Hundreds of civil society organisations in Nigeria have kicked against what they described as a deliberate attempt by the federal government to disrespect the Nigerian Constitution and destroy the principles of federalism, using illegally constituted anti-graft agencies.
The CSOs, numbering about 200, said the attempt by the federal government to frustrate the hearing of the case instituted by 19 state governments challenging the constitutionality of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, and two others, was an indication that government was aware of the illegality of the anti-graft agencies and was trying to put pressure on the Supreme Court.
In a statement on Sunday signed by Comrade Ifeanyi Odili, president, Campaign for Democracy; and Dr. Dapo Oluwole of the Transparency and Accountability Network, TAN, the activists faulted the federal government’s alleged pressure on the Supreme Court to dismiss a valid case, noting that they were fully in support of the fight against corruption but would not support the shenanigans of agencies working against the success of anti-graft efforts.
To them, the objections raised by the Attorney-General of the Federation in its application had no bearing with the case at hand because it did not address the issue at stake – constitutionality.
They called on the judiciary to ignore harassment and intimidation by the executive at the centre, saying a situation where successive administrations perceived the EFCC, in particular, as a tool for intimidation must stop in the interest of true Federalism.
According to them, this is the reason corruption has continued to fester rather than reduce.
The statement read: “We, as a group of Civil Society Organizations across Nigeria, have deemed it fit to also intervene in the current debate and litigations regarding the constitutionality or otherwise of the establishment of the EFCC, NFIU, ICPC, etc.
“When it comes to constitutional matters, all issues of concern must be properly and thoroughly interrogated and resolved by the judiciary without any attempts by the federal government to throw its weight around. In a federation such as ours, the federal government is not superior to the federating units and cannot always breath down their necks especially on matters of concurrent jurisdiction.
“This is not to suggest that we are opposed to the establishment of anti-graft agencies. As a matter of fact, Nigeria needs effective anti-corruption agencies to arrest the dangerous trends of the epidemic of corruption in Nigeria’s public and private spaces. Corruption is holding this country down. It is killing us and it must be terminated or, at least, subdued.
“However, you cannot fight a legal battle with an illegal body. To do so is to stand the very principle of justice on its head. If it is now discovered that the establishment of our anti-graft agencies was outside of the constitutional processes as stipulated by the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended, then there is an urgent need for that aberration to be treated and healed before we proceed from here. Otherwise, all the actions of the anti-graft agencies would eventually amount to a nullity on the long run.
“In fact, this will be to the advantage of the federal government which can now operationalise the anti-graft agencies without let or hindrance. This is why it becomes so strange that the federal government is raising objections against something they should take a full advantage of.
“We see a deliberate design to force a fait accompli down the throat of the Judiciary in this matter by the Federal Government and this is not only unacceptable but will be resisted by all legal means, including public actions by CSOs. What exactly is the federal government afraid of? Why would you come against answers being demanded on constitutional questions?
“All the federal government needs do is to organise its best legal minds to engage this matter in court to its logical conclusion without this overly agitated attempt to shoot it down or frustrate it.
“The preliminary objection countersuit by the Federal Government is unnecessary, unwarranted, and fundamentally gratuitous. A student who has performed well should never be afraid of his or her paper to pass through reexamination. There are many constitutional issues that have been resolved by the judiciary and this will continue to happen.
“Why should anyone be opposed to this one? It is corruption to say that the constitutional issues surrounding anti-corruption agencies should not be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction. It is ridiculous to argue that the highest court in the land lacks jurisdiction over a constitutional issue. Which court can then entertain it?
“States or organisations or, even, individuals, as bona-fide citizens of this country, have a right to question the legality or constitutionality, as the case may be, of an activity or agency of government and they have a right to be heard. To stifle that right by legal subterfuge as the federal government is now attempting to do is absolutely reprehensible.
“We, as civil society organisations, are interested in finally resolving all constitutional issues regarding the establishment and operations of all government agencies, including the anti-graft commissions.
“This should be allowed to run its course without complications.”
