Epstein files global fallout: Nigeria is too tolerant of abuse of power, by Olu Fasan

2026-03-04 - 23:17

In The Republic, Plato makes strong connections between city and soul, arguing that as the city is, so is the soul; both having a tripartite nature, corresponding to the rational/wisdom-loving, appetitive/desiring and spirited/honour-seeking elements. The Bible defines the soul’s three elements as mind, emotion and will. The ideal state, like the ideal individual, is one with a healthy, unafflicted soul. For, as Plato and the Bible make clear, an afflicted soul is an enemy of the body and the spirit. Sadly, in body, spirit and soul, Nigeria is an unhealthy nation. Nigeria’s body, that is, its political and governance structure is deeply flawed. Its spirit is debased. While arguably the most religious country in the world, Nigeria is not a god-fearing, righteous nation. And when it comes to its soul, namely, the rational/truth/wisdom/honour-seeking elements, Nigeria is utterly decadent, with no sense of right and wrong, no sense of public morality, and no virtue-defining moral compass! All of this came back to me recently as I reflected on the global fallout from the Epstein files, relating to the entanglements of some of the world’s powerful people with Jeffrey Epstein, the American billionaire-financier, who was jailed for having sex with underaged girls and who committed suicide in prison. In December 2025 and also in January 2026, following mounting global pressure, the US Department of Justice released several Epstein files. The files revealed how prominent people – politicians, royalties and corporate leaders – cosied up with Epstein for decades. The backlash was swift and contagious. In the UK, Prince Andrew, Queen Elizabeth II’s second son, was stripped of his Duke of York title and even lost the title “Prince”, a supposed birthright! He was later arrested. Lord Peter Mandelson, a former deputy prime minister, was dismissed as the UK ambassador to the US and forced to resign from the House of Lords, as the government fast-tracks a law to strip him of the title “Lord”. He, too, was arrested. In the US, former President Bill Clinton and his wife Hillary, a former senator and secretary of state, were summoned to Congress to tell their side of the Epstein story. The Epstein files have also ruptured President Trump’s MAGA base, turning some of his die-hard loyalists, like Marjorie Taylor Greene, against him. All of this got me thinking about Nigeria. Well, not because any Nigerian politician or corporate leader has, so far, been linked to the Epstein affair but because abuse of power and misconduct in public life are so prevalent in Nigeria and yet normalised and treated as par the course. This is a country where a president would appoint people with absolutely no shred of integrity as ambassadors; a country where ministers have graft-related files bulging at the seams with the EFCC; a country where people remain as ministers or in public office despite credible allegations of inappropriate behaviours swirling around them! The usual excuse, even in the face of patently obvious evidence of misconduct, is that someone has not been convicted by a court of law. But Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was not convicted of any offence before being stripped of his royal titles. Mandelson was not found guilty of any offence before being removed as the UK ambassador to the US and forced out of the House of Lords. Under the UK Ministerial Code, a minister “must” ensure that no conflict of interest arises “or could reasonably be perceived to arise” in the performance of his or her duties, and ministers must “behave in a way that upholds the highest standards of propriety.” Any alleged breach of the Ministerial Code or of the Principles of Public Life will be investigated by an independent ombudsman, and a finding of guilt will invariably lead to a resignation or dismissal without a court verdict. The principle is simple: holding a public office is a privilege, and only high standards of behaviour will suffice. But in Nigeria, a president will have or keep anyone in his cabinet and government regardless of the thick cloud of impropriety hovering over his or her head. And, of course, Nigeria’s “anti-graft” agencies lack the political independence needed to discharge their duties without fear or favour. For instance, the Code of Conduct Bureau, CCB, needs the approval of the Attorney-General of the Federation to prosecute anyone at the Code of Conduct Tribunal, CCT, so does the Independent Corrupt Practices and other Related Offences Commission, ICPC. But the AGF, a partisan politician, has a vested interest in such matters. As for the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, well, in theory, it can prosecute independently but, in practice, it’s neither immune to nor free from political interference. Besides, it’s utterly impotent operationally and judicially. Truth be told, in Nigeria, taking corruption or misconduct cases to court is a blind alley, a cul-de-sac. For instance, the CCB may take a matter to the CCT, or the EFCC to the court. But, in reality, they are simply kicking the case into the long grass because it would drag on for years and, in the end, be dismissed because “the prosecution failed to prove its allegations”, as if the court/tribunal is saying the accused has satisfactorily proved the source of his stupendous wealth. It’s always a phantom trial! Last year, the EFCC chairman, Ola Olukoyede, staked his future at the EFCC on the corruption allegations against Yahaya Bello, a former governor of Kogi State, saying: “I’ll resign if Yahaya Bello is not prosecuted.” Recently, challenged about his vow, Olukoyede replied: “Have I not made good that promise of commitment? Is Yahaya Bello not being prosecuted?” But what would he say about President Tinubu’s lavish birthday message to Bello and his co-option of Bello into a major role in his re-election bid? Does Olukoyede not think that Bello’s trial is already compromised with such high-level presidential interest in him? That’s not how serious countries tackle endemic corruption. Which brings me to another perversity that hardly anyone talks or cares about in Nigeria: the role of “gifts” in fuelling corruption. According to the UN Convention Against Corruption, UNCAC, the acceptance of gifts by public officials is a major factor feeding graft. As a result, gifts to public officials are tightly regulated in many countries. But not in Nigeria. Section 3 of the 5th Schedule of the Constitution allows a public officer to receive “personal gifts or benefits from relatives or personal friends to such extent and such occasion as are recognised by custom.” But how much is “recognised by custom”? Which custom? And shouldn’t such gifts be registered and the givers disclosed? Recently, Abubakar Malami, a former AGF, said that N958m of the N8.7bn he allegedly laundered were “traditional gifts from personal friends.” But shouldn’t Nigerians know who the “personal friends” are? In the UK, no public officer will receive £521,330 (the equivalent of N958mn) from personal friends without declaring the money and the identities of the friends in a register. But do Nigerians really care? Well, in a top-down, high power-distanced society defined by patron-client relationships, hardly anyone cares about corrupt enrichment by public officers. Culturally, the kind of bottom-up pressure that caused the Epstein files fallout globally does not exist in Nigeria. As Plato said, “The virtuous society and the virtuous individual are indeed alike in point of virtue.” Sadly, Nigeria is what it is, an epitome of corruption and misconduct in public life, precisely because there are too few virtuous individuals to birth a virtuous society. But Nigeria’s future depends on the existence of a critical mass of enlightened citizens that can hold their leaders’ feet to the fire! *Dr Fasan is the author of ‘In The National Interest: The Road to Nigeria’s Political, Economic and Social Transformation’, available at RovingHeights bookstores.