• Home
• Columnist
• Videos
• Artist
  • Musicians
  • Actors
  • Comedians
• Notable Nigerians
• Legend Dies
• Articles
  • Nigeria Articles
• Photos
• Submit Article

The inside story of why Farida Waziri, chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, lost her job

In the past few months, there  has been speculation about an impending shake-up in the   Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC. This was reinforced by the feud between Farida Waziri, chairman of the anti-graft agency and Mohammed Adoke, attorney-general of the federation, AGF, and minister of justice, over allegation, of a plot to whittle down the power of the commission.

  The speculation eventually came to pass last Wednesday, when President Goodluck Jonathan sacked Waziri as the chairman of the commission. Reuben Abati, special adviser to President Jonathan  on media and publicity, who announced Waziri’s removal, said the president has approved the appointment of Ibrahim Lamorde, as the acting chairman/chief of the EFCC. In a terse statement on the abrupt change of guards in the EFCC, Abati said that Lamorde’s appointment “takes immediate effect, and effectively relieves Farida Waziri of her position as EFCC chairman.”

Lamorde, an officer of the Nigeria Police, was, until this appointment, the Director of Operations of the EFCC. He had acted as chairman of the EFCC before Waziri assumed duty at the commission in May 2008, when she was appointed by the late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua. Incidentally, her appointment was terminated when she had one year to end her tenure. She was also not officially communicated to on her removal.

Although Abati did not give the reason why his boss booted  out Waziri as the helmsman of the EFCC, Newswatch learnt the president took the action based on allegations of unethical conduct and procedural blunders in her prosecution of the anti-corruption war. The president was also not comfortable with  the frosty relationship between Adoke and Waziri which tends to have hampered the anti-corruption war.   Shortly after Adoke was sworn in as the AGF, a controversy arose over new guidelines for the EFCC and the alleged plan to merge the EFCC and the Independent Corrupt Practices and other Related Offences Commission, ICPC. 

The feud between Adoke and Waziri worsened when the EFCC boss raised the alarm over moves by a clique of some serving top government officials to disparage her. She alleged that the clique was working in tandem with some unnamed “powerful people” who are currently standing trial for corruption and alleged oily deals to discredit her and the EFCC.

Although Waziri did not give names of members of the clique or those she referred to as “powerful people” standing trial, those who were privy to the running battle she had been having with the AGF suspected that she was referring to him as one of those deeply involved in a grand design for her downfall.

Femi Babafemi, the EFCC spokesman, alleged a few months ago that certain known elements in the defence of the corrupt fold, had come up with a different identity and found partnership in a clique in official quarters to wage war against the EFCC and its officials, especially Waziri.

“Specifically, a newly improvised group had, in a well-co-ordinated plot designed to embarrass and distract Waziri, written a letter dated July 15, 2011, to the attorney-general and minister of justice, asking him to investigate the last rank of the EFCC chairman,” Babafemi said.

The efforts of the AGF to bring the anti-graft, especially EFCC under the firm grip of the justice ministry had been on since he was first appointed.  Newswatch learnt that shortly after Adoke was sworn in, he had in June 2010, set up a nine -man committee headed by Deji Adekunle, to review the draft regulations of the EFCC and make recommendations to regulate the Commission, as well as make it conform to relevant laws and ultimately promote its efficiency.

The committee, at the completion of its work last year, recommended among several other things, the need to put in place comprehensive guidelines for all prosecuting bodies in order to minimise cases of abuse and ensure best practices.  The committee also recommended that the AGF should be informed of the results of investigations carried out by the EFCC. It proposed that this should be done in a narrow range in what it termed ‘Threshhold serious Complex cases’ but a routine reporting system for purposes of record and overview was recommended in the form of quarterly reports.

The committee also recommended that while the constitution confers overarching supervision over public prosecutions on the AGF, there was the need to have clear parameters set by the AGF for evaluating cases and determining when to prosecute.  The parameters recommended include amongst others, the gravity of the case, utility of timeliness of prosecution, the availability or evidence, the impact of the crime on society and the nature of crime itself.

However, Adoke has consistently denied that he was out to muzzle the anti-graft-agencies. According to him, the guidelines sent out to EFCC was done last year and that the aim  was not to unduly control the commission but to ensure that it respects suspects’ rights and liberties as enshrined in the constitution.

He had told Newswatch that the regulation seeks to prescribe safeguards to ensure that the prosecutorial powers of a publicly funded agency are exercised with due diligence and are not deployed to fight perceived enemies. He explained that regardless of the alarm raised in certain quarters that the guidelines were meant to cripple the anti-graft agency he was resolutely committed towards supporting President Jonathan’s determination to fight corruption within the ambit of the law.

The covert mudslinging by various groups suspected to be sponsored by Adoke and Waziri which sprang up with allegations and counter-allegations was said to have embarrassed the president. Although the two personalities sorted out their differences following the intervention of the president, the seed of discord sown by the feud lingered on.

Apart from the feud between Waziri and Adoke, the president is believed to have sacked her based on intense pressure he had received from formidable political interests cutting across party lines, especially at the National Assembly and the Nigerian Governors’ Forum, NGF. Some of them felt that she was incompetent and had a penchant to arrest suspects before investigating allegations against them. This manifested in the recent arraignment of some ex- governors by the commission for corruption when the operatives did not have ample evidence to effect charges against them.

However, prior to the political pressure for her removal, the presidency had been uncomfortable with criticisms of Waziri by US diplomats who described her as being controlled by politicians and unprepared for the job.  Indeed, recently, Hillary Clinton, US secretary of state, was lacerating in her assessment of the EFCC under Waziri. Similarly, the London Metropolitan Police was compelled to announce a severance of ties with the EFCC over the handling of the case involving James Ibori, former governor of Delta State. She was alleged to have signed a letter of pardon for Ibori, hence his failure to challenge his acquittal by the High Court in Asaba.

 It was further gathered that this compelled President Jonathan to sack Waziri based on a representation by a league of international anti-graft agencies that was said to have expressed fears that Nigeria was playing politics with the fight against corruption with her continued stay in office as EFCC boss. Sources said that the international anti-graft fighters actually made representation to President Jonathan to reinvigorate the ant-graft war by sacking Waziri.

Besides, her removal could also be linked to her alleged inability to track the source of funding for the operation of Boko Haram, the Islamic fundamentalist sect. Sources said that the funds used in recent suicide bomb blasts were offshore funds which the EFCC failed to trace.

The relationship between Farida and Victor Uwajeh also cast her in very bad light. She first denied knowing Uwajeh, whom she claimed was being used against her, until the man produced pictures showing him with Farida at a party.

Many Nigerians have commended the removal of Waziri as a step in the right direction. Mike Ozhekome, SAN, described her removal as good riddance to bad rubbish. He faulted the mode of her operation and said she was in the habit of relating with tainted individuals. Ozhekome further accused the former EFCC boss of selective justice.  According to him, her dispensation lacked human face and wore the monstrous visage of persecution rather than prosecution.

Fred Agbaje, a Lagos, lawyer, said that Waziri did not live up to expectation because, during her tenure, corruption and other related financial offences witnessed a geometrical increase. He, however, commended her efforts, especially her compliance with the rule of law, but quickly retorted that she would have achieved more, if she was able to take the bull of corruption by the horns.

Bamidele Aturu,  a lawyer and human rights activist,  said that Waziri’s removal was a very good development for the EFCC.  “We have called severally for her removal in the past. It is true we want to see the development of the EFCC as an institution, but we need people who are interested in waging war vigorously against corruption. The Presidency must not look for a replacement that would be interested in occupying the position for the sake of it, but a credible official that would be committed to the tenets establishing the EFCC,” Aturu said.

Maxi Okwu, president, Patriotic Alliance of Nigeria, PAN, described Waziri’s removal as “a breath of fresh air” and urged the president to seriously consider confirming Lamorde as chairman.  He advised that Lamorde should be confirmed because he has a pedigree and a potential to perform well.

With last week’s removal of Waziri as EFCC boss and the appointment of Lamorde as acting chairman of the commission, the president appears poised to reinvigorate the anti-graft war. The choice of Lamorde as acting chairman was considered to be apt because he was believed to be the engine room of the Ribadu anti-graft crusade.

The new acting anti-graft chairman is an assistant commissioner of Police, who has stepped into that position for the second time. His appointment is expected to reinvigorate the anti-graft war of the Jonathan administration. Lamorde, 48, was the no-nonsense director of operations when Ribadu held fort as chairman. When  the late Yar’Adua removed Ribadu in 2008 under the pretext of sending him for a senior officers’ course at the National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies,NIPSS, Kuru, Plateau State,  Lamorde became the acting chairman.

When Waziri was appointed the substantive chairman, Lamorde was posted to Ningi, a particularly dangerous area in Bauchi State. However, in December 2010, Lamorde was posted back to the EFCC, based on the directive of President Jonathan.   He retained his post as director of operations, and deputy chairman of the commission.

Lamorde has more than 20 years training and experience in policing and management. He joined the Nigeria Police Force in 1986, after graduating with a Bachelor of Science degree in Sociology from the Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, in 1984. He served at the Niger State Police Command between 1987 and 1988.  He was the divisional crime officer, DCO, in Rijau, Niger State, between 1988 and 1989 and served as police public relations officer, PPRO, of the Niger State Police Command for four years.

Lamorde was a pioneer officer of the Special Fraud Unit, SFU, of the Nigeria Police, created in 1993. While still an officer of the SFU, he was deployed as chief investigation officer in the United Nations Civilian Police in the  Ermera District of East Timor where he served between 2000 and 2001.

On his return, he became the Divisional Police Officer, Ojo, Ibadan, Oyo State, from where he was deployed by the Force Headquarters, Abuja, as a pioneer director of operations of the EFCC.

In the global pursuit of criminals, Lamorde has worked effectively with other government law enforcement agencies around the world, including the FBI, Metropolitan Police, US Postal Inspection Services, USPIS, Internet Crime Complaints Centre, IC3, the Dutch Police, German Police and the South African Police.