By INNOCENT ANABA

ABUJA — Chairman of Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, Mr Ibrahim Lamorde, argued, yesterday, that drastic measures were needed to check corruption in the country.

Speaking at the Annual General Conference of the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA, in Abuja, Lamorde said that corruption had eaten deep into the society’s fabric.

He pointed out that  existing laws were adequate to deal with corruption, but what was needed was  effective enforcement of the law in existence.

He spoke at the  Section on Legal Practice, with the theme: “Investor-Confidence: The role of Effective Administration of Anti-Corruption Legislation.”

Lamode noted that the anti-graft laws were not needed as existing ones may only be reviewed to strengthen them.

He said: “Everybody agrees that the existing legislation is adequate. There may be one or two amendments needed. If the existing legislation is effectively enforced, we will be able to address issues of corruption.

”The success we have recorded in EFCC so far is because of the collaboration we have had with the NBA. We are in agreement that corruption has eaten deep into the fabric of the Nigerian nation and there is need for drastic measures to address it. So, going forward, you are going to see a more efficient prosecution of cases.”

He noted that sometimes, state executives and other serving government officials “dip their hands into the treasury to pay lawyers with state funds,” noting that because of the huge money involved in such fees, lawyers accept to defend such corruption cases, at times using every means to frustrate trial.

On the way out, he charged the Bar to come up with a regulation on payment of legal fees that will not aid the obstruction of justice in any form.

He  called for more reform of the criminal justice system, as well as adequate funding of anti-corruption agencies.

Mr. Kevin Nwosu, a former Director of Academics, Nigerian Law School, who spoke on “Attainment of Fast-Track Justice in Trials,” said there was no reason why Alternative Dispute Resolution, ADR, cannot be adopted in resolving certain criminal cases to ensure speedier justice delivery.

“Let me say with all certainty that the use of ADR in resolution of criminal cases is workable, if only we understand what ADR is, how it works and why it works. ADR is more than what lawyers refer to it. It’s a set of tools for problem solving, including criminal cases.

“ADR can be used to avert a crime and prevent self-help which can result to criminal assault or murder. If we mainstream ADR fully, we reduce the crime load. The potentials are high.”

-via Vanguard

Posted by admin on Aug 28 2012. Filed under EFCC Politics, Latest Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry