How public officers rob the nation 

By Levi Obijiofor 

Friday, 10 August 2007 

Almost one year ago, long before former president Olusegun Obasanjo left his villa in Abuja, the Accountant-General of the Federation, Ibrahim Dankwambo, made startling revelations about how public servants, in particular accounting officers in federal ministries, departments and agencies routinely soiled their hands on public funds. This was widely reported in the local press. What was alarming about the disclosure was not the insight into the standard practice of illegal embezzlement of public funds by seasoned public servants. The shock was all about two things: the entrenched and widespread nature of the illegality; and the fact that the audacious plundering of the treasury took place under the watchful observations of self-styled anti-corruption president Obasanjo.

Of even greater shock was that nothing came out of the report. As soon as the yelling and screaming subsided, the nation returned to its traditional state of amnesia. The message was clear -- paroxysms of temper and yelling at public officials can’t reform a nation. The lack of federal action over the scandal was a national disgrace. It was as if a shameless nation shorn of moral etiquette and ethical propriety had telegraphed a message of forgiveness to the culprits in the following words: “Please ignore our tantrums, dear public servants. All is now forgiven!!!” No action was taken by the Obasanjo government because the government itself lacked sincerity in its public relations campaign against corruption. A government that is genuinely committed to catching rats and rodents shouldn’t be setting up rats as the government’s anti-corruption sheriff. This was why, months after the accountant-general’s report received widespread media coverage, corrupt public servants continued to poke their grubby fingers into the nation’s treasury without regard for professional integrity and accountability.  

In a paper he presented on August 24, 2006, at the fifth national seminar on crimes which was organised by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, Dankwambo was unequivocal about how public servants defraud the national. He was particularly disappointed by the high level of corruption he observed because the looting of the treasury took place despite what he referred to as “strict financial regulations”. Participants at the seminar were shocked when Dankwambo said that many accounting officers at various federal ministries, departments and agencies were guilty of unethical and fraudulent accounting practices. For example, he said that most financial information provided to auditors by accounting officers couldn’t pass the basic test of honesty. Why? The information was mostly fudged, deliberately inaccurate, misleading and generally intended to benefit the financial officers who falsified financial records. According to Dankwambo, payrolls and general estimates constituted the soft targets because they were used as the basis for fraud by finance officers.  

Dankwambo also noted that some accounting officers usually rushed into last minute contract awards in December of every year so they could use up every naira allocated to their ministry or department before the end of each financial year. Driven by the desire to spend all that is available in the ministry or department rather than return to the government all funds not spent at the end of the financial year, some accounting officers encourage fraudulent contracts and illegal monetary approvals. The logic, iniquitous and offensive as it might be, is that it is better to embezzle federal funds through fraudulent means rather than to return money to the government. Implied in this logic is the absurd question: why give money to a government that produces money? The root of this criminal conduct has to do with public perception of government as a “cash cow”, available to be milked and exploited by everybody. Inspired by a wacky philosophy underpinned by greed, public servants, like the rest of society, feel that it is more honourable to take money from the government rather than to return money to the government. In our society, it would appear that only dishonest men and women return money to the government. 

Among public officers, there is a general assumption that monetary allocations to government ministries, agencies and departments which are not spent within any financial year should be taken as nobody’s money and therefore should be spent anyhow. There is no need for financial accountability and responsibility. This explains also in bold terms our slapdash attitude to government business. Government departments and ministries are figuratively inanimate entities. Whatever belongs to the government belongs to nobody. Ripping off the government has therefore become not the key concern of senior public officers but the strategic aspiration of many dubious public servants. This was the underlying issue that Dankwambo highlighted in his paper.    

Why do public officers who should be managing government funds and resources in an accountable, responsible and prudent manner regularly engineer criminal schemes designed to defraud their employer – the government? For an answer, we need to revisit the way we perceive government as an institution and how that perception influences how we relate with government departments and ministries. In our society, government is perceived as a vending machine that is loaded with endless flow of money. This explains why many people are preoccupied with efforts aimed at inventing ways and means to defraud this vending machine called government. This illegal appetite for consumption of government money also feeds our appetite for illegal acquisition of government property. That’s why dismissed and retired public servants, ministers and special advisers refuse to return government cars, furniture and residential property at the end of their official assignment.   

Like a studious professor of accountancy, Dankwambo identified three ethical tests which continue to challenge the sincerity and professional integrity of accounting officers and other public officers in federal ministries and departments. The first challenge deals with public officers’ disregard or contempt for financial rules and procedures which are aimed at entrenching a culture of financial accountability and management. Dankwambo pointed to Financial Regulation 515 which states that “The Federal Government requires all public officers responsible for expenditure to exercise prudence. Money must not be spent merely because it has been voted.” Apparently, this regulation has been widely ignored because these criminally-inclined accounting officers have continued to engage in reckless and fraudulent expenditure of funds allocated to their ministries and departments. The only time these fraudulent accounting officers bother about carefulness in financial matters is when they plot to embezzle government money.  

Dankwambo was quite emphatic that “all” accounting officers in “all” ministries, departments and agencies were involved in after-hours business of rushing into contracts in the eleventh hour in order to spend all money allocated to their ministries and departments. What a shame! A culture of dishonesty was also identified as the second ethical termite that has eaten deep into the soul and moral foundation of our accountants, auditors and administrative officers. In a country that is still battling the deleterious impact of “419” fraudulent activities on its international image, this makes the federal government’s task of rebuilding Nigeria’s image a lot harder to conceptualise or accomplish. Dankwambo regretted that lack of integrity among accounting officers has led to tomes of audit questions raised by the government’s Public Accounts Committee. 

In the high profile list of ethical challenges that confront the nation, bribery and corruption also received prominent attention. That was no surprise. In his revelation, Dankwambo said: “The process of approving a contract and paying the contractor can be an irresistible temptation for the unscrupulous. In some of the places, a strategically placed high-level official can manipulate the process to select a particular contractor. He can also tailor the specifications of the design to favour a given enterprise by providing inside information at the time of issuance of tender so that the enterprise will pay a commission to him/her.” There is nothing else to add to this depressing account of how public servants rob the nation. The only conclusion to be made is that the fight against corruption is still bogged down at the level of infancy.