Local reactions to the arrest, detention and trial of the Governor of Bayelsa state, Diepreye Alamiyeseigha, in British courts over the charge of money laundering have thrown more light on the Nigerian character and society, and certainly not on the case itself. 
 
An assessment of reports in the Nigeria media prove one major point: namely, that we have serious problems in this country, that we are a people without standards, values, beyond shame, we live in a society where anything is possible, we worship persons, we place them above the rule of law, anything can be rationalised, Nigerians can hold a position today and shift to the other side tomorrow and still argue with great passion, and there is never a shortage of opportunists, in and out of the corridors of power. To start with, I am concerned that the Alami case may have become a source of business and livelihood for a category of Nigerians, a kind of ladder, and an avenue for self-promotion. This is perhaps the only explanation for the outrageous responses to the saga. In Bayelsa state for example, the political and cultural elite is playing safe; its members want to be seen to be loyal to the Governor, and they have been busy playing games with both sides of the mouth.

And so from the Ijaw National Congress to the Concerned Mothers of Bayelsa, and Bayelsa Consultative Council of Elders, there has been a curious and invidious attempt to express solidarity with Alamiyeseigha, (Alami or Alamsco) in his moment of trial. A so-called Concerned Mothers of Bayelsa carried placards the other day; they sang Alamiyeseigha's praises, and called on the British government to leave him alone. I don't think these are "concerned mothers"; they sounded like rented and sponsored mothers. Some Ijaw elders also went to Aso Villa to see the President.

The President reportedly refused to see them. Why should President Obasanjo step into this matter? Why are they going to him? Does he run an extension of the British law courts in Abuja? When the Alamiyeseigha story broke, it was commonly alleged that it was he, Obasanjo who tipped off the British authorities and that Alamiyeseigha is in trouble only because he is not in Obasanjo's good books. So why go to a man who has been classified as the enemy? The joke is on Obasanjo and he should know. He should be careful not to confirm the impression that he is the witch behind Alamiyeseigha's travails or that he is in a position to influence the machinery of justice in Britain.

The Bayelsa House of Assembly has also since shut down, with all its members on an indefinite recess. What is at play is obvious: the lawmakers want to avoid a situation where they would have to discuss the Governor's case. As it is, the Bayelsa House of Assembly may not reconvene until the case is resolved. Even the Speaker of the House has said that much. What the Bayelsa lawmakers have exposed is the state of Nigerian democracy. What we have is not a democracy that is based on principles and ideas, but personalities. Alamiyeseigha is the most important political figure in Bayelsa state; nobody wants to offend him or his supporters, because the price for insisting on the truth may be high. But must the State House of Assembly stop functioning, must the machinery of government grind to a halt, just because the Governor is in trouble in a foreign land?

The Bayelsa Speaker is on record, as saying that the Governor is innocent until proven guilty. The Nigerian Constitution says a Governor can only be impeached on the grounds of "gross misconduct": the meaning of which shall be determined by the state legislature. But is Alamiyeseigha not already guilty of gross misconduct? He has brought Nigeria and the state of Bayelsa to ridicule, and demeaned the high office that he occupies. He has been remanded in prison custody; and has now been granted bail and moved into an open prison. He cannot go within three miles of any port in Britain, otherwise he will be arrested, even security dogs will bark "wow, wow" on sighting him.

This is a Nigerian leader whose photograph is now in the hands of every security officer in Britain. He cannot sleep in any house that is unknown to the British authorities. Every day, he has to go a police station and report himself. His travel passports have been seized. His assets have been confiscated. At home and abroad, he has become a symbol for money laundering. This case places a moral burden on the people of Bayelsa and all Ijaws. And yet, the state House of Assembly is behaving as if it is an organ of the Governor rather than act in the interest of the people of Bayelsa.

Even the Deputy Governor has been very hostile towards any suggestion that he is an acting Governor or that a situation may arise where he would need to assume office as Governor. He desperately wants to be seen as a loyal deputy. The truth is that Goodluck is trying to be lucky. He is using his boss's trials to enhance his own political fortunes; while pretending to be an Alami man, he is in fact taking advantage of the situation. If Alamiyeseigha survives the present crisis, and even if he does not, he, Goodluck, having been so loyal to him in the face of adversity, would find it easier than any other aspirant to position himself as a gubernatorial candidate for 2007. And it is not an accident that Dr Goodluck Jonathan has been praised by Bayelsa elders for his loyalty!

Outside Bayelsa state, lawyers, only God knows who is working on what brief, have turned the Alamiyesiegha case into a public debate over the meaning of diplomatic immunity. It is an utterly useless controversy. The British justice system is not going to listen to the command of Nigerian debaters; it will be guided strictly by its own rules and traditions and if there is anything to be taken from the handling of the case by the Bow Street Magistrate Court and the Crown court, it is clear that the British system is convinced that Alamiyeseigha has a case to answer, a prima facie case having been established against him, and that he is not entitled to any form of diplomatic immunity. And this being so clear, you wonder why otherwise brilliant Nigerians are wasting so much ink discussing an issue that will not serve any purpose in the present circumstances.

It is also sad that the relevant questions are not being asked. How did Alamiyesiegha end up with so much money? What is his salary as Governor? What did he declare to the Code of Conduct Bureau in 1999 and how much has he made since then? Why did he have so much money in his London home? Now that he is stranded in Britain, for how long can a Governor be absent from his duty post and still be allowed to hold down the office? Does our Constitution make provision for an absentee Governor? To avoid these questions and begin to argue that the man has immunity is disturbing. So beyond the immunity question, where do the commentators stand? It is even more disingenuous to say that the man is being persecuted because he is Ijaw. For Heaven's sake what has ethnicity got to do with this? Interestingly, Alamiyeseigha's defenders have shied away from making categorical statements about money laundering and his role in it. They are not saying anything about him, or to him, instead they are blaming the British.

Their principal point is that it is not only Alamiyesiegha that has stolen public funds in Nigeria. Thus, the impression is being created that it is perfectly normal in this country for a public officer to steal, and that because some officers are protected by the law, they should be allowed to do so. This certainly cannot be the intention of the law-givers. Indeed, the Nigerian intelligentsia is showing up very badly in this case, they are not just arguing, they are being partisan, and I suspect when all this is over, one of the major issues to be considered would most likely be the contributions of this class to the dispossession of the Nigerian state and the devaluation of the public space.

Meanwhile, in Bayelsa, lawmakers and commissioners have reportedly gone underground; local government chairmen have fled from the state capital, their exotic cars have been withdrawn from the streets. In public, they pretend to be on the side of the Governor, but privately, they are all struggling to cover their tracks. Governors in our various states are also avoiding England. According to one report, the ones among them who have had cause to travel to Europe have done so without informing the Presidency. Every Governor is trying to be careful; the other day, it was Dariye, the Plateau state Governor, today, it is Alamiyeseigha, the Bayelsa Governor, no other Governor wants to be the next scapegoat. What can be taken from this is that many of our public officials have a lot to hide. They do not know what it means to be in public office and in a position of responsibility. Corruption is widespread; the guilty are afraid; the heat is on!

In Bayelsa, the principal losers are the people and sadly, their voice is not being heard. It is their money that is being traced; it is their future that has been placed in a state of suspended animation. For sure, it is not only Governors that are corrupt in our land; it is the entire system that needs to be cleansed and reformed. The bigger thieves in fact are in the civil service: all those officers with modest pay but who have houses in Europe and children in some of the most expensive schools on the surface of the earth. So no one should be surprised that in Bayelsa at the moment, every public official is running away from the EFCC officials who are also exploiting Alamiyeseigha's circumstances to swoop on the state.

The New Age has reported that a lobby group has been appealing to the Federal Government to arrange the release of the Bayelsa Governor to Nigerian authorities, so that he can face trial at home. We are indeed a country of deal-makers. We always think that any situation can be manipulated, including the rule of law. There is no court of law in Nigeria that can try Alamiyeseigha for money laundering in or out of office. Big men in Nigeria are as a rule, above the law. If the Obasanjo government is serious about its anti-corruption campaign, it should steer clear of the Alami case. The British should be allowed to pursue the case, a crime committed on British soil, to its logical end. If Alamiyeseigha ends up in jail so be it. Future Governors will remember his story and perhaps learn. The British would also have helped Obasanjo to achieve what he has been trying to do in the last six years of his anti-corruption campaign.

In other societies, a man in Alami's situation would have resigned and apologised for bringing his people so much embarrassment, while he continues the battle for his honour. In Syria, a former intelligence chief and Interior Minister, who was accused of corruption and murder felt so bad and has since committed suicide. His name is Ghazi Kenaan. He died this week. But here in Nigeria, such a thing would not happen, disgraced public officials do not resign; they wait until they are pushed out. Those who are protesting that Alamiyeseigha is an important man who is entitled to immunity must remember that in the eyes of the British, he is really an ordinary man in the temple of justice. He had gone to Germany we are told, to do a tummy tuck because the size of his stomach was beginning to affect his heart. In retrospect, he didn't need that surgery after all. By the time he is through with this trial, I predict that his tummy will be effectively flat. He is all things considered a damaged man, but he says he does not need our pity. But really, he deserves our pity, doesn't he?

Robot  # 1 | 16.10.2005 00:44

Link to the article is here

Ula-Lisa  # 2 | 17.10.2005 10:40

I agree with you Alams should resign. He has lost all the money already, what is left of him? I also agree with you that in a normal democracy, Alams would resign or be forced out by the legislature. But Nigeria is not normal; like I mentioned elsewhere, we at a crossroad. The ways are 1) Business as usual with \"bigmen\" stealing us blind or 2) A turn for the best, the Rule of Law. The society which is at the receiving end wants to do the latter, but the ruling elite would normally settle for the former. You also wrote; \"Outside Bayelsa state, lawyers, only God knows who is working on what brief, have turned the Alamiyesiegha case into a public debate over the meaning of diplomatic immunity. It is an utterly useless controversy. The British justice system is not going to listen to the command of Nigerian debaters; it will be guided strictly by its own rules and traditions and if there is anything to be taken from the handling of the case by the Bow Street Magistrate Court and the Crown court, it is clear that the British system is convinced that Alamiyeseigha has a case to answer, a prima facie case having been established against him, and that he is not entitled to any form of diplomatic immunity.\" This is healthy in line with democratic principles and freedom of opinion and the internet has helped a lot. As an aside, the Brits read what we write. They may not be moved by our commands but they want to know what Nigerians think on every issue. They have whole departments with staff dedicated to search out the minds of Nigerians because they have investments in Nigeria. Some may be contributing internet briefs of argument for sundry reasons; but the debate is good and the NVS, for instance, has really lived up to its slogan of being a marketplace of ideas. Every one can read all the intellectuals and see on which part of the divide they choose to cast their lot. The wind of freedom is blowing in the wind; if we know of looted property or monies, we cannot be censored by \"order from above\" we shall publish it, and at least in the court of public opinion, make our case. To the lawyers in Bayelsa, is it possible to bring a petition before the house or a suit in court to compel the Bayelsa Legislature to do their job of impeaching, or at least investigating the Alams Issue to find if it may amount to gross misconduct? Is there any Ijaw lawyer there who is on the side of posterity? Can anyone do something legal besides begging OBJ to intervene to save Alams\' neck from the Brits?

ADEBAYO ADEJARE  # 3 | 17.10.2005 15:12

Alamie will not resign. His fellow-Governors are solidly behind him except Bafarawa. So its no use expecting a miracle in our circumstances. The Deputy Gov will also just continue to run the state indefinitely while the House of Assembly will do nothing.You will need a Paul Tarfa a Buhari or even an Abacha to get rid of this insanity. This is not also an Obasanjo issue. If the President helps Alamie to evade justice, he would have lost ALL credibility and violated his sacred mandate. So, we\'ll just continue to monitor the \"case\" till 2007 when Alamie\'s term would expire while still under house arrest in England. The plain truth is that the Nigerian peoples can never get justice in this system when their leaders are involved. Those advocating recovery of Alamie for trial in Nigeria are being clever by half because they know and the British know that it can never happen. Only a foreign Court can punish a serving Nigerian Governor. Times have changed! Brigadier Shotomi lost his career under Gowon because his name was mentioned by a criminal in a UK Court Proceedings. Governors who served under Gowon were probed and loot recovered. Buhari also probed Shagari\'s Governors recovered loot and jailed them. J.S Tarka brlliant youthful radical and perhaps the most handsome Nigerian Politician ever lost his Ministerial Job on unproven allegation of corruption. This war against INTERNATIONAL CRIME did not start yesterday Gen. Bamaiyi of NDLEA fought with his blood and life. In this very dispensation a Nigerian Citizen has been seized by US DEA for trial in New York nobody raised hell. Alamie\'s case is worsened by the fact that he is an ex-military still in the Military\'s List of wanted sevicemen but now found for them by British Police. Just because we have a democracy is no excuse to behave crazy. It was the height of recklessness for anybody over age 40 to steal in an Obasanjo Administration. Such a person should have known better. He has only himself to blame. Like Eric, above I, too, am disappointed that the lawyer who wrote this piece Dr Reuben Abati writes that the robust public dabate by lawyers and non-lawyers over the scope of diplomatic immunity is an \"utterly useless controversy\" just because the \"British System\" assumed jurisdiction. Is the British System unquestionable by common law - trained lawyers? Are we not concerned that Section 308 of our Constitution is being abused by Alamie and another 15 Governors? But I agree ENTIRELY with the writer\'s submission that President Obasanjo would do well to steer clear of this rubbish and thank the brilliant writer for prolonging the \"useless controversy\" and demanding, albeit by way of joke, Alamie\'s resignation.

Guest  # 4 | 17.10.2005 18:35

I hope that Alami, the alleged thief will be convicted and sentenced to jail term in Britain. Anything short of this, is miscarriage of justice.

Guest  # 5 | 17.10.2005 17:23

This is my first response to an article written here. Many thanks to the founders of this forum and thanks also to Mr. Abati for the wisdom with which he has written. \"Know thy self, Oh man\" said the Oracle at Delphi, but it is a pity that the Nigerian man does not know himself. A man has stolen from his indigently impoverished people, who subsist at below $1 a day and we are debating whether or not he has immunity? I have read very scholarly articles here and I am of the assumption that patron here can reason. Even if this man, Alama whatever, has immunity must we throw ethics and morality to the thrashcan? We must not debate one another any more in this regards. But like Mr. Abati rightly said, we must apply our energies to other conversations that will positively impact our dear country. We must not condescend to giving lip to thieves. We have a thieving culture in Nigeria and only high-office arrest like this can deter others from so doing. Alama\' is a thieve and should be so treated. What a disgrace this guy has brought all of us to. Many times in my different fields of endeavor, I get labeled wrongly just because I am from the same country with the likes of Alama\', Dariye and Igbinedion. Enough already. Don\'t you know that we have more of a sociological problems in Nigeria than economic? That the spate of armed robberies and cheap assasinations in Nigeria is because people are hungry. The more thieves like Alama\' steal from our treasuries, the broader the wealth gap between the rich and poor. Let us carry on these conversations and hopefully, there will be an enlightenment for good. Thanks again, Mr. Abati

Guest  # 6 | 18.10.2005 06:17

That Alamieyesiegha will resign is as likely to happen as a camel passing through the eye of a needle. It is in the nature of our recent political culture. Our current leaders seem thoroughly incapable of shame and integrity. Men of honour resign when faced with serious questions of moral integrity. But us? No chance. Do you wonder why? \" Britain and Nigeria\'s half-hearted war on corruption By Michael Peel Nigeria is this week due to enter final talks to win $18bn (£10bn) of debt relief in the biggest ever write-off by the Paris Club of western creditors. The deal, which could help the country save $1bn or more each year in loan repayments, has been widely presented as evidence of improvement in both governance in Africa and in the west\'s attitude to the continent. Amid the mutual congratulation, it is worth taking a moment to compare the impressive-sounding numbers with another figure that originates in Nigeria, Africa\'s most populous nation. It is the estimated $3.5m or more worth of crude oil that is stolen each day from the Niger Delta by conspiracies of government officials, militias, the military and expatriates. On an annual basis, the value of that theft would exceed the debt repayment saving. As governments in Africa and the west focus on key issues such as debt, aid and trade, too little attention is being paid to a problem of which the Niger Delta is a prime example: the long-standing network of corrupt relationships between western governments, rich nation businesses and African elites. Despite promises by all parties to do better, Nigeria\'s oil industry - Africa\'s largest, pumping $150m a day at current prices - remains largely opaque and unaccountable. Unless crucial improvements are made, the \"year of Africa\" may yet be remembered as another episode in the shameful looting of a continent. At first glance, there seems to be much activity under way that could help address this problem. A new European Union directive on money laundering has just been agreed and the British government and private sector are working together on a committee set up to tackle corruption issues. Nigeria has introduced or plans to introduce measures to monitor budget spending, show how its oil revenues are distributed and disclose more information about payments by multinationals to the government. Some high-profile Nigerians are being pursued over corruption. Yet, while a few important changes have been made, other measures are more complicated or less impressive than they might seem. As of last week, the Nigerian finance ministry website showing the distribution of oil money to the country\'s 36 states carried details from just three of the past 15 months. Results of a long-promised audit of the state oil company and its multinational joint venture partners are still awaited. Many Nigerians have very mixed feelings about the corruption prosecutions, welcoming the start of action they see as long overdue while noting that those being pursued appear mainly to be enemies of President Olusegun Obasanjo or otherwise politically expendable. Nor is London keeping its side of the bargain on tackling corruption. Britain is not among the 32 countries, including France and Nigeria, that have so far ratified the 2003 United Nations convention on corruption. The UK government says the reason is that it has still not implemented fully the 2002 Proceeds of Crime Act. This was supposed to facilitate Britain\'s offer of legal assistance to foreign countries such as Nigeria, which has complained for years about London\'s failure to help recover the $1.3bn or more looted under the late dictator Gen Sani Abacha and processed through British financial institutions. A similar sense of grudging inertia surrounds the UK\'s 2001 Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act. This was touted as the law that made it possible to pursue British citizens and companies guilty of bribing foreign public officials. To date, not one prosecution has been launched. Even the government\'s claim that several investigations have begun under a more streamlined system is treated with suspicion by some anti-corruption campaigners. They point to a burst of activity last year to pre-empt an inspection by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, which in March finalised a document assessing Britain\'s work on combating bribery. The OECD cautiously welcomed the last-minute changes but made substantial criticisms. In other words, London was found wanting just as Tony Blair was trying to persuade fellow G8 leaders to adopt more Africa-friendly policies at their July summit. At other times, Britain has not tried to hide its double standards. The Commission for Africa set up and chaired by Mr Blair to devise an agenda for the G8 summit highlighted the failure of rich country export credit agencies to tackle corruption. Yet Britain\'s Export Credits Guarantee Department has shown little inclination to follow up allegations that a consortium including MW Kellogg, a client, agreed to pay $170m of bribes to secure billions of dollars of work on a giant Nigerian gas plant. Britain and Nigeria have offered each other many flattering words over the past 12 months on debt and other issues. But in both cases their actions on corruption and transparency look spasmodic, selective and oversold internationally to create an impression of fundamental reform. Historic injustice means debt relief is morally right - but so is greater pressure on both governments and others to do far more about an outrage that has dragged down so many African nations for so long. The writer is an associate fellow of Chatham House\'s Africa programme and author of a July report on the crisis in the Niger Delta

Yoruba  # 7 | 20.10.2005 02:10

Obasanjo must first resign before anybody else. We have not forgotten the murder of Bola Ige. When will you Yorubas hold Obasanjo for the murder?

GUEST  # 8 | 20.10.2005 12:47

We Yorubas cannot hold obasanjo for Ige\'s murder. Obasanjo and Ige were great friends. Ige was working for and with Obasanjo at the time. Had he not been murdered Obasanjo would have cleared all the Yoruba States. It is plain common sense that you do not need to kill your faithful servant! So, beg Alamie to throw in the towel before it gets too late.

Guest  # 9 | 20.10.2005 22:07

Joke! Have seen nigerians resign before from public office if not by force and impunity with gun?? they don\'t know what that is .... - resign! We are still at the rudimentary stages of democracy. Don\'t expect anything more. It\'s all corruption and impunity at all level of govt. Obinwanne CU

Guest  # 10 | 20.10.2005 23:32

Ige must have been murdered by the Martians then. Rights? If Obasanjo was not involved completely in murdering and eliminating Ige, as you claim, then who did? When will the murderers face justice? When will the Yorubas demand justice for the murder? Nigeria has some serious problem so long as this kind of double talk continues. Before anybody resigns, Obasanjo must go to jail; many murders are on his head. Period.

---

The conversation continues in our forum. Click here to read all comments

---