Undiplomatic comments of an ambassador
THE British High Commissioner to Nigeria, Paul Arkwright on a visit to Kano the other day set conditions that Nigeria must meet for his home government to return money stolen from Nigeria. Such conditions include, how the repatriated funds will be spent by the government of Nigeria, and to what judicious end. If Arkwright truly said this, and it has not been denied he has committed a diplomatic blunder to the point of impudence.
But not done, the high commissioner recommended a holistic reform of the Nigerian judiciary, and an overhaul of the security and other government institutions ostensibly to improve the quality of governance. He even wants the prisons comprehensively reformed too. These ‘suggestions’ fall far short of acceptable diplomatic norms.
First, Arkwright’s comments cast doubt, with no proof yet, on the intention of the sitting government and impugn its capability to manage and apply public funds for the greatest good of the greatest number of the citizens. Second, the entire suggestions constitute interference in the internal affairs of this country contrary to Article 41(1) of the Vienna Convention. They also do not promote friendly relations that are one of the functions of adroit diplomacy.
The utterly reckless behaviour of Nigeria’s political, government, and business elite which has indeed given cause for the British envoy to speak as he did, are well known. If there were no thieving Nigerians who, in collusion with foreign bankers, lawyers and facilitators are, sufficiently unpatriotic to stash their loot in, and for the development of foreign countries, surely there would not at all be cause for foreigners to begin to define terms on which Nigeria can spend its own money. The whole truth about repatriated Sani Abacha loot remains hidden from the Nigerian public. Were there no government officials so bereft of integrity as to re-loot repatriated funds, comments such as ascribed to Arkwright would not arise.
So, fundamentally, Nigerians, or just a fraction of the population really are the cause of the disrespect or disdain in which the country and a whole people are treated. But building Nigeria is work in progress and far more citizens are sufficiently unhappy with the state of things to welcome and support any and every effort to this end – including from abroad. Indeed, this is the reason Nigerians voted for a change of government.
A friendly country like the United Kingdom is rightly expected to help improve quality of governance in all aspects. However, this must be done within the bounds of reciprocal respect, with due sensitivity to the sovereignty of this country, and without adopting a teacher-on- responsible-management posture.
The point must be made with all emphasis that every jurisdiction that respects international laws and conventions as well as seeks, in its very own interest, the economic stability of other nations, has a duty to prevent illicit, corrupting funds into its financial system. Besides, no one should conveniently forget the axiom that the thief of public money and the colluding receiver are both guilty. Nations that allow, by acts of omission or commission, inflow of stolen money bear at least, moral liability for the crime.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs should watch more closely the manner in which representatives of foreign countries have lately gone about their assignments. Too many visits to persons and places for not-so-clearly-purposeful reasons, uncalled for utterances that make Nigeria look bad and its people look less than responsible; these are not acceptable and must stop. The institution to enforce this, is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
In so far as the ministry is ‘dedicated to the vigorous pursuit of the vital national interests’ of this country, it can be reasonably construed that these interests necessarily include that Nigeria and its people are treated with respect within and outside its shores. The ministry should live up to its mission statement.
Related
Latest
Get the latest news delivered straight to your inbox every day of the week. Stay informed with the Guardian’s leading coverage of Nigerian and world news, business, technology and sports.
9 Comments
Good to point out what is needful but what happens to a country where the leader makes discrediting remarks about his own country on foreign shores.l had thought you would have warned our leaders to address the press at home and not abroad,charity they say begins at home.Let’s have up-lifting remarks from our leaders while outside our shores.
This chap is clearly an arrogant fool. The British government Is way more corrupt than even Abacha’s. Just ask the Arabs. It is therefore a bit rich for this cretin to set the terms for the return of the stolen wealth of our nation as they have been caught inhe act of handling stolen property – a known crime here in the UK. Go and give it back!!!!
Now you know, if you didn’t know before that white people can be thieves too even with shirt and tie. Just posh thieves.
Give it back!!! A thief cannot have a say on how the owner istolen propertychoses to dispose or spend it.The Russians come here with their loot and the British government promptly kill them off and take ownership of the stolen goods. UK is the den of robbers with a very high fence surrounded by a huge moat. Not even Alibaba can penetrate the fortifications with all of Arabian skills.
The British are co-conspirators in this crime. They aided and abated the looters in committing these crimes against Nigeria. Someone is not blameless if stolen items are found in his/her custody. This is universal law. They have no right to tell the victim Nigeria, how to spend their own money that was looted and discovered in their custody. So, the British and the Swiss should hide their head in shame and spare us their holier than thou pretensions. They should apologize to Nigeria and return the money immediately without conditions or delay.
The ambassador is correct and to the point. You can not return a stolen property to another thief.
We are still a British colony, what’s wrong with what the MASTER has said?? Whatever he said is not worse than what our own leaders have said in Washington DC, London, Paris, Tehran, etc. Simply pet, Nigeria is still a colony of the British Empire, with the Queen as the head of state.
Reuben Abati is back at The Guardian. That is why the Guardian can write this kind of editorial comment criticising the British High Commissioner for stipulating conditionalities for the return of the remainder of the loot that were stolen by Nigerian politicians and stacked away in British banks. What the High Commissioner is saying is that there are still elements in the government, public service, military and the judiciary that collaborated to drain the national treasury and they must be gotten rid of and thwt the system be reformed to prevent a reoccurence of the lootingf. In the light of the Dasukigate exposition whereby we now know how the returned Abacha loot was “relooted,” how can any patriotic Nigerian blame the British High Commissioner?
Absolutely nothing to do with Abati. Diplomatic norms and practices must be respected at all times irrespective of intention. The diplomat crossed the line in venturing into our internal affairs. Interaction between nations is still guided by laws. Only Guardian is well informed and grounded to point out these facts.
We will review and take appropriate action.