Special to USAfrica magazine (Houston) and USAfricaonline.com, first African-owned, U.S-based newspaper published on the Internet
Agbedo is a Professor of Linguistics, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, and contributing analyst to USAfrica
Nigerian Senator Ali Ndume has a history of making controversial statements that often stir public debate and reflect a broader issue of political rhetoric in Nigeria. His recent remarks, including the assertion that President Tinubu’s decision to relocate some Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) departments to Lagos will have political consequences in 2027, the claim that “all animals are equal but some are more equal than others” to justify disparity in constituency allowances of Senators, and his defence of corruption as ‘people-driven,’ are notable examples. These statements not only spark controversy but also raise critical questions about governance, equity, and ethics in Nigerian politics. Nonetheless, the major thrust of this piece is the ‘distinguished’ Senator’s corruption thesis, which revolves around three key issues – rationalisation of corruption as ‘people-driven,’ gradation of corruption, corruption-drug trafficking comparison, and lethal consequences. This is implicit in the following excerpts:
If you compare us, politicians, to all the corruption, it is very small. Our corruption is people-driven. If you steal it, you will go and share it with the people. If you don’t, you are not coming back for four years. There is no reason for stealing…If the death penalty is supposed to be included in corruption, I will support it but you don’t go and kill someone that stole one million or one billion, no. But someone who steals one trillion of government money should be killed…The death penalty is the best deterrent for those being caught for drugs. If you do drugs, you are killing people…That means you have destroyed the lives of so many people and killed so many people…
From the foregoing, it is obvious that Senator Ndume’s stance on corruption is deeply troubling and reflects a dangerous normalisation of unethical practices that undermine Nigeria’s development and governance. The Senator started his flawed argument by miniaturizing political corruption, i.e., corruption driven by politicians, “If you compare us, politicians, to all the corruption, it is very small.” This claim underestimates the impact of political corruption. Politicians, by virtue of their positions, often have access to substantial public funds and resources. Corruption at the highest levels of government can result in enormous financial losses for a country and can undermine public trust, erode democratic institutions, and stymie development efforts. The scale of corruption by politicians, even if involving fewer individuals, can be far more damaging than corruption in other sectors. His next attempt at rationalising political corruption by pushing the notion of ‘people-driven’ is no less problematic.
His argument that politicians must engage in corruption to share stolen funds with the people in order to secure reelection reveals a deep misunderstanding of ethical governance and the true impacts of corruption. Ndume’s justification essentially condones theft and misappropriation of public funds by framing it as a necessary political strategy. This perspective is morally bankrupt and undermines the fundamental principles of honesty, integrity, and accountability that are essential for public office. Politicians are elected to serve the public good, not to engage in self-serving activities under the guise of benevolence. Claiming that corruption is acceptable because it is “people-driven” perpetuates a dangerous cycle. Distributing stolen funds to gain popular support does not justify or mitigate the act of theft. Suggesting that politicians steal public funds to distribute among constituents to secure votes highlights a systemic failure in governance and accountability.
This practice, often referred to as patronage or clientelism, perpetuates a cycle of corruption where leaders use public resources to secure loyalty and votes, rather than for the public good. It fosters a culture of dependency and corruption, where citizens may prioritize immediate, personal gains over long-term, systemic improvements. Such a perspective ignores the broader, devastating impacts of corruption on society. This practice not only encourages ongoing corruption but also stifles genuine development and long-term improvements in governance. Citizens come to expect and rely on handouts, rather than demanding structural changes and accountability from their leaders. While distributing stolen funds might provide immediate relief to some constituents, the long-term consequences of corruption are far more damaging. Corruption diverts resources away from critical public services like education, healthcare, and infrastructure. Over time, this leads to deteriorating public services, increased poverty, and diminished economic opportunities.
The temporary benefits of handouts cannot compensate for the systemic harm caused by corruption. While the assertion that there is no justifiable reason for corruption is valid, Ndume’s own statements speak to the illogicality of stealing. If politicians are engaging in corruption to distribute resources and secure electoral support, they are indeed operating under a rationale that, albeit flawed, justifies their actions within the current political framework. The real issue lies in changing the system that incentivizes such behaviour, rather than denying the existence of any rationale behind it. When politicians engage in corruption, even under the pretext of benefiting the people, it erodes public trust in government institutions. Citizens lose faith in the political system and become cynical about the possibility of good governance. This erosion of trust can lead to increased apathy, reduced civic engagement, and a weakened democracy.
By justifying corruption as a means to an end, Ndume undermines the rule of law. Rather than downplaying political corruption, leaders should focus on systemic reforms that address the root causes of corruption. This includes strengthening institutions, enhancing transparency, implementing strict anti-corruption laws, and promoting a culture of accountability. Laws against corruption exist to maintain order and fairness in society. When politicians flout these laws, it sets a dangerous precedent that undermines legal norms and encourages lawlessness. Upholding the rule of law is essential for a functioning and fair society. Effective governance requires robust accountability mechanisms. Instead of excusing corruption, efforts should focus on strengthening these mechanisms. This includes transparent financial practices, independent oversight bodies, and stringent enforcement of anti-corruption laws. Ensuring that politicians are held accountable for their actions is crucial for building a just and equitable society. Rather than engaging in corrupt practices, politicians should focus on fostering genuine development. This involves implementing policies that create jobs, improve public services, and promote economic growth. Sustainable development requires honest leadership and a commitment to using public funds for their intended purposes.
Empowering citizens through education, economic opportunities, and civic engagement is key to reducing corruption. An informed and engaged populace is more likely to demand accountability and resist corrupt practices. Politicians should work to empower their constituents, not exploit them for political gain. In essence, Senator Ndume’s attempt to justify political corruption as “people-driven” is deeply flawed and counterproductive. Corruption, regardless of its purported benefits, undermines ethical governance, erodes public trust, and causes long-term harm to society. Addressing corruption requires a commitment to ethical leadership, systemic reforms, and a shift away from practices that perpetuate the cycle of corruption and patronage. By promoting genuine improvements in governance and empowering citizens, Nigeria can build a more just and prosperous society.
Also, Senator Ndume’s support for the death penalty for drug traffickers, on the grounds that drug trafficking kills unlike corruption, is deeply flawed. His argument not only oversimplifies the complex issues of drug trafficking and corruption but also misses the broader implications of these crimes on society. This line of reasoning, which derives from the false premise that drug trafficking directly kills people, whereas corruption does not, fails to acknowledge the profound and often indirect harm caused by corruption. Corruption siphons off resources that are critical for public services such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure. When funds meant for hospitals, schools, and public utilities are embezzled, the consequences can be deadly. For example, inadequate healthcare can lead to preventable deaths, poorly maintained infrastructure can cause fatal accidents, and lack of educational resources can perpetuate cycles of poverty and crime.
Thus, while the deaths resulting from corruption may not be as immediately visible as those from drug overdoses, they are no less real or significant. His justification of application of the death penalty as punishment for drug traffickers is fraught with ethical, legal, and practical concerns. Many human rights organizations argue that capital punishment is inhumane and violates the right to life. Furthermore, there is substantial evidence that the death penalty does not effectively deter crime more than other severe punishments. Miscarriages of justice, where innocent people are executed, are irreversible tragedies. Implementing the death penalty for drug trafficking without addressing these concerns can lead to significant human rights violations and undermine the integrity of the justice system. Also, the argument that drug trafficking is a more severe crime because of its direct lethal impact on human lives tends to overlook the systemic issues that contribute to both drug trafficking and corruption. Poverty, lack of education, unemployment, and weak law enforcement are root causes that fuel both problems. Effective strategies to combat these issues require comprehensive policies that address underlying social and economic factors, rather than punitive measures alone. By ignoring these root causes, Ndume’s argument fails to offer a holistic solution to either drug trafficking or corruption.
The implementation of the death penalty for drug trafficking raises the potential for misuse and abuse of power. In a number of countries of the world, the enforcement of capital punishment can be arbitrary and discriminatory, disproportionately affecting marginalized and vulnerable groups. Furthermore, corruption within the judicial and law enforcement systems can lead to unjust sentencing, where individuals may be executed without fair trials or adequate legal representation. Ensuring justice and fairness in the legal process is paramount, and the death penalty complicates this effort. While the intent to combat serious crimes is valid, comprehensive criminal justice reform is a more effective and sustainable approach. This includes improving law enforcement capabilities, strengthening judicial systems, enhancing rehabilitation and reintegration programs for offenders, and investing in preventive measures such as education and economic opportunities. Such reforms address both the symptoms and the root causes of criminal behavior, leading to long-term reductions in crime rates and improved societal well-being. In essence, Senator Ndume’s argument for the death penalty for drug traffickers, while dismissing the severity of corruption, is untenable and misses the broader implications of both issues. Corruption, like drug trafficking, has devastating effects on society, albeit in less direct but equally harmful ways. Addressing these complex problems requires comprehensive approaches that prioritize justice, human rights, and systemic reform over simplistic and punitive measures.
Senator Ndume’s support for death penalty for high-level corruption, specifically for theft of N1 trillion or more, but not for smaller amounts like N1 million throws up a mindset intent on misguided grading of corruption. The Senator’s approach, which implies a sliding scale of punishment based on the amount stolen, suggesting that some levels of corruption are less reprehensible than others, is deeply flawed. Corruption at any level undermines public trust, damages economic stability, and erodes democratic institutions. By suggesting that only grand corruption warrants the death penalty, Ndume inadvertently minimizes the severe impacts of lower-level corruption, which cumulatively can be just as devastating to society. As a corollary, his contention that while drug trafficking deserves the death penalty due to its lethal consequences, corruption should not be punished as harshly unless it involves astronomical sums, such as trillions of naira reveals a deeply flawed perspective that not only overlook the devastating impacts of corruption on society but also points somewhat unwaveringly to the fallacy of comparing harms.
Ndume’s argument rests on the assumption that corruption is not as immediately lethal as drug trafficking. However, this view fails to acknowledge the long-term, systemic damage caused by corruption. Corruption diverts resources from essential public services like healthcare, education, and infrastructure, leading to preventable deaths and suffering. Poorly equipped hospitals, unsafe roads, and inadequate schools are indirect but very real consequences of corruption, contributing to mortality rates and diminishing quality of life. Setting a threshold for corruption punishment based on the amount stolen, such as trillions of naira, is arbitrary and impractical. Corruption, whether it involves thousands or trillions, represents a breach of public trust and a failure of governance. By suggesting that smaller-scale corruption is more tolerable, Ndume downplays the pervasive harm caused by everyday corrupt practices. This approach creates a dangerous precedent where lesser acts of corruption are implicitly accepted, perpetuating a culture of impunity. Even the so-called “small-scale” corruption has cumulative effects. Numerous minor corrupt acts across various levels of government and sectors can aggregate into a massive drain on public resources.
This cumulative damage stifles development, exacerbates poverty, and entrenches systemic inefficiencies, ultimately harming the nation’s socio-economic fabric. Therefore, Senator Ndume’s argument that corruption should only warrant the death penalty if it involves trillions of naira is fundamentally flawed. Corruption, regardless of scale, poses a significant threat to national well-being by undermining governance, perpetuating poverty, and eroding public trust. Rather than setting arbitrary thresholds, Nigeria needs a comprehensive approach to combat corruption, including consistent legal enforcement, institutional strengthening, and the promotion of a culture of integrity. Only through such efforts can Nigeria hope to address the pervasive issue of corruption and build a more just and prosperous society.
Conversely though, Senator Ali Ndume’s rhetoric, while often controversial and sometimes provocative, can indeed be seen as reflecting some of the deeper, more troubling realities of Nigeria’s system of governance. His statements, whether on the relocation of Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) departments, the disparity in constituency allowances of senators, or the justification of corruption as people-driven, reveal underlying issues that plague Nigerian political culture. For instance, his assertion that corruption is justified because it is “people-driven” and politicians distribute stolen funds to their constituents reflects a deeply entrenched system of patronage. This perspective reveals a political culture where the distribution of public resources is used as a tool for securing loyalty and votes, rather than for genuine development. It underscores how corruption is rationalized and perpetuated within the system, leading to widespread inefficiency and mistrust. By framing corruption as a necessary tool for political survival, Ndume inadvertently underscores the systemic failures in governance and accountability. This cycle of corruption and patronage not only diverts resources from essential public services, thus perpetuating poverty and inequality, but also undermines public trust in government institutions. Ndume’s statements point to a systemic lack of accountability in Nigerian governance. Whether it’s the justification of corruption or the unequal distribution of resources, these issues highlight a political environment where rules are bent and laws are selectively enforced.
This lack of accountability fosters a culture where unethical behaviour is tolerated and even expected as the new normal. Perhaps then, it seems tenable to argue that the brighter side of Senator Ndume’s dark political rhetoric tends to beam searchlight on the uncomfortable reality of Nigeria’s political system – the intense pressure on politicians to be seen as a good ‘son-of-the-soil.’ This localised loyalty and patronage system perpetuates corruption, revealing the complex dynamics between elected officials and their constituents. There is no gainsaying the fact that in many parts of Nigeria, the concept of being a good ‘son-of-the-soil’ carries significant weight. Politicians are expected to prioritize their local communities, often at the expense of broader national interests. This cultural expectation drives politicians to engage in patronage, directing resources and favours to their constituents to maintain support.
Failure to meet these expectations can result in ‘political consequences,’ as voters may withdraw their support in favour of candidates who promise immediate, tangible benefits. The pressure to be a good ‘son-of-the-soil’ creates a fertile ground for corruption. Politicians often resort to misappropriating public funds to meet the demands of their local supporters. This patronage system fosters a cycle where constituents come to expect and depend on these illicit benefits, and politicians feel compelled to continue corrupt practices to secure their positions. As a result, corruption becomes entrenched, with both politicians and constituents complicit in perpetuating the system. Unfortunately, while the intention behind people-driven corruption might be to provide immediate benefits to local communities, it undermines the principles of good governance. Resources meant for public goods and services are diverted for personal and political gain, leading to inefficient and ineffective governance. This misallocation of funds deprives critical sectors like healthcare, education, and infrastructure of necessary investment, hindering national development and progress. To break this cycle, Nigeria must promote civic education and engagement, strengthen institutional frameworks, encourage ethical leadership, and invest in transparent community development initiatives. By addressing the root causes of people-driven corruption, Nigeria will hopefully move towards a more accountable, equitable, and prosperous society.
