DIMINISHING ANTI- GRAFT CRUSADE: ACCESS TO INFORMATION AS A FUNDAMENTAL REQUIREMENT

DIMINISHING ANTI- GRAFT CRUSADE: ACCESS TO INFORMATION AS A FUNDAMENTAL REQUIREMENT

EBEN ENASCO REPORTING...

Article 13 of the United Nations Convention against Corruption adopted by Resolution 58/4 of the General Assembly of the United Nations in October 2003, require governments to ensure citizens participation in anti-corruption adventures.

The article designed for such through enhancing the transparency of, and promoting the contribution of the public to decision-making processes, was to ensure that the public have effective access to information.

Access to information is one of the fundamental requirements of having a veritable democracy in any country with Serious Government.

The tendency to withhold information from the people at large, is a compound pointer to trusting any form of formidable Anti- Corruption Crusades.

According to Abdul Waheed Khan, Assistant Director-General for Communication and Information of UNESCO: “The concept of true flow of information and ideas constitute the nucleus of democracy and is also critical to the respect for Human rights.

Without the right to freedom of expression, which incorporates the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas, the right to vote is undermined, human rights abuses are perpetrated in secret and it becomes impossible to expose corrupt and inefficient governments.

Therefore, the essence of free flow of information and ideas is predicated upon the truism that public bodies hold information not for themselves but on behalf of the public.

If public bodies, Government at all levels with a vast of information hold them in secret, the right to freedom of expression, guaranteed under international law in many constitutions and other extant law would be seriously undermined.

Freedom of Information Act was enacted a few years ago, to promote, enhance and develop our precarious democracy.

An Act which is an expansion of Section 39 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, was signed into law on May 28, 2011, by President Goodluck Jonathan's administration.

The purpose of the Act was to make public records and information more freely available, provide for public access to public records and information, protect public records and information to the extent consistent with the public interest and the protection of personal privacy, protect serving public officers from adverse consequences for disclosing certain kinds of official information without authorization and establish procedures for the achievement of those objectives.

The Act further spelled out ways of getting access to records by Court, materials and documents under the security classification.

But in Nigeria, precisely with the present day government, rights to information is cumbersome with jokers Manning the podium.

There have become cracks in Nigeria Anti-Corruption practices despite the well promulgated article 13 of the information rights.

THE IMPACT OF ACCESS TO INFORMATION ON ANTI CORRUPTION CRUSADE.

Scholars have argued that access to information and transparency are thus prerequisites compass for successful presentation make or mar anti-corruption crusade.

Freedom of the media and the corollary right of access to information, onto the center stage in the anti-corruption crusade is an obvious reason for high corruption practices in Nigeria.

Until Nigeria Government recognized this part and make it effective, the whole system would continue to be lopsided.

Citizens must have access and means to public information in order for democracy to function, which will make government of the people, by the people and for the people real.

Lack of access to information results in a non- participatory society, in which political decision-making is not democratic.

Therefore, access to information

concerning governance of the state allows individuals to exercise their political and civil rights in election processes; challenge or influence public policies; monitor the quality of public spending; and demand

accountability.

Information and communications technology ICT has become a very useful tool for fighting corruption.

Of course, ICT-based social media has added a new dimension to the fight against corruption as information can find its way around the world in a matter of minutes and viral pictures or videos taken by citizen journalists can be used as evidence of corruption or other ills.

In addition, these videos and images may be a catalyst for governmental action and can be used by the international community to apply pressure on States.

The Internet gives a global dimension to the work of local CSOs and also enables collaborative investigative journalism.

Some ways in which ICT is useful in the fight against corruption, and in particular in enhancing citizen participation in anti-corruption efforts, are most likely Sharing information, Automation and digitization of government processes and services, including blockchain-enabled platforms.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that those demanding bribes in areas where these platforms are used become more reluctant for fear of being identified.

Technology has been used to automate government processes and reduce the face time public officials in certain positions have with the public. Automation may limit the discretion of public officials, increase transparency and make it more difficult for corrupt transactions to be effected.

Corruption undermines the fairness of institutions and processes and distorts policies and priorities.

As a result, corruption damages the legitimacy of regimes leading to a loss of public support and trust for state and government institutions.

Undermining the Sustainable Development Goals, Economic loss and inefficiency, Poverty and inequality, Personal loss, intimidation and inconvenience, Public and private sector dysfunctional, Failures in infrastructure, Rigged economic and political systems, Impunity and partial justice are characteristics effect of denial to information.

Not only does corruption affect economic development in terms of economic efficiency and growth, it also affects equitable distribution of resources across the population, increasing income inequalities, undermining the effectiveness of social welfare programs and ultimately resulting in lower levels of human capacity building.

The foundation of a sound democracy involves accountability of the Government and its agencies.

It is hoped that with the enactment of the Freedom of Information Act, this would be guaranteed.

AS A PRE CONDITION FOR CITIZENS' PARTICIPATION.

There are many initiatives set out in laws to combat corruption and which have direct relevance to infrastructure projects.

One crucial aspect of enabling citizen participation, whether by individuals, groups or the media, is their access to information and the mode in which they access information.

Access to information control, is one of the numerous projectors that would probably speed up the fight against corrupt practices in the country.

Freedom of information FOI laws, which increase transparency and thus help the fight against corruption in the country.

Access to information activate and put pressure on governments to enact and implement laws enabling people to ask questions of any official body that is part of or controlled by the state, and receive prompt and thorough answers.

They draw on the idea that information produced using tax money is owned by the tax-paying public, and should be made available to them without restriction.

As public bodies respond to people's queries and pro-actively publish the information they create, people are able to see, better understand and scrutinize the workings of the public bodies they fund.

Access to information is seen as a necessity for effective participation in public life; a tool to redress one sort of imbalance between people and the powerful institutions that govern them.

But when relevant information is hauled, it is difficult to make any significant progress.

DENIAL OF FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AS PANACEA TO SLOW ANTI-CORRUPTION CRUSADE IN NIGERIA

When people are denied relevant information, the pursuant of anti graft becomes extraordinarily slow and weak.

People find it uninteresting and Baias to promote.

Corruption is a clog in the wheel of progress in Nigeria and has incessantly frustrated the realization of noble national goals, despite the enormous natural and human resources.

The most common types or categories of corruption are supply versus demand corruption, grand versus petty corruption, conventional versus unconventional corruption and public versus private corruption.

For Corruption in public services, it had been in existence from Prime Minister Tafawa Balewa’s era to President Muhammadu Buhari's administration.

Corruption in developing countries is associated with vices such as lack of values and poverty.

The high cost of living experienced in Nigeria brought about loss of values in families, offices and the society as a whole.

People are not interested in how you make your money; they are more concerned about making money at all cost.

Poor remuneration in the public services is another attribute to corrupt practices in the Country.

Greed of money, desires, Higher levels of market and political monopolization, Low levels of democracy, weak civil participation and low political transparency, Higher levels of bureaucracy and inefficient administrative structures, Low press freedom, Low economic freedom are some factors likely to slow down anti corrupt practices.

In 2012, Nigeria was estimated to have lost over $400 billion US Dollars to corruption since independence.

In 2018, the country ranked 144th in the 180 countries listed in Transparency International's Corruption Index with Somalia, at 180th, being the most corrupt, and Denmark the least.

With a score of 25% and ranked 149/180 in Corruption Perception index 2020, Nigeria is a significant decliner on the CPI, dropping more points since 2012.

Nigeria's population is equivalent to an estimation of 2.64% of the total world population whilst its ranks number 7 in the list of countries and dependencies by population.

Notorious for complacency, involving high levels of public sector corruption and misappropriation of funds, the country continues to grapple with corrupt practices.

Nigeria has an opportunity to strengthen good governance and promote anti-corruption efforts to reverse such effects.

Sub-Saharan Africa is the lowest performing region on the CPI, underscoring a need for urgent action.

ANATOMY OF UNSUCCESSFUL ANTI CORRUPTION CRUSADE.

Over many years, successive governments in Nigeria have evolved various measures, policies, and programs to combat the menace of corruption.

The most important of these measures according to Ijewereme 2013 are Murtala/Obasajo’s Jaji Declaration/confiscation of assets illegally acquired by Nigerians of the 1970s, Shagari’s Ethical Revolution to fight corruption through the introduction of code of conduct for public servants of 1981, and the War Against Indiscipline WAI by the Buhari/Idiagbon administration in 1984.

The ethical and social mobilization crusade by the Babangida regime in 1986 as well as WAI and Corruption WAI-C by Abacha’s administration in 1994,

These efforts were largely cosmetic and remained at the level of rhetoric, and did not result in any significant change.

Similarly, in recognition of corruption as the worst problem of Nigeria when Obasanjo came to power in 1999, his government immediately put in place different anti-corruption institutions to curb the problem.

These include among others, the EFCC and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offenses Commission ICPC.

The institutionalization of these anti-graft agencies, at the inception of Obasanjo’s administration, raised the hope of Nigerians with the expectation that the changes will bring to book corrupt public officials and also act as a deterrent on others.

Unfortunately, these programs and strategies made little impact in the war against corruption in the face of enormous political corruption in the Nigerian public sector. For instance, for three successive years, 2001, 2002, 2003, TI ranked Nigeria as the second most corrupt country in the world.

Subsequently, when Nuhu Ribadu became the chairman of newly created EFCC in 2003, Nigeria’s corruption profile started declining gradually. In 2007, prior to the exit of Ribadu, TI ranked Nigeria 32nd position out of 147 countries surveyed in the world (Eme & Okoh, 2011; Ijewereme, 2013; TI, 2007).

Furthermore, President Umaru Musa Yar’ Adua frequently reaffirmed his determination to fight corruption and proclaimed respect or the rule of law and due process, but the actions and body language of Yar’ Adua depicted the opposite Aderonmu, 2009; Ijewereme, 2013.

Yar’ Adua’s administration did not sustain the impressive performance of Nuhu Ribadu. During Yar’ Adua’s administration, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation, Micheal Aadoanka, worked fervently to undermine effort in the fight against corruption in Nigeria.

Similarly, corrupt practices have continued to increase at a worrisome level since President Goodluck Jonathan assumed office.

Jonathan’s administration was perceived to have displayed lack of political will, a high degree of lethargy and carelessness in the fight against corruption in the face of many corrupt practices reported frequently against government officials.

Despite the depth of literature on corruption in the Nigerian public sector, it is only few studies that have interrogated Nigerian political corruption from theoretical and empirical perspectives, for example, “Political Corruption in Nigeria: Theoretical Perspectives and Some Explanations” Ogundiya, 2009. Although Ogundiya interrogated corruption from theoretical perspectives, his work was not complemented with some empirical explanations.

Corruption is the misuse of entrusted power or a dishonest use of one’s office or position for personal gain.

It has manifested in the form of misappropriation, kickback, over invoicing, bribery, embezzlement, tribalism, nepotism, money laundering, outright looting of the treasuring, among successive governments.

In Nigeria, most of the elected and appointive public office holders and top bureaucrats use their position of authority to actively engage in corrupt practices.

In many African states, particularly Nigeria, corruption has been a malaise that inflicts every aspect of the society.

Corruption drains African countries more than US$140 billion yearly Ribadu cited in Obuah, 2010a.

Corruption deprives enabling environment for potential investors to invest; it distorts public expenditure, increases cost of running businesses, cost of governance and diverts resources from poor to rich nations.

Nigeria is the most populous country in Africa; it has an estimated population of 160 million people. The economy is mainly dependent on oil, which sustains corrupt practices.

According to the Transparency International (TI; 2005) Report, corruption drains Nigeria, about 20% of her gross domestic product (GDP).

Corruption is Nigeria’s worst problem which tend to stem from access to information that is now responsible for all kinds of woes, such as election rigging, failed promises, abandoned projects, poor quality of implemented projects, dilapidated infrastructure, nepotism, instability in the Niger Delta, and impediment to flow of foreign direct investment.

However, the former Economic and Financial Crime Commission EFCC Chairman, Nuhu Ribadu, claims that the over US$400 billion that had been looted from Nigeria by the leaders is “six times the total value of resources committed to rebuilding Western Europe after the Second World War” Ademola, 2011, p. 312).

Political corruption has derailed meaningful developmental goals, resulting in high level of unemployment and disconnection of the people from the leaders with attendant insecurity such as youth restiveness, arm-robbery, and kidnapping for ransom.

SIGN OF WEAKNESSES IN ANTI CORRUPTION CRUSADE.

The Federal Government has gradually shown principle of blind submission tendencies ever since February’s general elections when Buhari’s ruling party won a stronger mandate.

Leaders, from governors up to the president, have been exercising maximum power and declaring any sharp criticism of their leadership as treasonous.

Some powerful state governors now regularly use security agents to arrest and intimidate journalists and activists who dare to question their actions or attempt to hold them accountable.

At any point in the past year, governors of Kaduna, Cross River, and Bayelsa states have held one or more people in detention.

Some high profile journalists and activists currently in detention in Nigeria include

Dadiyata Abubakar Idris, Stephen Kefas, Agba Jalingo and Jones Abiri.

Dadiyata Abubakar Idris, a university lecturer and critic of the governor of Kaduna state was picked up on Aug. 1, and Stephen Kefas was picked up May 8 in Rivers state but transferred to Kaduna state.

They are being held on the orders of Kaduna state governor, Mallam el Rufai. Agba Jalingo, publisher of CrossRiverWatch was picked up August 30 in Cross River for treason and disturbing the peace.

Jones Abiri, publisher of Weekly Source in Bayelsa state, is facing terrorism charges. He was picked up in March while he was meeting with his staff. Previously, from July 2016 till August 2018, the DSS held him without charge and without access to his family or a lawyer.

More recently, during the Nov. 16 special elections in Kogi and Bayelsa states, journalists were attacked and prevented from doing their jobs, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists CPJ.

In Asaba, the capital of oil-rich Delta State, the editor of online news Big Pen Nigeria, Joe Ogbodu and reporter for the National Mirror newspaper, Prince Amour Udemude, are facing criminal defamation and disturbing the peace charges for exposing corruption in the oil industry.

Despite President Muhammadu Buhari’s anti-corruption campaigns since winning his first term election about five years ago, Nigeria is still been perceived as one of Africa’s most corrupt countries.

Not only did the country slip two places below from 146th position in 2019 to 149th in 2020, the country also scored 25 out of 100 points, falling by one point compared to 2019, according to 2020 Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index.

Media in Nigeria awakens to a new wave of government censorship as popularity of the ruling class continue to plunge.

In a new wave of censorship, the Nigerian government has clamped down on media houses, worsening the deteriorating climate for information gathering in the country.

The National Broadcasting Commission, Nigeria’s media regulator, has sequely announced penalties for radio stations, for what the acclaimed ‘unprofessional broadcasts.’

The absence of a clear and defined framework led to several constraints and challenges in the

efforts of government to realize the entrenchment of transparency and accountability as pillars of

responsible governance.

And This has created fears in open access to information dissemination. Summarily, this act portends weakness in the part of the government.

GOING FORWARD.

Access to information held by public authorities is a fundamental element of the right to freedom of expression as provided under Section 39 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Without doubt this right is vital to the proper functioning of any country's democracy.

This right is proclaimed in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human.

The FOI Bill was first submitted to Nigeria’s fourth National Assembly in 1999 and its progress in the legislative process was very slow.

In all, the FOI Bill spent over 11 years in the legislative process

before it finally received presidential assent.

Before the promulgation of the Act, Nigeria had no law which guaranteed access to public records and

information.

On the contrary, many Nigerian laws have secrecy clauses prohibiting the disclosure of information,

for example, the Official Secrets Act, the Criminal Code, the Penal Code, the Evidence Act, The Official Secrets Act,

For instance, prohibits the unauthorized transmission of any information which has been classified by any government branch as being prejudicial to the security of Nigeria.

As such, the arbitrary classification of any information was sufficient to deprive the public of relevant

information.

Similarly, the Evidence Act6 recognized that material evidence may be withheld from the court where such evidence was within government custody and constituted unpublished official records relating to affairs of state, except with the permission of the officer at the head of the department concerned, who had the discretion to give or withhold such permission as they saw fit.

Also, the courts lacked the

jurisdiction to compel a public officer to disclose communications made to him in official confidence where the concerned public officer considered that the public interest would suffer by the disclosure.

Therefore, it was a matter falling within the sole discretion of the concerned public officer.

Overall, Nigerian public servants easily embraced the entrenched culture of secrecy and arbitrariness in civil and political administration.

To obtain information from any government agency often proved very difficult.

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo, for instance, had earlier declined the presidential assent to the FOI Bill on the grounds that it would have negative implications on national security.

It was against this background that the Act came into existence.

The virtue of the new law is aptly

captured in its preamble.

Therefore, if the desire to pursue anti graft crusade to logical end will succeed, more emphasis must be channeled to relevant information dissemination cut across all areas.