team said that \u201cIn response to your
\nrequest under AI3982, we would like to inform you that we are still
\nconsidering your request and need additional time to provide you with a
\nmore comprehensive response.\u201d<\/p>\n
According to Mumuni, the Bank Access to Information Committee (AIC) in its
\nDecision on appeal issued in Case number AI3982-A dated 29 April 2016 held
\nthat although the appeal by the organisation was not filed within 60 days
\nof the Bank\u2019s decision as required by its Access to Information Policy,
\nSERAP appeal nonetheless \u201ccontains a request for additional information,
\nnot previously submitted by the requester, and which the Bank has neither
\nconsidered nor denied. Accordingly, the AIC refers back to the Archives
\nUnit this portion of the appeal for processing for public access.\u201d<\/p>\n
SERAP said: \u201cThe portion of the appeal which the Bank has now referred to
\nits Archives Unit for public access include information on: evidence and
\nlist of the 23 projects allegedly completed with recovered Abacha loot,
\nand whether the 23 projects where actually completed; and what became of
\nthe 2 abandoned projects; evidence and location of the 8 health centers
\nbuilt with recovered Abacha loot reviewed by the World Bank; and evidence
\nand location of the 18 power projects confirmed by the World Bank.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cOther aspects of the spending of Abacha loot the Bank referred to its
\nArchives Unit for processing for public access are: information on: how
\nthe $50mn Abacha loot received before 2005 kept in the special account was
\nspent; evidence and location of schools which benefited from the Universal
\nBasic Education (UBE) program in the amount of NGN24.25bn; and evidence
\nand location of the 13 road projects completed with the recovered Abacha
\nloot, including the names of the 3 of the largest road and bridge projects
\nin each geo-political zone.\u201d<\/p>\n
The World Bank AIC appeal decision reads in part: \u201cSummary of Decision:
\nThe Access to Information Committee (\u201cAIC\u2019) found that the appeal is not
\nproperly before the AIC for consideration. The appeal in this case was
\nfiled 75 calendar days after the Bank\u2019s initial decision. Under the Bank
\nPolicy on Access to Information, appeals to the AIC must be filed within
\n60 calendar days of the Bank\u2019s decision.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cNotwithstanding the above, the AIC found that the appeal contains a
\nrequest for additional information, not previously submitted by the
\nrequester, and which the Bank has neither considered nor denied.
\nAccordingly, the AIC refers back to the Archives Unit this portion of the
\nappeal for processing for public access.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThe Decision Facts: On September 21, 2015, the requester submitted a
\nrequest (\u201cRequest\u201d) for \u201cdocuments relating to spending of recovered
\nassets stolen by Late General Sani Abacha and the Bank\u2019s role in the
\nimplementation of any projects funded by the recovered assets and any
\nother on-going repatriation initiatives on Nigeria with which the Bank is
\nengaged.\u201d On November 25, 2015, the World Bank (\u201cBank\u201d) responded to the
\nRequest by providing the requester with 11documents.<\/p>\n
\u201cOn February 8, 2016, the secretariat to the Access to Information
\nCommittee received an application (\u201cApplication\u201d) appealing the Bank\u2019s
\ndecision. The Application challenges the Bank\u2019s decision on both a
\n\u201cviolation of policy\u201d and \u201cpublic interest\u201d basis. The Application
\nstates, in relevant part, the following: [Intentionally omitted] is
\nsending this Appeal to the AI Appeals Board against the World Bank
\ndecision dated 25 November 2015 to provide patently insufficient
\ninformation on the spending of recovered stolen funds by the late General
\nSani Abacha.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWe consider this a serious violation of the AI Policy, as it amounts to
\nimproper or unreasonable restriction of access to information.[\u2026]Following
\nreceipt of several documents from the World Bank totalling over 700 pages
\non the Abacha loot, [intentionally omitted] commenced independent
\ninvestigations and verification of some of the information supplied with
\nappropriate agencies and institutions of government.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cFindings and Related Decision: In reviewing the Application in accordance
\nwith the AI Policy, the AIC considered: (a) the Request; (b) the
\nApplication; (b) the date of the Bank\u2019s initial decision; and (c) the date
\nwhen the Application was filed before the AIC. In this case, the Bank\u2019s
\nresponse was issued on November 25, 2015. The Application was filed with
\nthe AIC on February 8, 2016, i.e., 75 calendar days after the Bank\u2019s
\ninitial decision.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cUnder the Bank Policy: Access to Information, July 1, 2015, Catalogue No.
\nEXC4.01-POL.01 (\u201cAI Policy\u201d), appeals to the AIC \u2018must be filed (…)
\nwithin 60 calendar days of the Bank\u2019s decision to deny access to the
\nrequested information\u2019 (see AI Policy, at Section III.C.8 (b) i). In view
\nof this requirement, the Application is not properly before the AIC for
\nconsideration.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cNotwithstanding the above, the AIC found that the Application contains a
\nrequest for additional information, not previously submitted by the
\nrequester, and which the Bank has neither considered nor denied.
\nAccordingly, the AIC refers back to the Archives Unit this portion of the
\nApplication for processing as a new request for public access.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The World Bank has again asked for more time to release details on the spending of recovered loot by late General Sani Abacha. This followed the bank\u2019s decision to refer…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":52104,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-52103","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news"],"yoast_head":"\n