After years of inaction and many questions as to why the Nigerian authorities have done nothing to pursue Nigerian wrongdoers in a 21-year corruption case involving oil giant Shell Nigeria Ultra Deep Limited and Italian company ENI SpA, it appears that the Nigerian authorities have finally decided to pursue criminal proceedings against Nigerian parties. In April 2019 the Abuja High Court issued orders for the arrest of former Petroleum Minister Dan Etete Etete and Attorney General Mohammed Bello Adoke.
Recent reports about developments in an ongoing corruption case in Italy, which alleges corruption in Nigeria by oil giants Royal Dutch Shell and Italian company Eni, have increased speculation as to whether any meaningful proceedings relating to the matter will ever be brought in Nigeria. There appear to be numerous issues in respect of which inquiries might be undertaken.
In 2014 $321 million which had been amassed in Luxembourg by Nigeria's former head of state was frozen. Although the government did not need to enlist external counsel to recover the money, the federal attorney general engaged local lawyers, whose only qualifications were alleged to have been that they had both worked with the attorney general while he was legal adviser to President Buhari's political party. This is just one in a series of embarrassing situations involving Buhari's government.
Although corruption in the ranks of Nigerian judicial officers has long been considered an issue, the authorities have been accused of lacking any genuine desire to address the problem. Although the National Judicial Council occasionally penalised judges, no judges were prosecuted. All that changed in 2016, when a number of Nigerian judges were arrested on suspicion of corruption. More recently, the Court of Appeal dismissed corruption charges against another Federal High Court judge.
When the Federal Ministry of Finance's new whistleblowing programme was announced, an issue was identified with regard to the lack of clarity around how rewards will be calculated. Following this, there has recently been significant controversy surrounding a reward which may have been paid to an informant following the recovery of approximately $43 million under the programme. If the matter proceeds to litigation, it may provide some indication as to how the programme is actually being implemented.