Posted by By MOLLY KILETE, Abuja on
As the hearing on Chief D.S.P. Alamieyeseigha's money laundering case is slated to commence in London later this week, many concerned Nigerians continue to discuss the unfortunate situation.
As the hearing on Chief D.S.P. Alamieyeseigha's money laundering case is slated to commence in London later this week, many concerned Nigerians continue to discuss the unfortunate situation.
The governor's absence has placed a strain on the peace and tranquility of the state but many people in Bayelsa State are also very disappointed at the fact that evidence being used against Chief Alamieyeseigha suggests that whether he is freed or not, his image will be tainted forever.
Warman Weri Ogoriba is a young political activist who contested the chairmanship of the Kolokuma/Opokuma LGA in the Peoples Democratic Party(PDP) primaries in Bayelsa State in 2003 and lost in controversial circumstances. Nevertheless, he has remained a stalwart member of the party in the state and insists that, he will continue to participate in the political activities of the party in pursuit of the installation of accountable and relevant governance in his state.
The recent ordeal of the state governor in the United Kingdom has attracted his interest and concern. Lindsay Barrett caught up with him in Yenagoa and sought his opinion on its implications.
What do the younger generation of politicians, like yourself, in Bayelsa State make of the events that have led to the governor's humiliation in the UK?
It is indeed a very sad situation not only for Bayelsa State and the Izon race, but also for the democratic politics of the nation as a whole. I think that what the governor is going through now is a normal process that any governor should be prepared to face and overcome. Politics as a whole and life in general is full of ups and downs, and the governor should simply concentrate on vindicating himself. If the allegations that have been made against him are true, then, it will be truly unfortunate for the people of the state who put so much trust in him.
I am sure you are aware that some highly placed individuals and respected elders of the Izon race and Bayelsa State in particular have declared that the governor's ordeal is being instigated by his detractors and that rather than the cause being a genuine criminal investigation, it represents political harassment. Do you agree with this?
Well, those individuals are entitled to their opinion but if they say that the governor's ordeal in faraway London is being instigated by detractors at home they must be prepared to provide proof of this, because this is a very serious allegation. What I think they should concentrate on more objectively are the issues being raised by the allegations being made against the governor.
As I said before, the onus lies with the governor to prove that these allegations are false but at the same time, those who support and defend them must be careful not to make things worse by making false claims themselves. It is a fact that British authorities have arrested him and granted him bail but also requested that he appear in court at a future date.
We are worried like anyone would be, over the stigma that this event places on our state and people, because he is our elected leader, but we must also consider the circumstances that might have given the British authorities the opportunity to do this and ensure that in the event some of these allegations prove to be well founded, we can gain a true understanding of the situation before we make wild statements in defence of His Excellency. Of course, if the British authorities eventually cannot prove the allegations that led to his arrest, then the whole thing will be settled and his detractors will be put to shame. In a way, this will be the most effective outcome for the governor and the state, so we should hope that the process of justice in the British courts will be properly served.
Well, it seems that one of the things that led to the wide interest and notoriety that has trailed the governor's ordeal is the size of the funds being mentioned. Even more than allegations of large amounts of cash found on his person and in his London home, the huge amounts of British currency representing several billion naira being held in what are assumed to be 'proxy accounts" boggles the mind. How could this be explained, especially, since the governor rules over a state that has minimal internal revenue and depends almost wholly on the allocations from the Federation Account.
The figures being mentioned represents a substantial proportion of such allocations, so it is pertinent to try to understand where the governor or his proxies could have raised such amounts. How do you regard this particular issue?
It is true that Bayelsa State has been woefully underdeveloped. It is true that internal revenue generation of Bayelsa State is negligible for now. It is also true that the governor has performed quite effectively in some areas of provision of new infrastructure in the state, but in development economics, performance is measured in terms of the proportion of revenue that expenditure on projects represent.
Bayelsa State depends almost entirely on the allocation from the Federal Accounts which has expanded enormously since Dr. Alamieyeseigha became governor. Now, it would certainly be most unfair and indeed criminal if any proportion of these moneys meant for the development of this long neglected area, was to be found resting in accounts traced to government officials in London or elsewhere.
If indeed the British police claim to have evidence of this, they should be allowed prove it no matter the source of their information. If indeed it is proven that such moneys are really deposited in accounts that can be traced either directly or indirectly to the governor then, the people of the state have a duty to demand to know how they got there, because it is his task to conserve our funds and use them for the development of the state and it is hard for us to prove that such enormous amounts did not come from the coffers of the state.
The governor must keep his record clean as a part of his commitment to the mandate given to him, and in doing so he must prove his enemies wrong if he is to satisfy the confidence placed in him by his people.
You are a member of the same political party as the governor and you have been an active participant in the politics of your state.
To what extent do you think that the way the governor has conducted the affairs of the state and the party, may have created the circumstances that he is now facing in the UK?
It is indeed true that I am a loyal member of the PDP and have practical experience in the politics of the state. For more than 14 years, I have been actively involved and so I understand the political terrain very well. With this background, I want to say that the governor has not done very well in the area of monitoring the accountability of the grassroots governance in the state.
He has not enabled the people of the state to truly know the state of the revenue and expenditure of the various arms of government and it is this attitude that has made many Bayelsans very doubtful of the probity of his administration. If he had allowed more public disclosure over the accounts of the state, especially enabling people to know for a fact how much came in and how it was expended then there would certainly be a wider and more vocal public resistance to his situation since the people would be confident in saying that such amounts had not been siphoned out of the public coffers. Unfortunately, that has not been the case. Even though the governor has certainly done well in putting some visible infrastructure in place, no one knows what proportion of the state's revenue these projects represent.
Well some persons who have been defending the governor say that the way he was humiliated in London indicates that he is being targeted for political reasons because if the true purpose of whoever wanted him humiliated was to have justice served they would have waited until he left office in 2007. What is your view of this opinion?
Well you rightly describe those who have been following this line as 'the governor's defenders" and as such they would hardly be expected to say anything else. However, if we must look at this matter objectively one cannot agree that if the evidence exists of the contravention of British laws one should expect the British to wait until Chief Alamieyeseigha leaves office to prosecute him. So, it comes down once again to the governor being able or willing to allow the course of British justice to run and thus, ensure that he will be fully exonerated.
If this happens, he will be regarded by his people with even greater respect than he enjoys now. So, I believe that if Chief Alamieyeseigha is convinced that he has done nothing contrary to British law, then even the ordeal he is going through now will help to clear his name and certainly let those he considers his enemies hang their heads in shame.
There can be no Bayelsan who does not hope that this will be the eventual outcome of the dilemma, but to simply say that all that has happened should be put down to his political travails is to be either naive or misleading. There may be a perfectly reasonable explanation for the presence of the funds that have been reported being where they are, if they are indeed proven to be there. Only the governor can clarify this issue.
Section 308 of the Nigerian constitution confers immunity against arrest and prosecution of the governor as long as he is in office. Do you subscribe to the view that the British Government has contravened international law by not recognising this immunity when they detained the governor?
I am not an international lawyer, so I cannot say for certain that this is the legal position. But what I do know is that, immunity should not be seen as a licence to commit crime. I am not assuming that the governor is guilty of having committed any crime, but I believe that British justice is fair and equal and that if he is innocent, he will be exonerated and will return to his seat in triumph. However, I must repeat that the onus of proof, lies with him and with no one else and the issue of political dishonesty in the manner in which he was treated will certainly be settled once he is proven innocent.