Nigerian Politics: The Peculiar Justice of Shekarau
Administration
Writers Articles And Opinions
27 October 2009
By Saka Raji Audu
The word
Adalchi is a Hausa language that signifies justice
and justice means fairness. It is this quest for
fairness and equity that the All Nigerians People's
Party (ANPP) adopts Adalchi as its slogan or
motto. In Islamic political and economic systems,
justice and equity play important role in the life of
the people. This is because; a society without justice
or fairness cannot witness realistic progress and
advancement. So, it is not by coincidence that Kano
State, under the practice of the Islamic code of
conduct (Shari'ah) emphasizes Adalchi as her
guiding principle. It is against this background that
Shekarau government, since 2003, abhors the secular
principle of robbing Peter to pay Paul.
When Shekarau came to power through highly celebrated
popular votes in that year, his government tried and
looked into the issue of various injustices
perpetrated by the previous administration. Among
these denials and injustices by Shekarau predecessor
are failures to settle Pensioner's benefits, the
sacking of non-indigenes from the state civil service
leading to shortage of qualified medical personnel and
teachers of science subjects in the state,
non-settlement of salaries and allowances of PDP
councilors, unlawful demotion, etcetera, etcetera,
excetera.
While all of the above injustices were being
perpetrated with reckless abandon and impunity by the
previous government, no one was bold enough to put up
challenges against the odds. This was, perhaps,
because the issue of people's freedom of expression
was some how limited, restrained and nothing to write
about. But as soon as Shekarau administration assumed
office in May 2003 with the principle of Adalchi,
things began to take proper shape. Shekarau government
also began to look into the various injustices and
glaring violation of people's legitimate freedom with
a view to correct them. It however ensured that all
the non-indigenes whose appointments were unlawfully
terminated based on ethnic and primordial sentiments
were recalled and reinstated.
As a matter of fact, before Shekarau was elected
governor, a certain chemistry teacher of a school, an
Ibo was sacked by the previous administration because
he is not an indigene. Thereafter, there was nobody to
teach the subject in the school. When Shekarau came in
2003, he searched for the teacher and brought him back
to his job with incentive to perform. Likewise the
Pensioners whose pensions were not settled for many
years were adequately paid in arrears by Shekarau
administration, and since then things have never
nosedived. There were other wounds created by previous
administration that Shekarau later plastered, nursed
and healed to ensure equity, justice and egalitarian
society. All these are facts that no one, no matter
one's sentiment can dispute or puncture.
It is in view of the foregoing that this write up
would debunk and correct some of the sentiments and
desperations put forward by one Naseer Kura on behalf
of one Bashir Abba Shariff, which rumour has it that
he is the in-law of Naseer Kura. The piece under the
title, "The Peculiar Justice (Adalchi) of Shekarau
Administration" was published in the moribund
Desert Herald in its July-August editions.
Consequently, one would not have bothered to make this
response but for the simple fact that the man, at the
centre of the alleged fraud, Bashir Abba Shariff based
on which Kura wrote, has also in the Daily Trust
of 9th October 2009 come out openly with an
"open letter to Governor Shekarau" about the same
issue. This is perhaps; after he had seen failure and
futility in the clandestine attempt to alms-twist the
government that had properly investigated his issue
and well-thought out decision taken, and knowing full
well too that he is indeed guilty of the fraudulent
offence. Thus, the peculiar justice Naseer Kura so
much dwelt on; in his misguided piece against the
present government to the detriment of truth is the
import of this rejoinder.
I think that when somebody like Naseer Kura talks
about justice, he should really mean justice. As I
said, justice means fairness when dealing with any
situation that involves two sides of a coin. One
should not be seen to look at one side of the coin, no
matter one's interest. Therefore, hammering on one
aspect of an issue at the detriment of the other is
not fair. Every issue must be properly looked at, in
an informed position no matter the desperation. This
is what the real justice or fairness entails.
Consequently, in his belated effort to weep sentiment
for his in-law before the public, Naseer Kura in his
peculiar style of 'justice', hides away some
fundamental facts from the public scrutiny, thereby
denying the public the right to know the truth about
his in-law's involvement in the case of high level
fraud perpetuated against the people of Kano State in
1999.
In his usual way of giving dog a bad name in order to
hang it, Kura did not tell us so many things in his
misguided serialized article. Of course, he did not
tell us that the very man he accuses of peculiar
justice (Adalchi) was a member of the Committee that
reviewed his in-laws case and found him perfectly
guilty of high technical fraud of adding zeros in
front of a digit. The Shekarau Committee in fairness
recommended compulsory retirement in view of the
gravity of the offence. But the government of
Kwankwaso that later reviewed the matter recommended
the dismissal of Bashir Abba Shariff from the civil
service, which was carried out to the letter.
In 2002, Shariff and one Abdulmumuni Yelwa went to
court to challenge their 1999 dismissal. Contrary to
Naseer Kura's argument, the court ruled against the
"procedure" adopted by the Kwankwaso Administration in
the dismissal of the culprits. But, it is not that
Shariff or his accomplish was not guilty of the
fraudulent offence. Indeed, they are truly guilty. As
a mark of their culpability and to also atone for
their sin, there is evidence that Bashir Abba and
Yelwa returned N250,000-each representing one
quarter or 25% as advance payment of the total amount
they looted from the public's money back to the
government. Naseer Kura should not have pretended
against this fact. If the culprits or their
sympathizers deny this, the next rational question is
that what this particular sum they paid to the
government coffer meant for. Is it for charity?
Kura disclosed that the government appropriately filed
its appeal through the court registry, which did not
follow it up to its logical conclusion. If this was
the case, it would have been wise for Kura's in-law to
have pursued his case if he really believed that he
was not guilty of the fraud that led to his dismissal.
Therefore, abandoning the court for series of meeting
his solicitor had entered into, with the agents of
appellant should have also been seen by Kura as
contempt of court. From Kura's confirmation, it was
clear that the state government appealed the court
judgment and by hook or crook that the court had not
mentioned the appeal, does Kura not see this
manipulation as a clear injustice to the state
government? In order to adhere strictly to the court
judgment, the government under the adalchi leadership
of Malam (Dr) Ibrahim Shekarau set up a committee that
evaluated Bashir Abba issue to conform to the
procedure of the court. It should be emphasized here
that from the available facts, Shariff and Yelwa are
guilty of the fraudulent offence and the punishment
for such level of offence as stipulated by the civil
service rule is dismissal.
But in order to recover people's money diverted by
Shariff and Yelwa and perhaps afford them the rare
opportunity to still draw something from their
entitlements, a compulsory retirement as against
dismissal without any benefit was thought out and
executed. In order to achieve this, both Shariff and
Yelwa were reinstated to allow the due process of the
law as demanded by the court verdict. This gave room
to the letter of 18th July 2005,
reinstating the earlier dismissed culprits. With the
fulfillment of the court procedure, both Yelwa and
Shariff were compulsorily retired from the civil
service via a letter dated 28th July 2005.
One of the duos, Abdulmumuni Yelwa simply complied but
the other man, Bashir Abba Shariff appeared funny.
Shariff was funny because rather than accept his
compulsory retirement as a mark of Adalchi and
Mutunchi from Shekarau led government, he was
clever by half when after three months of action,
Shariff sent in a letter of application dated 12th
October 2005 seeking for voluntary retirement,
thereby seeking honour in a matter of dishonour. Is
this the kind of peculiar justice (Adalchi) Naseer
Kura wants us to understand in his lopsided article?
Why must he support a man found culpable of
fraudulent practices and who has accepted that he
committed the fraud by way of refund of a part in the
total sum of people's money diverted and still has the
effrontery to request for voluntary retirement when he
ought to have been out rightly dismissed? Does this
not sound ridiculous and mischievous to Naseer Kura or
still; is this not an indictment of integrity against
Kura for his bold face defence of a fraudster? I think
it would have been good for Kura if he and his in-law
realised the Hausa saying that "if mouth has eaten,
the eye ought to feel shame". BAKIN DA YACI, IDO
ZAI JI KUNYA.
In effect, there was nothing like contempt of court in
the matter of Shariff and the government because the
procedure the court frowned at in the dismissal of
Shariff in 2002 was later corrected in 2003 by
Shekarau's Adalchi administration. As for the
reinstatement of Abdulmumuni Yelwa, similar justice
was given to Bashir Abba Shariff in 2005 after the due
process of the law had been followed. Contrary to
Naseer Kura's assertion, there was no disparity
between the two. Naseer Kura also asked hysterically
whether the "government", not the "Civil Service
Commission" can retire an officer by a mere
resolution. But, can the same Kura differentiate
between the "Government" and the "Civil Service
Commission?" Aren't they the same?
In spite of the various comments of suspicion among
some organs of the government in respect of the court
verdict, which Bashir Abba Shariff claims it favoured
him, I think there was still good attempt from the
same organs of the government particularly, the
Directorate of Public Complaints and Anti-Corruption,
which Shariff confessed in his "open letter to
Governor Shekarau" as being "most straight forward,
sympathetic, encouraging, assuaging and assuring"
during his meeting of August 22, 2007 in order to
clear the backlog of Shariff's over heated issue. But,
from the look of things, Shariff would not like to
concede to every positive step by the government to
help him out of his problem, despite the strong
evidence that he actually perpetuated the fraudulent
offence against the state.
Perhaps, this is why Shariff now seems to be standing
alone in the matter jointly filed with his colleagues,
Abdulmumuni Yelwa since Kwankwaso era against the
government. From all indications, Shariff is seriously
in dilemma. This is because, ironically, the man who
faulted him in the committee that investigated and
indicted him and his colleagues is now the governor of
the state. Therefore, it would sound stupid if Shariff
believes that the man who faulted him outside the
government will now see him as innocent, at least,
being the Chief Security Officer of the state. I
therefore suggest that Bashir Abba Shariff should see
reason from the right perspective and learn to hold
the bull by the horn, rather than leaving the
substance and pursuing the chaff. He should have
accepted his fate in good faith. If Kura is
sympathetic of his in-law's plight, the cost of one
page advertisement placed in the Daily trust of
9th October 2009 about this issue ought to
have been used to set up for him a business where he
can make legitimate profit.
Naseer Kura should not have wasted his time and
energy in the moribund Desert Herald of July
and August edition to make use of clever argument to
persuade people that something is true when it is
really false. Kura used this method hypocritically to
over flog issues in order to unjustly seek justice for
his in-law. He should therefore understand that his
'battle' against Shekarau government as far as this
matter is concerned will be a lost one, and if not
already lost.
Naseer Kura cannot simply alms-twist the government to
renege from its already well investigated and
articulate decision to allow his in-law to cart away
what does not belong to him in the name of court
verdict that never pronounced him innocent. From the
evidence before the public, it is clear that Naseer
Kura in his crocodile tears knew that his in-law
actually committed the fraudulent offence. If not, why
has it taken him this long to address this issue that
happened since 1999, passing through the Kwankwaso
administration? Perhaps he knew that the then Governor
Kwankwaso was convinced of Bashir Abba Shariff deep
involvement in the fraud; and knew that the governor
wouldn't have been moved by his hypocritical appeal.
If Kura really was convinced that his in-law did not
commit the offence, where has he been throughout
Shekarau first tenure of four years? Why is it now
that Shekarau is at the verge of completing his second
tenure that he begins to write thrash and
unsubstantiated accusations in a dubious and
sentimentally sponsored newspaper- Desert Herald?
Methinks that if Kura really has sympathy for his
in-law, he ought to have started this correspondence
battle since 1999. It is possible that, being aware
that Kwankwaso would not be disturbed or cajoled by
his sympathetic correspondence battle, he decided to
wait for the passage of that administration. If Kura
wanted to pursue justice, whether military or civilian
regime, justice is justice; he would have been
expected to have started since the beginning of the
case rather than starting now to deceive people and
curry unnecessary favour.
I want Naseer Kura to know that should Malam (Dr)
Ibrahim Shekarau now acts contrary to his investigated
report of 1999; he would have been anti justice (adalchi),
which is not in the character of his government.
Indeed, what was an act of corruption in 1999 is still
corruption in 2009 no matter the colour of language
used to paint it. Neither the public nor the
government can be stampeded into rescinding from
justice by any 'one-man' pressure group called "Basic
Rights Action." Therefore, it is advisable for Bashir
Abba Shariff and his in-law, Naseer Kura including
their sponsors and sympathizers to accept the truth of
the matter and plead for forgiveness and leniency from
the general public they have defrauded through Shariff,
for nothing can deter the political ambition of Malam
(Dr) Ibrahim Shekarau.
Saka Raji Audu writes from Kano and can be reached on
his email:sakaraj@yahoo.com