The recent arrest of former Akwa Ibom State Governor, Udom Emmanuel, by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on allegations of a staggering ₦700 billion fraud is a depressingly familiar narrative. It mirrors the pattern of former state chief executives facing scrutiny post-tenure, often entangled in the very circumstances they themselves created. This is hardly unprecedented; numerous state governors have outstanding cases with the EFCC. While the sheer scale of the alleged fraud is alarming, the more troubling aspect is the frequency with which such cases fade into obscurity.
During his tenure (2015-2023), Mr Emmanuel’s administration was consistently under scrutiny for various allegations of financial impropriety. A comparison of the ₦3 trillion received from the Federation Account with the level of capital projects executed and the accumulated debt raises serious concerns. Equally troubling are detailed reports of alleged cash withdrawals exceeding ₦30 billion.
This disturbing situation is not unique to Akwa Ibom State alone. It permeates many states across the Federation, where financial guidelines appear to be disregarded, with funds withdrawn and expended at the whim of a select few who have established themselves as local power brokers.
Conversely, former Minister of Women Affairs, Uju Kennedy Ohanenye, is in EFCC custody over allegations of misappropriation and diversion of approximately ₦138.4 million in public funds. The investigation focuses on her role in the disbursement of the 2023 budget for her ministry, with accusations specifically pointing to mismanagement of funds associated with the P-Bat Cares for Women Initiative. Despite her position and prior contributions, she has been questioned and detained by the anti-graft agency, illustrating a direct accountability process for ministers involved in public fund mismanagement.
Following her detention, she was among the ministers dismissed, highlighting the government’s attempts to address corruption.
While both Udom Emmanuel and Uju Kennedy Ohanenye are accused of financial malfeasance—Ohanenye with specific, localised allegations and Emmanuel with broader, more systemic issues—their cases reflect different scales and contexts within Nigeria’s ongoing battle against corruption.
Ohanenye’s swift legal repercussions suggest a proactive approach by authorities at a ministerial level, implying a potential shift towards greater accountability. In contrast, Emmanuel’s case highlights the entrenched nature of corrupt practices at the gubernatorial level, where substantial sums and protracted investigations often engender a sense of impunity among former leaders. Ultimately, these cases encapsulate the wider narrative of corruption that continues to challenge governance in Nigeria, raising critical questions about the efficacy of anti-corruption measures and the preservation of public trust.
Corruption permeates every level of Nigerian society, profoundly and detrimentally affecting its citizens. Despite paying for essential services like electricity and water, many Nigerians are forced to resort to alternatives due to corruption and inefficiency. Those with the means invest in boreholes, while others rely on local vendors for their water supply. Similarly, despite a national police force, citizens frequently turn to vigilante groups for security, a stark paradox for a nation once lauded as the ‘Giant of Africa’. The Nigeria Police is poorly equipped and notoriously corrupt.
The local government system has effectively collapsed, reduced to a subordinate function of state governments. State electoral commissions, intended to ensure fair elections, often serve merely as conduits for misappropriating public funds. Even when substantial sums are allocated for elections, they frequently yield empty promises, with government nominees declared winners without genuine electoral processes. The limited resources remaining for local governance are typically allocated for salaries, leaving scant provision for essential community services.
State governors have effectively become local potentates, monopolising their states’ resources. Wealth that should benefit the populace is siphoned off for the exclusive use of a privileged elite – government officials and their families – while ordinary citizens endure abject poverty.
This system operates under a veil of silence, as dissent is suppressed by a lack of effective opposition. The People’s Democratic Party (PDP), which should serve as a robust opposition voice, is paralysed by internal strife and self-interest. Across the states, opposition groups face persecution, branded as enemies of the people, while higher educational institutions, which should champion change, have become mere extensions of state propaganda. These institutions, intended as centres for research, innovation, and the advancement of human knowledge, are instead seen to prioritise the conferral of undeserved honorary degrees upon political figures, rather than fulfilling their crucial role in knowledge dissemination through teaching, publications, and wider public engagement.
The consequences of corruption in Nigeria extend far beyond national borders, profoundly impacting the lives of ordinary citizens. A recent episode of the podcast “THE OTHER SIDE “ by Ndeya Television illustrated how corruption can stigmatise an entire nation. The case of a Nigerian policeman seeking asylum in Canada, whose application was denied on the grounds that the Nigeria Police is inherently corrupt, exemplifies this. This blanket condemnation of the country is unfortunate, highlighting how Nigerians continue to pay a heavy price globally due to pervasive corruption.
Meanwhile, because of misappropriation of allocations the educational crisis in Northern Nigeria is deepening, revealing a complex emergency that extends far beyond simple statistics. Alarmingly low literacy rates, reaching critical levels, contribute to a burgeoning cohort of out-of-school children, estimated to number in the millions. This troubling trend is compounded by a complex interplay of socio-economic factors, including poverty, insecurity, and cultural barriers that impede access to quality education.
A significant ethical dilemma arises from the prioritisation of education for their own children by those in positions of power. Many officials, policymakers, and affluent families are increasingly opting to send their children to schools abroad, creating a profound disconnect between those who govern and the communities they serve. This choice not only highlights stark inequities within the educational system but also reinforces a cycle of neglect for the vast majority of school-age children who remain within the country. While these decision-makers seek opportunities in foreign institutions, countless children in Northern Nigeria are left to contend with overcrowded classrooms, insufficient teaching resources, and a lack of basic amenities.
Furthermore, the crisis is not merely a matter of access; it encompasses the quality of education being delivered. Many schools, particularly in rural areas, suffer from inadequate infrastructure, a shortage of qualified teachers, and limited curricular relevance. Consequently, even those enrolled may not receive an education that equips them with the essential skills for personal and community development, further entrenching poverty and limiting future opportunities.
The effects of this educational neglect ripple throughout the community. High rates of illiteracy contribute to increased unemployment, further exacerbating socio-economic disparities. Young people, often desperate for opportunity, may be drawn into cycles of violence and extremism, leading to greater regional instability. Additionally, the lack of education inhibits civic engagement and reduces the likelihood of political accountability, as an uninformed populace is less able to demand improved governance and social services.
The EFCC, tasked with combating such egregious mismanagement of public funds, is itself grappling with internal administrative issues that threaten its credibility. While the Commission makes concerted efforts to prosecute financial crimes, its effectiveness is often hampered by a perceived lack of thorough investigation and diligent prosecution, possibly due to staffing shortages and inadequate funding.
The public is increasingly disillusioned with the Commission’s inability to secure convictions in high-profile cases that have garnered national and international attention. This erosion of public confidence poses a significant threat to the fight against corruption, which has become endemic in the country.
Although anti-corruption agencies are pivotal in combating corruption, their endeavours alone are inadequate. Nigerians must proactively demand robust governance at all tiers of government. This necessitates cultivating a decision-making process that is participatory, transparent, and accountable, whilst consistently upholding the rule of law.
Furthermore, it is imperative to foster equality and promote inclusivity, ensuring that public institutions operate effectively, efficiently, and with probity.
By adhering to these principles, we can substantially diminish corruption, acknowledge minority viewpoints, and amplify the voices of marginalised communities—an indispensable step towards sustainable development.
By: Shu’aibu Usman Leman,
(Former National Secretary,
Nigeria Union of Journalists)
shuaibuusmanleman@yahoo.com
