Recovered Assets: Activist urges FG to charge corrupt officials

Human right activist and lawyer, Comrade Femi Aborisade, has called on the Federal Government to charge corrupt officials from whom assets were recovered, following Federal Government’s publication of the list of retrieved funds.

He noted that the identities of persons from whom the recoveries and forfeitures were made were not disclosed, contrary to repeated promises made by the President Muhammadu Buhari regime to name and shame former public officers who had looted public vaults.

Aborisade, who spoke in Lagos, said non-disclosure of the identities of suspected looters who have made returns is not in the public interest, adding that public interest dictates full disclosure of the value of recovered loot and forfeitures, including identities of the looters through the prosecutorial judicial system.

“It should be noted that as far as plea bargain agreements are concerned under the ACJA, until the court convicts, sentences and makes appropriate orders under section 270(10)-(12), ACJA, the defendant is permitted, under section 270 (15)(b), ACJA, to back out of the plea bargain agreement, if he/she is ready to face trial. If the defendant withdraws from the plea bargain agreement, section 16 of ACJA provides that no references shall be made to any prior admission or confession or the plea agreement.

“Therefore, by virtue of section 270(15)(b), ACJA, alleged recoveries made by an anti-graft agency without charging the looters to court to obtain definitive court orders is not in the best interest of fighting corruption in a transparent and non-discriminatory manner,” he stated.

Aborisade argued that by statutory and judicial authorities, disclosure of names as well as the amount returned, is not just what is legally required but it is also what is in the public interest.

“We call on the Federal Government to charge all suspects to court and in the process, simultaneously, name and shame them. There is no legal liability in so doing. Non-disclosure of names of looters serves only undemocratic hegemonic political calculations and provides room for the likelihood of re-looting part of the recovered loot,” he asserted.

The Activist hinted that a fundamental point to first establish is that disclosure of the identity of persons who have voluntarily been making returns as well as those who have suffered forfeitures and the value of what they return or forfeited ought to be a product of a systematic process of investigation and prosecution through the judicial system.

He maintained that the best tradition of a democratically elected government operating a written constitution and specific statutes governing specific areas of law is for government to charge suspects to court.

“In the process, the names of looters as well as the value of what they return or forfeited pursuant to any plea bargain agreements, confessional statements and/or admission of guilt would simultaneously become public knowledge,” he added. File Name: Recovered Assets 06-06-2016