FG was right in handing Bakassi over to Cameroun - Olu Onagoruwa

updated: Monday 25-08-2008

Dr. Olu Onagoruwa.
Photo: Wole EfunnugaDr. Olu Onagoruwa was the Attorney-General of the Federation during late General Sani Abacha’s military regime. In this interview with Associate Editor, Wole Efunnuga and Assistant Editor, Oluwatoyin Malik, he speaks on the reason behind Gani Fawehinmi’s opposition to his accepting the AGF job, his position on the Bakassi handover issue, the murder of his son, Toyin, and sundry issues.
Excerpts:

You were once the Attorney-General of the Federation and you were a core participant in the Bakassi issue. Very recently Nigeria handed over Bakassi to Cameroun. What is your view about this handing over?
My view is that the government was very right in handing over Bakassi. Not only was the government right because it was proper, but also because it was sensible. Now, many people are saying the government shouldn’t have handed over Bakassi to Cameroun. That is not correct. The government acted properly, because once the International Court gave its verdict, and we consented to it, we have no choice. So what the government did was to vindicate the rule of law all over the world. Number two, Bakassi doesn’t belong to us, it is not in our map, because for you to claim anything, it must belong to you. Three, Dr. Elias, the great judge, told us in Nigeria that the place did not belong to us. No amount of noisemaking, no amount of emotional weeping would change this. That’s the point for now.

It was learnt that Bakassi was ceded to Cameroun by the British. Why do you say it didn’t belong to Nigeria?
Number one, the greatest authority, Dr. Elias, said it didn’t belong to us. Two, it is not anywhere in our map. Number three, we consented to the judgement and when you consent, then you’ve lost your right.

Don’t you see that as faulty leadership, to have consented without any argument to favour Nigeria?
No, no, no. Elias might have been wrong in many things and people are criticising him, but he wasn’t wrong on Bakassi; he was only enforcing the judgement. And what he did was correct.

When the issue of Bakassi arose, I told Abacha that we could not win the case and he was angry. I said the best thing was to continue to deny Cameroun’s claim of ownership; and we would be having that ad infinitum. But they didn’t agree with me; apparently they wanted money, they wanted the oil.

It got to a stage that the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF) started to libel me; telling everyone that I didn’t like the government. It became a blackmail but I insisted that the best thing was not to challenge them, it was not even to enter appearance in the case, but they refused. They wanted money and they got the money, and the money has finished them.

You mentioned the rule of law while talking on Bakassi. How would you assess President Yar’Adua’s stance on rule of law in Nigeria?
Well, one, for anybody to proclaim the rule of law is to proclaim the truth. Before he got into government, he had said he would pursue the rule of law. Whether he has pursued it or not is not for anybody to complain. He has said the right thing. Now, the issue is: has he followed this? I think he has followed the rule of law, though there are some faults here and there. But you know in Nigeria it’s very difficult to lead because people don’t know what they really want; they don’t know what they mean; they don’t know what they want, they just exclaim and shout, and people believe that when you shout much in this country, then you’re actually asserting your right. That is not correct.
Yar’Adua may have gone slowly, but don’t forget he’s a sick man. You must bear with him. So I don’t think that he has broken the rule of law, though in some of their decisions, you can see clumsiness here and there. But he’s still a new man in office, whether you like it or not. And then nobody can ascertain the nature of the sickness, I just know that it’s a very terrible sickness. But he will survive and he will help this country to the best of his ability.

Sir, still on this rule of law, some people argue that a federal high court in Abuja gave an interim order that the President should hold back from handing over Bakassi, with even a portion of the Senate kicking against his handing over on that day. But he still went ahead to do it, yet he claims to be a man who believes in the philosophy of rule of law.
Yes, I believe that the procedure was wrong. The government should have applied to a superior court to cancel the order before he did what he did. But he was right. That judge knew that he couldn’t prevent the International Court’s order. The International Court and international law are superior to local domestic law. So, the judge shouldn’t have proceeded to grant that order. He knew that it was above his jurisdiction, but having done so, the Attorney-General and Mr President should have gone to court to have the order cancelled. They were wrong in granting it. But the point is that Yar’Adua took the correct position by handing over Bakassi on the day he promised to hand over. No local court has the jurisdiction to change the decision of the international court. But you cannot argue with Nigerians because they would just make all the noise that they can mobilise and say what they want. The President was right in giving Bakassi to the owner.

Another aspect of this rule of law is that most of our past leaders, presidents and governors, through the application of the rule of law, seem to be easily let off the hook, whereas we see that in other countries of the world, even allegations that are not as grave as theirs brought about serious sanctions on the leaders of such countries.
Give me an example of such countries.

For example, there was a minister in China that was sentenced for collaborating with an agency to bring in fake drugs and he was beheaded.
That’s true. Now, you cannot punish someone unless you find him guilty. That’s the basic stand of the rule of law. But once you find him guilty and you don’t punish him, that’s a breach of the rule of law. In Nigeria, there are men who have offended the law and they’re being hidden, but once the government has brought them out, they’re punished. You don’t punish a public person; that’s the rule of law. You punish people who are guilty, people you find guilty. Now, the point is that you must wait for the event to happen and once it happens, you then punish. But for you to punish before the rule of law or before you investigate the case, that’s the crime. You cannot punish unless you find the person guilty.

Some people still argue that even the like of Alamieyeseigha who was found guilty of doing some things was given very light punishment while some other ex-governors too were only charged to court, granted bail and left untouched. People are even beginning to have fears about the competence of the EFCC...
I agree with you that the EFCC is not doing fully well what it should have been doing. But the point is that Nigeria is rooted in long-standing record of crime, and you know the criminals have very big friends in the top hierarchy of government. What we are going through now is that we are trying to establish a record that would help the country. You will see people still running away from the law because they are not worried, they don’t understand the law - or they understand it but they don’t want to follow it.

Some people complain about the president being slow while some others believe that he is strategising. What is your comment on Mr President’s style of administration?
We must concede to him that he’s not very strong in health, but he’s trying his best. He has many vultures around him there; vultures who are anxious to make money. They are there in that government. And then, what can he do? He can only ask that they be taken to court. And if somebody fails in going to court, that may not be the fault of the person.

Can we really attribute his being slow to his health? If we look at the case of Fidel Castro, he’s in the hospital, very ill, but the country is being run well by the person he has put there. If Mr. President is not very sound in health, are his aides — the ministers, the special advisers-not supposed to help him in moving the country faster towards development?
You see, I’m not saying that the excuse is his health. I’m not saying that. I’m saying that, looking at him, we must take it into account. If he’s too sick to work, he should resign and hand over the power. But my view is that, at this moment, he’s still trying his best to help the country. It’s not very easy, particularly in Nigeria. They would stretch you. “Oh, you did it this way, you did that”... That’s the way they behave.

You mentioned how you advised the late General Sani Abacha and how things went. What was it like working with him? Do you have any regrets working with him?
Hm, I have regrets working with him.

You have?
Yes, because he was a blood-shedding person. What happened in government was that we who he was discrediting, we were the people who were really helping the government. And you know when a head of state goes looking for money, money, money, he would fail as he cannot spend it on anything reasonable, particularly stolen money. You heard what the three former heads of state were saying that he didn’t steal! Can you imagine such a thing? The man stole; he not only stole, he murdered.

But did you not see all these vices in him before you offered to work with him?
No, no, no. How can I believe that somebody who became the Head of State would continue to murder the citizens and loot money; how can I believe that? You see, one’s being in government shouldn’t be to steal money. It is anathema. I didn’t believe that Abacha would steal people’s money? I didn’t believe it.

I regretted working with him. But given another opportunity to work again in a government, I will do it. The role of lawyers in government is separate. A lawyer should not go helping government to steal money. He would be failing in his basic duty. What you do in this world, you will account to God.

Chief Gani Fawehinmi appears to be somebody who loves you so much. He advised you not to move near Abacha...
I’m sure you would have read the argument between me and him. I posed 29 questions for him to answer and he has not answered them. I don’t want to talk about it because he’s ill. If he were not, I would have restated my arguments. I argued in 29 questions. I said: “Gani, you should answer these questions. If you answer, then, that’s the end”.

You see, he was not telling me not to go into goverment for the benefit of Nigeria. He was saying it for his own private reasons. At that time, Buhari wanted to make him Attorney-General, and that was the time Babangida came in and took over. So, by telling me not to go, he was only angry that I shouldn’t be ahead of him. You see, he was not talking for Nigeria, it was about himself and he presented it as if he was telling me not to go. He didn’t give me any reason why I should not go. I shouldn’t just go.

For no reason?
No. Am I a dunce? I don’t want to talk about it any more. He knows that I have all these particulars with me. Gani doesn’t believe that anybody is superior to him; he believes he is the leader.

Apart from Gani Fawehinmi, some Nigerians felt you were among the progressives then and that your being part of the military government negated the agitation for democratic rule then.
No, that’s not correct. One, people didn’t oppose me — only Gani, and he didn’t give me reasons. Now when he challenged me, supposedly wrote a book, abusing me, I gave him a reply. I gave him 29 questions to answer, to tell people that he was honest. There was no reason I shouldn’t become the Attorney-General because once a lawyer becomes the Attorney-General, he’s the leader of the Bar. Nobody can change that, whether you give him SAN or not. SAN is a decoration. So, I was called to the highest office in the land for my profession and I accepted. Whether anybody opposed it or not, - they might have opposed it, I would not agree with them — but nobody actually opposed it, except all those Gani’s underdogs, they would criticise me, but some people like Femi Falana said it’s wrong. Only Femi Falana wrote in my favour, saying ‘the Attorney-General is highly qualified for the office. He’s highly qualified to be appointed.’ He wrote in their own paper’ and they were angry with him, but that’s not my problem. That’s their problem. I had been offered a post and I decided rightly to accept it. Many important people advised me to take it up, and I did.

There were cases of assassinations in Nigeria, and people would say that they do not know the killers. That brings us to the issue of your son’s murder. Do you know the person who killed your son?
You see, when it happened, the Head of State, General Abacha, sent two delegations to me, one led by the Attorney-General, and the other one led by the Chief of Staff. I didn’t know that the government had a hand in it. I didn’t know. So, when matters started to unfold, I discovered that the Head of State was directly involved.

How did you discover that?
The car used for my son’s murder was found in Aso Rock. I wondered why the Head of State would have a hand in it. Why should a Head of State have a hand in the murder of his minister’s son? I was sad. They could not discover who killed my son because they’re not investigative, they’re not imaginative, they were anxious to cover up. I wrote to him, telling him.

Your findings?
Yes. If you read my book, you’ll see it there. One Colonel, now Brigadier’s car was used. His car was used. And I was flabbergasted that in this country, a Head of State should order the execution of the son of his minister. But I was not surprised because they attacked Alex Ibru before that. The case is still in court.

My offence was that one Mr. Ogboru was discharged and acquitted in a case filed by the government and the minister for internal affairs wrote to me, when I got into government, asking for my opinion. And I said: ‘Please release him, the court has granted him exception.’

And then, barely two days later, Abacha sent for me and said I was opposed to his government. I said ‘No, my duty is to protect your government and you’. He didn’t agree. He was also angry with Alex Ibru and this was the reason he wanted to kill Alex Ibru.

In what way were you opposed to his government?
I don’t know. He was telling me ‘you’re opposed to my government.’ I didn’t know he was so much involved.

Did he want that person prosecuted?
Yes, he then went and re-arrested the man.

Was it the same Great Ogboru family?
It was the same Ogboru. His family; the junior brother. So, he ordered that Ogboru be re-arrested. He told me that, but I said that would be wrong; we had no right to re-arrest him because the court ordered his release. I said “look, whatever grievances you have should have been ventilated before the judge by your lawyers’. I said it’s very wrong. I didn’t know he was angry.

He was so angry with me. I was performing in the government; that’s why he didn’t dismiss me. I think he would have dismissed me then. He said Ogboru wanted to kill him (Abacha) directly and I asked him (Ogboru) to go! I said, ‘No, the court said he should go. I’m not the court; I’m the Attorney-General.’ I told him I could be wrong by doing his work faithfully. He said no, I wasn’t faithful. I asked: ‘do you want me to go?’ He said: ‘I didn’t ask you to go but once your Commander-in-Chief is opposed to this thing, you shouldn’t support it.’

So, I later discovered that the car was there in Aso Rock and it was only brought out by Justice Chukwudifu Oputa. Oputa later said that the car should be brought and they brought the car from Aso Rock. At the panel on that day, I was the saddest man. And so, this man killed my son. Once you have a Head of State killing people for whatever reason, then the government has become a monster. They killed my son for no reason other than that I gave a piece of advice which Abacha didn’t like.

Let’s come back to another military person who just left power about a year and three months ago. That’s Chief Olusegun Obasanjo. How would you assess his administration?
I just felt that he was just trying to establish a new system for us, and in that state, you cannot but make mistakes. I believe he made mistakes, a lot of mistakes. But my credit goes to Obasanjo for introducing EFCC. The EFCC has shown us that this country is too corrupt; everybody in this country is corrupt. So, for Obasanjo to inaugurate EFCC is an achievement.

And now, we cannot go back. You know, recently, Ribadu was being punished for being the chairman of EFCC. But nobody can cancel the administration, they can only punish him. That’s my belief. Obasanjo did some very good things, like the EFCC. And then, he recovered a lot of money for us. I believe we should stop attacking him, we should leave him. I think we should look into the future and forget about it. He did good and bad things. I didn’t want to mention them because Obasanjo was dear to me. We’re not close friends, but I believe he was very great.

He established the EFCC and put Ribadu there. Throughout his regime, Ribadu had accelerated promotion. Now recently, the Police Service Commission reversed that promotion? Was that legal?
No, I don’t think the police were right. If Ribadu was promoted, he didn’t promote himself. He was promoted by the government. So, the fault should not be his own for being promoted wrongly. I think the government needs to have a proper review of his case. And there are many others. Many people have argued against that decision. The government has no right just to decide to punish the man because he was the director of EFCC. I don’t think they were right.