Over the last week or so, there has been heightened interest
amongst Nigerians about the use of the most recently repatriated $322.5 million
Abacha loot. The questions raised around the issue include the choice of
using the money for the conditional cash transfer programme of the Federal
Government, the choice of states benefitting from the programme, the usefulness
of a monthly transfer of N5, 000 to poor Nigerians and concerns about the
re-looting of the funds.
*Gen Sani Abacha |
The use of
the funds for the cash transfer programme is therefore largely a result of the
pre-conditional involvement of the World Bank. The conversation now needs
to move beyond this to ensuring a transparent, accountable and equitable use of
the funds for the designated purpose; providing safety nets for the poorest
amongst us. It is worth noting that this objective to use the funds
transparently and accountably would be no less expedient if the funds were used
for a legacy project, especially in the light of the issues of corruption that
continue to plague such projects in the country.
The
beneficiaries of the cash transfer programme are households contained in the
National Social Register which is developed by the National Social Safety-Nets
Coordinating Office (NASSCO) in collaboration with and support from the World
Bank. This register is built employing three targeted mechanisms to
identify poor and vulnerable people across the country. These
include Geographical Targeting (using a poverty map of existing classifications
of poverty across all states of the Federation), Community-Based Targeting
(using community members and leaders to decide local eligibility for the
poorest and vulnerable households in their communities) and Proxy Mean Test
(using observable household individual characteristics such as location and
quality of the household’s dwelling, education and occupation of its adult
members).
It is the
households identified through these processes and included in the National
Social Register that are eligible to receive the cash transfers from the
National Cash Transfer Office (NCTO). Available information indicates that
about 20 states are currently benefitting from the cash transfer programme and
that plans are in place to ensure that all 36 states and the Federal Capital
Territory are included by
the end of July 2018. The inclusion of States in the programme is dependent on
the readiness of the social register for each state following the processes
described above, and the state government providing basic infrastructure and
manpower for the implementation of the programme in the State.
Unfortunately, certain states have been slow in fulfilling the latter
condition, whilst the NASSCO has also been unable to complete the process of
getting the social registers for all states ready in satisfactory
time. More work and advocacy is obviously required in this regard.
The
question of the usefulness of N5,000 to help poor households is one that has
been of major concern to many Nigerians since the introduction of the cash
transfer programme. The relevant institutions of government implementing
this programme such as the NCTO and the National Social Investment Office
(NSIO) have rationalized this amount by reference to empirical research which informed
the choice and the real impact being made by the amount on the ground.
Reference has also been to other donor-funded cash transfer programmes in
certain parts of the country with similar sums that have had an obvious
positive impact on poor people.
Whilst this
question appears logical in the light of the economic realities in the country
and the rate of inflation, it is equally important to have a cautious and
open-minded approach towards a programme of this nature. Since these
funds are supposed to be transferred to the poorest in the country, it is
important that, rather than viewing the potential impact from our own
perspectives, we consider the perspective of the targeted beneficiaries
themselves. In the midst of all these issues, the most important factor that
has led us here is the lack of an established legal and institutional framework
for the recovery and management of looted assets. Exerting our efforts in
trying to undo most of what has been done so far with regard to the current
tranche of repatriated $322.5 million will achieve little if a framework built
on transparency and accountability is not established.
Going
forward therefore, our interest as Nigerians will be best served in proactively
monitoring the use of these funds for the purpose for which they have been
appropriated to ensure that the money actually gets to the poorest
Nigerians. Our role as citizens and civil society in monitoring this
process is prominently recognised in the MOU signed for the repatriation of the
funds, providing a strong foundation for doing so. Furthermore, we should
leverage on the awareness and momentum created by the return and use of these
funds to advocate for the passage of the Proceeds of Crime Bill and other
complementary legislation that will establish the requisite institutions and
enhance the overall framework for the recovery and management of looted assets
in Nigeria.
*Dr. Ayibakuro
Matthew is Research and Policy Director at ANEEJ
No comments:
Post a Comment