Accountability and Anti-Corruption

Corruption simply means an abuse of public position. Abuse can take various forms. Administrative law performs the functions of identifying, probing and sanctioning corruption. Even when Administrative Law is proactive, it tries to prevent corruption. For this purpose, three bodies have been brought up in Nigeria to counter corruption: The Code of Conduct Bureau, the EFCC and the ICPC.

Administrative law must function to limit the excesses of Ministries, Departments and Agencies, and must also function to identify and punish abuse of office. Administrative law focuses on the prevention of maladministration and control of all corrupt practices. Corruption is endemic in Nigeria, as evidenced by the Corruption Perception Index published by the Transparency International (2011) and also stated in the case of AG Ondo v AG Federation. By reason of the pervasiveness of corrupt practices in Nigeria, Administrative law has intervened to fight the scourge of corruption by setting up public institutions through enabling statutes enacted by the National Assembly to form the bedrock of the fight against corruption.

The two major statutory provisions in the fight against corruption are the ICPC Act of 2000 and the EFCC Act of 2004. These statutes are being complemented by several legislations and policy statements among which are Anti-corruption, Strategy, the Public Procurement Act, inter alia. A combination of these legislative frameworks has led to substantial judicial pronouncement in relation to the fight against corruption. For instance, the case of SERAP V FRN where the ECOWAS court clearly stated that the theft of public funds has imparted negatively, the socio-economic development in Nigeria. In Akingbola v FRN, the court held that the main purpose of establishing the EFCC was "to wage war against the hydra-headed monster called corruption in the country."

Code of Conduct Bureau and Code of Conduct Tribunal

In the Fifth schedule, part 1 and 2 of the 1999 constitution, there is a duty imposed on public officials to observe and conform to certain codes of conduct. This code of conduct prohibits the giving and receiving of bribes, abuse of public office, the operation of private foreign accounts by public officials, as well as conflict of personal interest with official duties on the part of public officers. See the case of Nwankwo v Nwankwo, where the court stated that public officers were not allowed to hold managerial positions in private undertakings in line with the Code of Conduct. The Code of Conduct requires every public officer, within three months of coming into office or immediately after assumption of office, to declare his assets and this declaration must be done every 4 years.

It is the main duty of the Code of Conduct Bureau to receive and deal with allegations that a public officer has committed a breach of or has not complied with the provisions of the Code of Conduct. The Code of Conduct Tribunal, on the other hand, conducts administrative adjudication on all allegations on the Code of Conduct and imposes any of the punishments specified in the Constitution.

The ICPC Act of 2000

The ICPC is a foremost anti-corruption agency which performs the functions stated below:

1. To receive and investigate any report of corruption.
2. To examine the practices of public bodies. Where such practices facilitate fraud and corrupt practices, to direct and supervise a review.
3. To advise public bodies on changes that might reduce incidents of corruption.
4. To educate the public on the adverse effects of corruption and bribery.

The ICPC Act prohibits corruption, which includes bribery and fraud. The primary focus is to prevent corruption in public offices, institutions and MDAs. However, it can also prevent corrupt practices in the private sector, particularly when corruption flows from the public sector to the private sector or vice versa. The ICPC has recorded moderate success in its dispensation of its functions.

EFCC Act of 2004

The EFCC was established to fight corrupt practices as stated in the case of Dododo v EFCC. The functions of the EFCC is stated in S. 6 of the Act. Such functions include:

1. The investigation of all financial and economic crimes.
2. Enforcement of laws against all financial and economic crimes.
3. Confiscation of items of both economic and financial crimes.
4. Adoption of measures to eradicate economic and financial crimes.
5. Introduction of control techniques to prevent perpetration of economic and financial crimes.

The EFCC has special powers assigned, which are stated in section 7 of the EFCC Act. Section 7(1) empowers the EFCC to investigate any company or organization in relation to any economic or financial crimes. Section 7(3) empowers the EFCC to conduct investigations into the properties of any person if it appears to the EFCC that the person's lifestyle and extent of his properties are not justified by his income.

The EFCC has achieved moderate success in its focus to eradicate and punish corruption. However, there are many factors militating against the fight against corruption. These include Red-tapism, corruption itself, lack of investigative tools, etc. The EFCC can investigate freely both public and private organisations and persons.