Bobrisky’s Conviction And EFCC’s Curious Agenda

The last week’s sentencing of the celebrity crossdresser, Idris Olanrewaju Okuneye (a.k.a. Bobrisky), following his conviction a week earlier, was bound to provoke some curiosity in any discerning mind. The controversial social media sensation will spend six months in prison for abuse of the naira by “spraying” it at a movie premiere in Lagos.

From the very day the news of the arrest and prosecution emerged, I became really confused as to what actually was happening. I had never heard that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) prosecuted anyone for abuse of the naira – which by the way is one act that has become so much embedded in our everyday life that one rarely remembers that it is a crime. From squeezing the notes or writing on it to showering them on dancers and other performers, abuse of the naira is one infraction which hardly any Nigerian can claim innocent of.

When I saw the money laundering accusations in the initial charges pressed against Bobrisky, I had believed that these were the main reason for his arrest and prosecution while the naira abuse thing was.a mere secondary matter. But then I was so quickly proven wrong when on the day of the arraignment, the EFCC withdrew the two money laundering charges, leaving only the currency abuse charges.

This development made the scenario all the more curious. Why the sudden interest in naira abuse by EFCC? This is a body created primarily to combat graft. Throwing currency notes about is surely not a form of graft. Therefore, it is certainly not easy to understand how and why the EFCC, which obviously has more than ample graft cases to grapple with, would become obsessed with naira abuse. In a recent communication on its investigation into the allegations of corrupt acts made against the suspended minister of humanitarian affairs and poverty alleviation, Dr. Betta Edu, the EFCC chairman was quoted as urging Nigerians to be patient with the Commission as the investigation is a complex one and will take some time. The EFCC boss further stated that Edu’s case is just one out of the thousands of investigations the agency is working on in the face of limited staff strength. He said some investigations take as long as years to conclude.

It is not unusual that an agency like the EFCC, especially in a country like ours, will be burdened with so many cases, but what may seem curious is that the agency, in the midst of its deluged work desk, will have the luxury of chasing an additional task of going after a naira abuse suspect. I have considered a number of possible answers to this apparent puzzle spurn by the EFCC.

First, is it possible that the agency, out of frustration at the slowness of our judicial process which is holding up many possible convictions that would help launder the image of the Commission, saw the Bobrisky case as an opportunity to quickly secure a high-profile conviction, knowing that the case, unlike others it typically handles, lends itself to such simple and quick resolution? Second, is it possible that Bobrisky is becoming a victim of a powerful individual within or outside the EFCC who has scores to settle with him or who is simply repulsed by his cross-gender adventures? Third, is it possible that the EFCC or the CBN is for once trying to get serious with enforcement of the law on naira abuse and is using the Bobrisky case to send out a strong message?

I am not in the least impressed by the reasoning of some Nigerians that Bobrisky’s ordeal is another demonstration of the fact that we are not all equal before the law. I read an article where the writer recalled recent instances where big shots, ranging from Obi Cubana to a presidential aide, were publicly involved in naira “spraying”, yet nothing happened. The argument of the writer, therefore, was that the EFCC moved against Bobrisky because he is a common man. I’m finding it difficult to make sense of this logic. “Spraying” of naira notes is a practice which even the poorest of the poor, including village old women in moments of excitement, engage in. When all the demographics that are guilty of breaking the currency law are duly profiled, it will be impossible for a millionaire celebrity like Bobrisky to be classified as a common man among them. If it is about using bribe to pay his way through, his pocket is deep enough to carry that.

While there have been comments here and there criticising the EFCC’s move against Bobrisky, it does seem to me that majority of Nigerians are not exactly sympathetic towards the maverick social media sensation. He is not a figure that is so much liked in a society where his kind of cross-gender eccentricity draws strong public repulsion. I suspect that if this case had concerned a more agreeable celebrity, many Internet users must have poured out to express sympathy and call out the EFCC. A hashtag like #IStandWithBobrisky might have been trending. An example is the public condemnation that came with the trial of actor, Funke Akindele, and her husband by Lagos state government for holding a party in violation of COVID-19 protocols.

But after all said and done, truth remains that as far as the law is concerned, the prosecutorial powers and responsibility of the state are totally discretionary; the state decides whom to prosecute and whom not to. All our complaints as to the justness of prosecuting one and leaving out another amount to irrelevant sentiments. Where Mr. A and Mr. B have committed a crime, it is totally within the powers and right of the state to prosecute Mr. A and leave out Mr. B. This is why it’s always possible for the state to prosecute a group of co-suspects while leaving out one of them who has confessed and accepted to serve as a witness against the others. A prosecuted suspect cannot let himself off the hook by arguing in court that others who committed the offence with him are not being prosecuted. In fact, the court has held that the attorney-general, in deciding whom to prosecute or not and whose prosecution to continue or discontinue, is “law unto himself.” In other words, his acts are completely discretionary and cannot even be questioned in court. They are not subject to judicial review. (All prosecutions, including those by the EFCC, are done on behalf of the attorney general).

The foregoing underscores the reason why everyone vested with the power to prosecute must exercise that power with absolute sense of duty and highest regard for justice. This is the spirit of the section 174(3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) which provides that in exercising these prosecutorial powers, the attorney general “shall have regard to the public interest, the interest of justice and the need to prevent abuse of legal process.”

To repeat, Bobrisky’s trial and conviction cannot be questioned on the basis of the law. He is a lawbreker and the state exercised its unquestionable power of prosecution to bring him to justice. One may begin to raise one or two moral issues, but they’re completely irrelevant to the law. However, the EFCC and all relevant authorities should not turn a deaf ear to this sort of sentiments, as they may embody arguments that are critical for realising the spirit of the law as against merely complying with its letters.

Finally, this brings me to the question of our historical laxity in enforcing many of our laws, which has left us a lawless enclave. A laughable example is how the police every Christmas announces the “ban” on use of firecrackers (colloquially known as knockout or banger), a warning both the police and the public never take seriously. The way this “warning” is rehashed every year and the complete indifference with which people disobey it has reduced what should be a serious law enforcement advisory to a tasteless yearly song by the police. What of the way people freely smoke marijuana, a “banned” hard drug, in public places, even as the authorities endlessly harp on its ban? Touts are all over our towns and cities extorting commercial drivers in the full public glare even as the authorities have been “warning” against it. Our public job recruitment process is mired in nepotism and bribery in the face of the “determination” of the government to stick to the recruitment laws. Our civil service is on the verge of dying of the cancer of corruption and inefficiency even in the midst of series of “reforms”.

The moment we begin to tell ourselves the truth and cease making ourselves a laughing stock, our nation will be better for it. We are where we are simply because we have failed to move away from where we are. It’s that simple. It’s an irony of a nation.

Henry Chigozie Duru, PhD, teaches journalism and mass communication at Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria.