General Sani Abacha. Photo courtesy: Getty Images
SUPPOSE we all believe what former Minister of Finance, Chief Anthony Ani, told the nation last Tuesday about the billions of naira that were allegedly siphoned by some top aides of General Abacha and how the last regime tried to cripple the private sector through delaying the release of the 1997 capital budget. Then what?
In case you didn’t get the widely reported gist, let me tell you. The former minister has addressed the press in Lagos early this week on the economic excesses of the Abacha regime and his perceived role in them. Titling his address, “The Missing Millions: My Own Side of the Story,” Chief Ani revealed that Abacha’s National Security Adviser (NSA), Alhaji Isma’ila Gwarzo, connived with others in the regime and stole a whopping $1.331 billion (N113 billion) in the name of security funds between last year and this year. In 1997, the NSA withdrew $912 million while the sum of $419 million (how convenient!) was withdrawn from the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) between January and May, this year. These monies were $175 million higher than the whole 1997 security budget, which was $240 million. Ani said to make the withdrawals smooth, the monies were not cash-backed so that his ministry would not know but were taken from the country’s foreign reserves. Ani had been perceived to be unwilling to play ball because, when his ministry chanced upon the 1997 withdrawals by Gwarzo, he complained to the head of state who brushed the matter aside by explaining that the funds were meant to serve security purposes.
These allegations, if true — and I have no reason to doubt them — are no doubt serious. One hundred and thirteen billion naira illegally cornered by a clique of self-serving men within a period of 18 months! How could anybody be so daring in a country of over 100 million people? This money was as much as 27% of the N424 billion projected as the Federal Government’s gross revenue from oil and non-oil sources for this year. Pray, what accounted for the withdrawal by Gwarzo of $912 million in 1997 when the whole security vote for the year was $240 million? That’s at a time the government itself was thumping its chest over the lessening of security emergencies compared to the previous two years’. For, by last year when these frenzied withdrawals were made in total disregard to the law, justice, morality and public opinion, the June 12 troubles, which created the most serious security emergency for the regime, had all but dissipated.
A few explanations are offered here. The withdrawals were made either for the purpose of self-enrichment or planning and executing Abacha’s uproarious self-succession agenda. Or both, indeed.
This action, and in fact similar ones earlier reported in the press, further reveals startling realities about the Abacha regime and the nature of unelected governments in general. One is the amount of power a few favoured individuals could garner and wield in such regimes. Chief Ani and the Ministry of Finance were pointedly bypassed and their advice ignored because those perpetrating the absurdity could simply walk to the head of state, quickly obtain his approval and collect their loot from the CBN which, in this case, acted as a mere forwarding agency.
Under the circumstance, favoured individuals constituted themselves into a shadow cabinet which, in turn, reposed immense power in itself. Hence Ani’s charge that “there were Shadow Ministers of Finance, Pseudo Ministers of Finance and Alternate Ministers of Finance, all advising on the budget they neither conceptualised, formulated or simulated.” Other Abacha ministers might make a similar postulation, depending on their individual experience. Another thing is that the statutory security organisations were sidelined as this money did not really go to them. At the same time, operations (covert and overt) were being undertaken on their behalf.
Overall, the Ani exposé has shown the regime’s inept handling of economic matters, the danger of a tiny clique cornering substantial chunks of the nation’s resources and that security was made a greater priority than any other thing, including public welfare and accountability. The exposé has also proved that in Nigeria, you don’t resign when you are serving a military government even if you disagree with its policies or find yourself no longer relevant in the scheme of things. Ask Ani.
Now what happens next? Ani has told us that he has helped, through his consulting firm, recover $700 million out of the pilfered sum from a bank in Beirut, with the approval of the present regime. Sigh. But what of the rest of the money? Is anyone going to be brought to book in an open court and, if found guilty, penalised? Or is it over with the recovery of part of the stolen money? Will and can there be further probes? Is the role of the CBN going to be clearly defined in such a way that its top appointees aren’t made to facilitate monetary transfers that smack of corruption? Why is there no one in government today enlightening the public on these occasional — welcome — exposés of corruption? Why are only outsiders, former government functionaries and press outlets the ones telling the lurid story?
These revelations are serving another purpose which may be good for democracy. They are increasingly discrediting military rule, showing it as a non-transparent system where a parliament doesn’t debate a proposed expenditure beforehand. The implication of this is that the public are becoming disenchanted to the extent that whenever a crossroads looms up before them, they know they have a choice. Happily, it is under the paternal Abubakar regime that they are learning this great lesson This is a bonus from a regime working hard to bring in democracy. Thanks.
* Published in my column, Melting Pot, in the New Nigerian Weekly today
