3 months ago
68
Presidential candidate of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) in the 2023 elections, Prince Adewole Adebayo, in this interview with JOHN AKUBO in Abuja, speaks on some burning national issues, including the controversy over the salaries and allowances of National Assembly members, the recent hunger protests and the seizure of the Nigerian presidential jets in France. Excerpts:
The issue of senator’s salary is heating up the polity. Is the take home of the lawmakers not supposed to be of public knowledge since they are representing the people?
It’s a problem of the media. Nigerian media is a subset of the Nigerian political elite. So they turn constitutional matters to entertainment. It’s the job of the media to approach the issue from an investigative point of view and unravel the truth. That’s why the constitution regards the media as the Fourth Estate of the Realm. If the first branch failed, the second branch failed, the third branch failed, the fourth estate should beam the searchlight on it.
We know what the law says and revenue mobilisation is on point about what the law says. We don’t know what they are doing in practice; that is now not a matter for speculation or a matter for individual opinion. It’s not a policy issue because the policy of the state regarding remuneration of public officials is that they don’t fix their remuneration; it’s fixed by the Revenue Mobilisation and Fiscal Commission. So, that’s what the law says. But if they are getting some money not approved behind, it’s a matter of fact and only a person who has direct knowledge of what is going on can speak to it. It is the duty of the media to put pressure on the National Assembly leadership and the people who work there for us to see and the ICPC should be involved in it to try to ascertain what their remuneration is. I know that the spokesperson for the Senate has already put an angle to it that says that the larger amount being mentioned by some lawmakers includes other money that is not remuneration; that other money that is meant for them to run their offices; other money that is meant for them to pay their legislative aides and to run their constituency offices.
So, it is simple enough for the media to obtain the information about the total money spent on account of senators and now break it down to know which one is remuneration and which one is not remuneration. So, that should not be a sensation across the country. It should be something that should be easily ascertained.
People are still concerned about their role, hence the advocacy for part-time legislation. Do you subscribe to that?
There is no confusion; there is only cover-up. The amount of money they are taking home is more than the amount approved for them. They are using the old personal remuneration trick where you pay little basic salary and then you pay the rest in allowances. That is how people evade responsibility; the Senate is doing it. There are so many government agencies that are doing it. The basic salary will be small, but you have all kinds of allowances that you will be receiving. What is clear is that the person who said he was getting N21 million did not exaggerate.
He was receiving N21 million but all the amount is not his direct remuneration. The bottom line is that public money is going to the hands of the legislators beyond the amount approved by the Revenue Mobilisation and Fiscal Commission (RMFC).
So, it is not the Senate that should be appealed to for transparency because the cover-up and the mischief are coming from there. It is the other agencies like the ICPC, RMFC, the Auditor General of the Federation, all the other institutions that are meant to oversight. As I said, the media should use the Freedom of Information Act to quiz the leadership of the National Assembly, the clerk of the National Assembly and all the other people involved to actually ask for clarity. The SDP as a party believe that social justice is required in the country. The party should summon its members in the National Assembly to give clarity.
Do you think the right thing was done by the President regarding the recent #EndBadGovernance protest that lasted for 10 days?
You see, I knew the protest was going to be like that. And I knew how the government would react. And I knew how it would end. I knew that, of course, people would make their point which would have been obvious to the government ab initio that life has been tough for Nigerians. I knew when we were running for the presidency. And I listened to the programmes of APC, PDP and Labour Party. I knew that they were ready to throw the people into the lagoon. I knew that this policy of so-called removal of subsidy was another excuse for petroleum excise. I knew that Nigeria would float its currency. It was a recipe for disaster in terms of factor price and inflation and you see that I spoke extensively all over the country in all the debates, in interviews, in campaign grounds, that Nigeria should not vote for either Labour Party, APC or PDP; not because of any other thing than the fact that their policies would put people in great distress and that distress will affect everybody.
This is because when the people don’t have good income and they’re not stable, even industries cannot open because when you produce something, people cannot afford it. And when they cannot afford it, they buy less, and you can’t get the volume to produce, you don’t have enough money. And if you devalue the currency, components that you need to run your industries, you will not be able to handle them. So, it’s predictable.
But people voted for these policies. And now the policies are being implemented and they are killing themselves over it. They have not even seen the end of it; it’s just the beginning of the problems that will come out of it.
So, the government, what can they do? They are stuck in this bad policy. So, yes it’s true that the president made a speech that was not that conciliatory and was not in a particular order addressing the problems. But it just shows you that the problem has some set of solutions. And those solutions appear to be beyond the government because they have committed themselves to the policies. Unless you have a policy shift away from these neo-liberal policies, shift away from throwing your currency to the dogs, shift away from the idea of not being able to control inflation and not being able to generate employment for your people; if you don’t do any of these things, even when the president goes on his knees, the destiny of the country will not change. So, I’m not here to critique the president regarding how he rendered his speech or not, but I would say that the speech should have been more humane, in tone. But beyond that, the main issue should have been that it’s an opportunity for the government to review these policies.
Not only the government; many of the people who are in opposition still believe in this ill idea too. And other political parties that are not in government, like PDP and LP that are not in the executive branch at the national level, they are still following that. They have not denounced these policies; because these policies are bad. And the Nigerian people should understand that President Tinubu did not disappoint the people. He said he was going to remove subsidy, he was going to float the currency, everything he said he was going to do, that’s what he’s doing.
So, they had an opportunity to listen to him, listen to Peter Obi, listen to Alhaji Atiku Abubakar and realise that these three people are not acting in our best interest, and they should not have voted for any of them. So, if you voted for them and you come out now to be demonstrating on the streets, that is not a democratic way to look at it because you voted for these policies. So, people should understand that this is not a military government. This is an elected government and the way you teach an elected government to listen to you is to make sure you don’t vote for them. So, when they lose a few governorship elections and all by-elections, they will start to understand that you don’t want them to continue the way they are doing.
But if you keep voting for them, they will assume that you are happy with their policies and they will think that those who are demonstrating or protesting are just troublemakers, because a politician is going to listen to what the majority wants, and the major way the majority shows its hands is on election day.
Where do you think things went wrong between the Ogun State Government and the Chinese firm, which has led to the seizure of Federal Government’s assets?
Things actually went wrong when the company and the state government that were supposed to be partners became opponents and started litigating. Sometimes, these businesses outlive the tenure of the incumbent governor and the successor might not understand the seriousness and decide to terminate the contract. But internationally, when you engage investors and you sign these contracts, you are not only signing commercial contracts, you are also signing treaties in some situations, and if there is a dispute between the government and the investor, the investor may decide to sue on their own, in a regular court, or it may go into arbitration, or state treaty arbitration. In this case, as a Nigerian doing business in China, there is an agreement internationally which Nigeria and China are signatories to, where they say if our citizen is doing business in the other country, they can do arbitration through the mechanism of the treaty. So, the issue we need to understand is that the dispute is not originally a Federal Government obligation; it is an obligation of Ogun State. But, under public international law, subdivisions, subsidiaries and sub-nationals are not recognised internationally. So, if a state out of the 36 states in Nigeria has an international obligation, Nigeria will be the one to be held to account. That is where Nigeria is implicated in the matter.
We also need to know that it is not a loan; it is not as if Nigeria took a loan and used any of these national assets as collateral. No; it was business that was supposed to be done between the Ogun State government and the Chinese private firm, which has gone to arbitration to allege that the Ogun State government breached the contract by stopping them from making progress and they have suffered losses and both parties went to arbitration.
The second stage where it went wrong is that when you go to arbitration and the arbitration award is against you, you should try for the sake of your reputation to pay. But, on some occasions, the state entity involved may be advised by the lawyers that the arbitrators made a mistake or that they misbehaved themselves and went outside their jurisdiction. So, some of these things may go into litigation, and sometimes, it is just a lack of political will to deal with the issue and they are dealing with it casually.
The interim attachment of the presidential jets doesn’t mean that the jets have been lost because under the international law, assets of the Federal Government used by the government for diplomacy and monies kept in our Central Bank for the central banking activities are immune. No court at any time can attach them. I want us to understand that clearly. So, when you go to court for an interim order, typically only one side is heard; the court has not heard from Nigeria’s side. So, the Chinese firm going to court to say that these are aircraft like any other aircraft and seize the aircraft will not work. They are for maintenance in France and any person, whether you are in government or not, can bring your aircraft for maintenance. So, the court might be inclined to just put a temporary seizure and serve notice on Nigeria to appear. I believe that as the law stands, once Nigeria appears and can demonstrate, especially with the assistance of the foreign ministry of the French Government that these are diplomatic assets, the court will lift the seizure. That does not mean you should not settle your counter-party; it doesn’t mean you should not pay your judgment debt when you have gotten finality in litigation, but typically, you do not attach monies or assets belonging to central banks and you do not attach asset or money or property belonging to a sovereign nation, and Nigeria is a sovereign nation headed by a president, who is using it for diplomacy.
What do you think is the worst case scenario for Nigeria in terms of payment in this ongoing case?
The worst case scenario is that Nigeria will get the arbitration award or a portion of it. As lawyers, it is very difficult to second guess when you are not the one handling the matter. One will assume that the lawyers to the Federal Government know that they have become arbitrators internationally and the lawyers to the Ogun State government will know enough law to advise them. But, from my experience, I understand the position of the Chinese company is now, because I have been in that position against the attorney general of Nigeria on many occasions such that I have threatened to seize assets before. In fact, in the past, I have seized the assets of this same government in London. What I can say generally as a citizen, if I can advise the government, is that they should be careful of their commercial reputation, because they are running a neo-liberal government and most of their macroeconomic policies are dependent on attracting Foreign Direct Investment and foreign portfolio investment, and in that kind of situation they wouldn’t want be seen as a tough cookie, difficult people to do business with, because Nigeria has very good lawyers. Nigeria is highly litigious. It is not today; it has been like that for many years.
There is a case where Paul Danny of England passed some negative comments about Nigeria on our attitude towards meeting our obligation. So, Nigeria is known to be a tough customer such that when they owe you, they don’t want to pay; they will argue it to the end. On many occasions, they get it right, like in the case of P&ID. It would have been a disservice to the country to pay all that humongous amount of money without scrutiny. That scrutiny saved the country massive income, saved the country a lot of our wealth and saved millions of people from going into poverty for having to pay $13 billion, which we did not have. But, occasionally, when you also challenge other ones, you get into tough situations but it is an embarrassment that is temporary. I believe that in the next proceeding following this, these aircraft will be released, but that doesn’t mean that releasing the aircraft will extinguish the obligation to pay any judgment debt. No, it means that Nigeria can breathe easy and then can now focus on how to negotiate.
Additionally, the Attorney General should be careful in advising the attorneys general. They should know that if they are entering into any obligation with international people, and sometimes even with Nigerians, if they agree to arbitration, they should be careful to realise the implications. I think the Attorney General of Nigeria should have advised the Ogun State government, one way or the other, on how to resolve this matter because none of the 36 states in Nigeria is known in the international arena.
So, we must have a system whereby we are able to convince the international community that we are a serious people. One governor should not come and sign a contract only for another governor to come, either because of politics or other problems not associated with the investor, and cancel the investment. Many Nigerians have lost assets and many international people have lost assets through this attitude. I myself have been a victim of it. On many occasions, you bring investors to the country, they are doing well and being applauded, then the next government comes, whether due to no attention, politics, malice or mischief, then they throw the people out and then trouble starts.
The most important lesson to learn is to make our courts to be fair and respected so that investors and partners can agree to do their litigation in Nigeria, because the tendency is that people just believe that the Nigeria court system is too slow and the system is not going to give you justice and everybody insists on having international arbitration clauses in their agreement. That is making us lose money, reputation and an opportunity to resolve issues domestically.
It appears Nigeria may be fighting this battle in multiple jurisdictions as the Chinese firm is threatening to take the battle to other countries like the UK. How difficult do you think this could pose for Ogun State and Nigeria, legally speaking?
For Ogun State, Nigeria is the father and guarantor. Internationally, nobody knows Ogun State. I don’t think it has any assets internationally that can be exposed. The most that can happen to Ogun State is that the Attorney General of the Federation may insist on deducting the money from the Ogun State FAAC; that is it. But these are pressure tactics. So, it doesn’t mean that going to the UK, America and everywhere is going to get you the asset because the laws are very clear. It is very difficult to attach assets of a sovereign nation in the UK, even in the U.S. The judgment they got at the Court of Appeal is similar to some judgments in the past. Just recognising the fact that Nigeria agreed not to assert immunity when you are enforcing a particular asset does not lose their immune status. But because they are putting pressure, trying to embarrass Nigeria everywhere, their aim is not necessarily to keep the asset, but to put Nigeria in the negative news all the time. So, if you are raising bonds, you are talking to investors everywhere, and everybody will be asking you about your debt and if you are being rated globally, some of the rating agencies will consider it; these are pressure tactics.
Nigeria is a very difficult country to recover assets from. I have been in litigation before where we spent $60 million in litigation just to recover from Nigeria and it took years. So, Nigeria is very tough. I have tried to recover from other countries, and once you make a little effort here and there, they will call you and negotiate with you. Nigeria is a very tough customer internationally. Maybe, the lawyers in the Ministry of Justice will be happy to say people will think twice before they sue Nigeria. But if you want to do business and you are in Singapore or UAE where people carry their businesses to, then, you don’t want to be seen as a guy who is tough, who will argue, litigate and be excessive to the end.
I think what the Ogun State governor should be doing is to see how to make Ogun State good for business not arguing legally. That is for the lawyers to do in Paris because you must continue to assure the investors that all is well. I am a lawyer; I am from Nigeria. I want to be Nigerian president. I am loyal and patriotic to the country but as a professional, if an international business asks me where they should take their business to and I am advising them on Nigeria, I am bound by professional ethics that Nigeria is a very difficult country and that if you get litigation against them, they may not pay you and they will make trouble with you. That’s part of what you need to advise them and you don’t want that to be part of your profile.
I am not saying you should not defend the country but you should make sure that you don’t lose your reputation. But overall, there is no need to panic. This is what happens regularly. What the judgment creditor is trying to do is to put you under pressure in many countries. They may not recover anything from all those countries but they are crying for attention. They are saying, please pay attention to us. Remember China is a very strong country and you don’t want to offend a country that is your partner on many fronts.
English (US) ·