EFCC And The Bello Fever

When you think you have seen it all, someone or some office in this country shows you that things can always be worse. The latest case in the race from the mediocre to the absurd is the one offered in the saga of the case against Yahaya Bello, the former governor of Kogi state.

The sheer number of descriptions of the saga, and the consensus among informed observers that the whole event is ludicrous, is a testament to the situation’s absurdity. Who is playing here, though, and with what?

I would have considered the whole thing farcical, too, and just left the actors to their shenanigans, but the gravity of the consequences forces one to see even when laughing. Some people opted to reduce the whole Yahaya Bello and the EFCC story to just another melodrama that will fizzle out like many other dramas in this country, but I don’t think it is right to act that way.

I believe that in the case of Yahaya Bello and the EFCC, crucial elements of a civil and democratic society such as competence, transparency, freedom and respect for the rule of law are at stake and that those who dismiss or simplify the whole episode as a battle between cannibals are wrong. The rule of law is not just a concept; commonsense is not a mere option in matters of justice; they are the foundation of our civil society, and their importance cannot be overstated.

Lest we become guilty of what we accuse others of, we must state clearly for the record and without mincing words that the EFCC is doing a lousy job in the investigation of Yahaya Bello. There is no other way to put it, harsh or strange as it might sound: the truth and what is right must stand and be allowed to stand.

Just like a fever tells us something is wrong with our body and that we need treatment, the Yahaya Bello saga is telling us that there is something wrong with the EFCC, and it needs to be treated. Yahaya Bello can only be one of two things: either guilty or innocent; what he is or not will be verified and certified by the courts of law; that is a matter of justice.

On the other hand, the EFCC and the people acting in its name can be many things, from competent or incompetent to mischievous or well-intentioned to objective and loyal to its mandate to selective in action and disloyal to their mandate.

Judging by its dealings with Yahaya Bello so far, it is easy to see why many are concluding that something is not functioning correctly in the EFCC’s operations.

The EFCC is the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, and by its declaration, it has the mission of eradicating economic and financial crimes through prevention, enforcement, and coordination. The core values meant to guide the commission are integrity, professionalism, courage, and collaboration.

The EFCC’s approach to the Yahaya Bello case suggests it has abandoned its principles and is now pursuing commotion and entertainment. I pity those who have the duty of defending or explaining some of the commission’s behaviour lately. How do you describe or justify an agency that sees in its building a man they claim to have been looking for over five months and then allows the man to go away only to go and try to arrest the same man the same day?

More than seeking justice through gathering evidence and presenting their case in court, the EFCC seems more interested in being seen as the agency that can and did arrest Yahaya Bello. Something is wrong somewhere, and it looks like this Bello fever is just an indication of what is wrong with an agency that seems to be vying for attention rather than objective, sober and detailed investigations.

Whose attention, though, is it that of the general public or some puppeteers in one corner or behind the scenes? Whichever way the EFCC acts, acting to get attention is wrong and bad.

It is dangerously wrong for an investigative agency to turn to an attention-seeking entity because doing so will undoubtedly lead it to divert from its mission and core values. It is embarrassingly bad for the EFCC to chase headlines or personalise issues because it exposes the agency to criticism and suspicions. All these, of course, will lead to the EFCC’s delegitimation and weakness.

Yahaya Bello is one man, and his case is personal; however, those who care about the system and consider the EFCC a valuable agency must ensure that what Yahaya Bello has elicited in the EFCC is treated quickly to save the system.

As a fever tells us to examine our body and subject it to treatment, the Bello fever in the EFCC tells us it is time to review the agency’s operations and intentions and ensure everything it does is above board.

What is the EFCC’s fixation on arrest, anyway? Why can’t they gather evidence and present their case to the court of law through a prosecutor, even if the person investigated is absentia? In the case of Yahaya Bello, the man always had his lawyers talking to them.

When suspects are arrested, what is the point of arresting them for a few days or hours only to let them go?

Those who care about the integrity, efficacy, and efficiency of the EFCC need to wake up to the fact that the commission needs to be treated. A healthy EFCC that works well will deal with only facts and figures, no sensationalism or suspense, just facts, logic and law in silence and with results.

The Bello Fever in the EFCC is speaking loudly to us all. Nigerians of all shades need to quickly understand that if a commission charged with fighting corruption is susceptible to any form of corruption or sickness, be it of competence, malice, pecuniary or political corruption, or deficient in decorum and commonsense, then the hope of fighting corruption is dead, and worse still, our freedom is at stake.

Prof Anthony Kila is an Institute Director at CIAPS. www.ciaps.org.