Mohammadu Buhari: “People have accused me of becoming President with stolen funds.
That Amaechi and some others sponsored my election with stolen funds from their state treasuries. In all honesty, I cannot ‘deny or confirm’ that, since the last administration had failed to prosecute them. I knew some of them well; and if I had refused their voluntary sponsorship, Nigerians won’t have a President that can protect them from corrupt leaders.… I will not spare any of the corrupt sponsors. But, I cannot investigate myself. Can I?”
The law implies that both the thief and the receiver of proceeds of theft are all thieves on different levels. From Buhari’s statement above, he is not denying knowingly receiving proceeds of theft. Rather, he is justifying having participated in the stealing of Rivers state’s treasury with the fact that Jonathan failed to probe him, Amaechi and others.
That someone refused to probe a thief does not exonerate that thief from his criminal act. It also does not stop a probe in the future. Buhari’s statement confirms that he aided and abetted Chibuike Amaechi and others, in looting their states’ treasury. Buhari knew that the source of money used for his presidential campaign was stolen. Yet he used that stolen fund to run for an election that was suppose to produce a crime-free fellow as president.
When you confess to have received stolen properties which means you are an indirect thief, and you know it, you ought to know that you are as guilty as those who physically stole what was handed over to you or what you benefited from. Buhari must be told that he is as guilty as Tinubu, Amaechi, Kwankwaso, Atiku, Okorocha, Aregbesola, Osho-Omo-Ole, e.t.c.
If we are to take Buhari serious, he must as a matter urgency, prosecute both the thief and the receiver of the proceeds of theft. In civilised countries, the needful in this case is for Buhari to resign so that an independet person, not involved in the theft case in question, can come in and prosecute both him, Buhari, and his partners in crime.
Otherwise, our thieving president of today has no moral right to prosecute or jail people who are only imitating his actions as in buying or receiving stolen goods from thieves.