Continues from last week

By Femi Aborisade

The Court then declared that:

“… by virtue of the provisions of section 15(5) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), section 38(2)(b) of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act 2004 and section 27(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2011,

it is contrary to public policy for the defendant or any of its agents to punish the claimant by way of suspension from duty or otherwise subject him to any disciplinary measure for making known to third parties information about corrupt practices and mismanagement of the funds of the Federal Polytechnic, Yaba otherwise known as Yaba College of technology.”

The suspension of Ibirogba from the office of Bursar was thus declared unlawful, null and void. The Court reinstated Ibirogba and declared that he is “entitled to return to his work as if he was never suspended with his right to salary, allowances and perquisites of office intact”.

The College was subsequently ordered to pay, within 30 days of the Judgment, backlog of the full salary and allowances of Ibirogba from October 2013, the cost of the action estimated at N50,000 (fifty thousand Naira) as well as N250,000 (two hundred and fifty thousand Naira) general damages – for unfair labour practice, suspension being  mala fide, vindictive, a clear case of victimization and unlawful.

In the expected fight against corruption, which perhaps was the principal reason for the overwhelming electoral victory of President Muhammadu Buhari, the NIC, by the Hon. Justice Kanyip’s Judgment in Ibirogba v. Yaba College of Technology, has declared it would be a reliable ally, at least from the point of view of encouraging and protecting the rights of whistle blowers.

Whistle blowers

However, there is a need for legislative reform such that, among other things, the damages which a public institution has to pay to whistle blowers like Ibirogba should be borne personally, collectively and/or individually, by those who constitute the Management and/or Governing Council and who knowingly participated, aided, condoned or allowed the looting, dissipation, mismanagement and/or waste of public funds, rather than the monetary penalties being taken from public treasury.

The burning question is: would the ‘change’ governments of the APC under the leadership of the anti-corruption President Buhari (at the Federal Government level) establish the necessary conditions, including initiating required legislative reforms to partner with the courts, particularly the NIC, in the fight against corruption in public office?

Femi Aborisade.

Attorney-at-Law & Industrial Relations Consultant.