The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, SERAP, has said that “The
order banning 50 alleged high-profile corrupt Nigerians from travelling
abroad without any legal basis and a judicial authorization is clearly
arbitrary, repressive and illegal, as it breaches constitutional rights
and the country’s international obligations, which protect the rights to
freedom of movement, to leave one’s country, to privacy, and to due
process of law.”
The organisation said: “A travel ban by its nature is an
interference with the right to leave one’s country. It is neither
necessary nor proportionate to prevent dissipation of stolen assets or
stop politically exposed persons (PEPs) from tampering with any such
assets. The ban should be immediately lifted and the order rescinded.”
Presidential spokesperson Garba Shehu on Saturday announced the
placement of 50 high-profile Nigerians on travel ban, citing the measure
as part of the implementation of Presidential Executive Order Number 6.
But SERAP in a statement on Sunday signed by its deputy director, Timothy Adewale, said:
“Rather than performing its declared objective of preventing
dissipation of stolen assets, the travel ban would seriously undermine
the government’s expressed commitment to combat grand corruption and
violate the country’s international human rights obligations.
“The travel ban will play right into the hands of high-profile
corrupt officials by feeding into the narrative that the fight against
corruption is targeted only at political opponents.”
The statement read in part: “The travel ban and mass
surveillance will distract the authorities from taking legitimate action
to recover stolen assets, effectively punish high-ranking corrupt
officials and portray the government as unwilling to embrace the rule of
law in its fight against corruption, thereby making it difficult to
obtain the necessary support and cooperation of countries keeping stolen
assets.”
“The travel ban will also strain the government’s relationships
with partner countries, on whom it will inevitably rely for vital asset
recovery cooperation, undermining the effort to bring them closer.
“By alienating these partners, the government could lose access
to important information and mutual legal assistance necessary to
effectively recover stolen assets and bring corrupt officials to
justice.
“Judicial affirmation of the legality of the Executive Order 6
doesn’t grant the government arbitrary powers to impose travel ban on
anyone without following due process of law.
“Rather than imposing a travel ban, the authorities should take
advantage of the provisions of the UN Convention against Corruption to
seek mutual legal assistance with countries where investigations and
litigation are ongoing by requesting them to apply preventive measures
regarding assets covered by the travel ban.”
“The authorities should also widely publish the names of the 50
Nigerians suspected to be involved, and submit those names to the
countries/embassies of countries where the stolen assets are stashed.
“The authorities should issue a risk alert on alleged corrupt
assets that are likely to be dissipated or tampered with by the
high-profile Nigerians, seeking the cooperation of countries keeping the
assets, and reminding them of their international obligations to
prevent these Nigerians from tampering with stolen assets that are
subject of ongoing investigations and litigation.”
“We are concerned with the threats grand corruption and money
laundering posed to the effective enjoyment of human rights of
Nigerians, and agree with the authorities that grand corruption and
impunity of perpetrators must be vigorously combated.
“But we believe that the fight against corruption will only
succeed if it is based on due process of law and respect for human
rights.”
“If the objective the government seeks to achieve is to ensure
stolen assets are not dissipated or that politically exposed persons do
not interfere with ongoing investigation and prosecution of corruption
cases, the appropriate legal response is for the authorities to pursue
orders of temporary forfeiture and mutual legal assistance, and not a
travel ban that would achieve nothing but violate citizens’ human
rights.”
“Nigeria is a state party to the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights, which in article 12 guarantees the right of
everyone to leave any country, including their own.
“The government cannot impose restrictions on this right unless
any such restrictions are provided by law, are necessary to protect
public order, or the rights of others. The travel restrictions on the
alleged 50 corrupt Nigerians clearly do not meet these conditions.”
“All restrictions on the right to leave must be narrowly
interpreted. In General Comment No. 27, the Human Rights Committee
stated that any restrictions must not impair the essence of the right
and that the relationship of the norm to the exception must not be
reversed.”
“The travel ban cannot achieve the objective of depriving the
50 Nigerians suspected of corruption of their ill-gotten gains. It is
absolutely important that the government is guided by the provisions of
Article 31 of the UN Convention against Corruption to which Nigeria is a
state party, and which authorises states parties to take preliminary
measures to seize, freeze or otherwise immobilise property for the
purposes of confiscation/pending investigation and litigation.”
“It is always important that the definition and interpretation
of the law should be as certain as possible, and this is of particular
importance in cases of corruption where citizens’ human rights may be at
stake. We do not consider that such reasonable certainty can exist
where the executive assumes patently judicial functions.”
“The right to leave one’s country includes a positive duty on
states such as Nigeria to issue documents – as well as a passive one –
to refrain from placing obstacles in the way of an individual seeking to
leave.”