![]()
South Africa has indicated her willingness to return the
more than $15 million seized from some Nigerians last
year in a move aimed to please the country’s new
president-elect, General Muhammadu Buhari. This is contrary to claims allegedly made by South
African ambassador to Nigeria, Lulu Mnguni, that the
money seized by the South African government had been
released to Nigeria. It would be recalled that the South African government
had, on September 5, 2014, seized $9.3m cash belonging
to Nigeria and a month later seized another $5.7m,
claiming that both funds were to be used for illegal
purchase of arms. But The Mail & Guardian reported yesterday that the
president-elect, Muhammadu Buhari, made positive
overtures to Jacob Zuma of South Africa before the
elections and relations between the two countries are
likely to improve. “South Africa is considering returning the Nigerian
money that it confiscated last year or clearing the way to
sell arms to the West African country,” The Mail &
Guardian reported. The newspaper also has learned through diplomatic
sources that South Africa has begun talks to work out a
process to return the money in an effort to start off on
a clean slate with the recently elected government of the
Nigerian president-elect. South African law enforcement agencies seized $15
million in two batches: $5.7-million that had been wired
to Standard Bank and $9.3-million in cash, which was
confiscated. It was brought into the country through Lanseria
Airport in Johannesburg in three suitcases by a
delegation said to represent the Nigerian government. In
both cases, the money was suspected to be for illegal
use. Now, South Africa wants to use the money to extend an
olive branch to Buhari’s government and mend relations
between the two countries, which became strained
during the tenure of outgoing president, Goodluck
Jonathan. “The positive thing about (Buhari) is that one of the
people who supported him is Atiku Abubakar. That makes
him our man and he will automatically work well with
[President Jacob] Zuma,” a government source said. Abubakar is close to Zuma. He was Nigeria’s deputy
president during the presidency of Olusegun Obasanjo,
at the time when Zuma was Thabo Mbeki’s deputy. “Also, this man (Buhari) is a (retired) military general. It
is true that the military needs some beefing up to fight
Boko Haram and we should help,” the source added. So how will Nigeria know that it stands to benefit from
an otherwise controversial transaction that had
exacerbated tensions between the two countries? The government source further stated: “Diplomatically
you send a signal. Obviously, they will have to make a
request once they receive a positive signal, but the
request will just be an official step to finalising the
transaction.” Buhari is due to take over the leadership of the country
after winning the recent elections. Formal talks have not
yet begun, but South Africa has apparently started
sending “positive signals” through its diplomats in Nigeria
and to the Nigerian embassy in Pretoria. To ensure that the process of returning the money or
regularising the sale of arms looks as clean as possible,
investigations will continue, the source said, but will be
managed politically to reach a conclusion that is
diplomatically favourable. “One way is to make the
investigators say: ‘Yes, a law has been broken, but it’s true that the government (of Nigeria) is the owner of
that money and genuinely wanted to buy arms legally.
They might have flouted the rules, but it’s a genuine
transaction. (We will say) this money does not come from
dirty hands or rebels or arms dealers,” the source said. “We will find a way to regularise the transaction and
either return the money or give them arms.” Nigeria wanted to buy arms such as helicopters and
ammunition to strengthen its fight against Islamic
extremist group, Boko Haram. Last year, the M&G reported that the head of the
national conventional arms control committee, Jeff
Radebe, who is also the minister in the presidency, was
blamed by his colleagues in government for taking a
unilateral decision to try to regularise the sale of arms
to Nigeria to facilitate the release of bodies of South Africans who were killed when the TB Joshua church
building collapsed in Nigeria. At the time, Radebe denied it and said the committee had
met in October and decided to propose unlocking the
Nigerian arms trade. ‘Bona fide error’ The M&G quoted from two letters that Radebe had
written to JP “Torie” Pretorius of The Hawks and
Dumisani Dladla, the head of the arms control
committee’s secretariat, in which he said the failed
attempt on September 5 to pay an arms dealer in South
Africa “was, in fact, a legitimate requirement from the government of Nigeria”. “Although the required
administrative processes were not adhered to at the
time, the government of South Africa deems it a bona
fide error,” he wrote. This week, a government source told the M&G: “What
Jeff did may have been unilateral, but it is now an avenue
that South Africa is willing to explore. Even when we
were doing damage control after your story, the
discussion centred on how we can get a positive outcome
out of this.” The committee apparently met after the article was
published in November last year and decided to use the
return of the money or the sale of arms to appease the
new government of Nigeria after the elections. “After the story, they had to regroup and say: ‘How do
we deal with this situation?’ You cannot let it hang
forever; you must find a way to conclude it in a way that
will satisfy both sides,” the source said. Zuma has apparently been briefed by ministers who
serve on the committee and has warmed to the idea.
Efforts to get comment from Zuma’s spokesperson Mac
Maharaj and from Radebe were unsuccessful. Improved relations Relations between Nigeria and South Africa have not
been at their best, particularly between the Zuma and
Jonathan administrations. “[By returning this money] you get friendship, loyalty and
an opportunity where he [Buhari] is willing to work with
us to lead the continent and speak with one voice. “Instead of Nigeria second-guessing us all the time, we
will compare notes and stop fighting for things like the
United Nations Security Council seat that’s not even
permanent,” the source said. “Nigeria is a strategic country that South Africa cannot
ignore. It’s a big market. It’s possible South African
companies make more money in Nigeria than in South
Africa.” When Buhari took on Jonathan in last month’s elections,
Pretoria was already positioning itself for refreshed
relations with Abuja. ‘Contributions to democracy’ The M&G has seen a letter that Buhari wrote to Zuma a
few days before the elections, in which he complained
about Jonathan’s alleged delay tactics over the poll and
the use of violence in an attempt to sway the voters in his
favour. “I thank your government and your mission in Nigeria for
your contributions to Nigeria’s democratic process.
While Nigeria’s democracy must be established and
secured by the commitment to fairness and the rule of
law of Nigerians, the goodwill and positive influence of
your government have helped us on this difficult yet vital journey,” Buhari wrote. “It is not your business who wins
elections in Nigeria, but we seek your help in making sure
the election is a free and fair one for us to win or lose
according to the people’s will.” He is expected to hold a one-on-one meeting with Zuma
on the sidelines of the African Union summit that South
Africa is hosting in June, and it’s anticipated that the
issue of the seized money will be discussed. Either Zuma or deputy president, Cyril Ramaphosa will
attend Buhari’s inauguration in May. Asked for comment, department of international
relations and co-operation spokesperson, Nelson Kgwete
said the department had not been in talks with Nigeria
over the confiscated money and knew nothing about a
proposal to either return the money or sell arms to that
country.
About
Ahmad Abdullahi Adamu
0 comments:
Post a Comment