Senegalese lawmakers weigh corruption cases against former ministers
DAKAR: Senegalese lawmakers on Thursday began debating whether to allow several former ministers to face charges before a special court over accusations they embezzled funds meant for the country's fight against COVID-19.
Senegal's National Assembly is controlled mainly by President Bassirou Diomaye Faye's party, elected in March last year on a promise to change how the West African country is run compared to his predecessors.
Faye has made the fight against corruption a policy priority and has launched investigations into the administration of Macky Sall, president from 2012 for 12 years.
But the opposition has slammed the moves as a 'witch hunt.'
Last Friday, lawmakers lifted parliamentary immunity from prosecution for two opposition MPs caught up in the allegations while serving in Sall's administration.
Proceedings of this type are rare in Senegal, and lawmakers must authorize cases against former ministers in the exercise of their duties.
Moustapha Diop was the industrial development minister while Salimata Diop was the women's affairs minister under Sall when the fund to fight the spread of Covid-19 was established in 2020-21.
Both have rejected accusations that they misappropriated any of the money, totaling one trillion CFA francs ($1.7 billion).
The funds were intended to reinforce the health care system, support households and the private sector, and protect jobs during the pandemic.
However, a December 2022 Court of Auditors report revealed irregularities, such as 2.7 billion CFA francs in over-invoicing of rice purchased for disadvantaged households and some 42 million CFA francs for sanitiser.
Three other former ministers accused are Amadou Mansour Faye, the former president's brother-in-law, Aissatou Sophie Gladima, and Ismaila Madior Fall.
Several prominent figures, including artists, broadcasters, fashion designers, and senior officials, have been questioned during an investigation.
Parliament lifted immunity for Moustapha Diop and Salimata Diop last Friday as they were elected lawmakers in November after Sall left office.
A three-fifths majority of the 165 lawmakers is required to adopt each draft resolution, with voting by secret ballot.
The High Court's investigative committee could then question the accused, who will decide whether or not to commit them for trial.
The court's final decision is not subject to appeal.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
a day ago
- Arab News
Trump banned citizens of 12 countries from entering the US. Here's what to know
DAKAR, Senegal: President Donald Trump has banned citizens of 12 countries from entering the United States and restricted access for those from seven others, citing national security concerns in resurrecting and expanding a hallmark policy from his first term that will mostly affect people from Africa and the Middle East. The ban announced Wednesday applies to citizens of Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. The heightened restrictions apply to people from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela who are outside the US and don't hold a valid visa. The policy takes effect Monday at 12:01 a.m. and does not have an end date. Here's what to know about the new rules: How Trump justified the ban Since returning to the White House, Trump has launched an unprecedented campaign of immigration enforcement that has pushed the limits of executive power and clashed with federal judges trying to restrain him. The travel ban stems from a Jan. 20 executive order Trump issued requiring the Department of State, Department of Homeland Security and the Director of National Intelligence to compile a report on 'hostile attitudes' toward the US The aim is to 'protect its citizens from aliens who intend to commit terrorist attacks, threaten our national security, espouse hateful ideology, or otherwise exploit the immigration laws for malevolent purposes,' the administration said. In a video posted on social media, Trump tied the new ban to a terrorist attack Sunday in Boulder, Colorado, saying it underscored the dangers posed by some visitors who overstay visas. The man charged in the attack is from Egypt, a country that is not on Trump's restricted list. US officials say he overstayed a tourist visa. Who is exempt from the ban, Which countries are affected Trump said nationals of countries included in the ban pose 'terrorism-related' and 'public-safety' risks, as well as risks of overstaying their visas. He also said some of these countries had 'deficient' screening and vetting or have historically refused to take back their citizens. His findings rely extensively on an annual Homeland Security report about tourists, businesspeople and students who overstay US visas and arrive by air or sea, singling out countries with high percentages of nationals who remain after their visas expired. 'We don't want them,' Trump said. The inclusion of Afghanistan angered some supporters who have worked to resettle its people. The ban makes exceptions for Afghans on special immigrant visas, who were generally the people who worked most closely with the US government during the two-decade war there. The list can be changed, the administration said in a document, if authorities in the designated countries make 'material improvements' to their own rules and procedures. New countries can be added 'as threats emerge around the world.' State Department guidance The State Department instructed US embassies and consulates on Friday not to revoke visas previously issued to people from the 12 countries listed in the ban. In a cable sent to all US diplomatic missions, the department said 'no action should be taken for issued visas which have already left the consular section' and that 'no visas issued prior to the effective date should be revoked pursuant to this proclamation.' However, visa applicants from affected countries whose applications have been approved but have not yet received their visas will be denied, according to the cable, which was signed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio. And, unless an applicant meets narrow criteria for an exemption to the ban, his or her application will be rejected starting on Monday. How the ban differs from 2017's Early in Trump's first term, he issued an executive order banning travel to the US by citizens of seven predominantly Muslim countries, including Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen. It was one of the most chaotic and confusing moments of his young presidency. Travelers from those nations were either barred from getting on flights to the US or detained at US airports after they landed. They included students and faculty, as well as businesspeople, tourists and people visiting friends and family. The order, often referred to as the 'Muslim ban' or the 'travel ban,' was retooled amid legal challenges until a version was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2018. That ban affected various categories of travelers and immigrants from Iran, Somalia, Yemen, Syria and Libya, plus North Koreans and some Venezuelan government officials and their families. Reactions to Trump's order Venezuela President Nicolás Maduro's government condemned the travel ban, characterizing it in a statement as a 'stigmatization and criminalization campaign' against Venezuelans. Chad President Mahamat Deby Itno said his country would suspend visas for US citizens in response to the ban. Aid and refugee resettlement groups also denounced it. 'This policy is not about national security — it is about sowing division and vilifying communities that are seeking safety and opportunity in the United States,' said Abby Maxman, president of Oxfam America. But reactions to the ban ran the gamut from anger to guarded relief and support. In Haiti, radio stations received a flurry of calls Thursday from angry listeners, including many who said they were Haitians living in the US and who accused Trump of being racist, noting that the people of many of the targeted countries are Black. Haitian-American Elvanize Louis-Juste, who was at the airport Sunday in Newark, New Jersey, awaiting a flight to her home state of Florida, said many Haitians wanting to come to the US are simply seeking to escape violence and unrest in their country. 'I have family in Haiti, so it's pretty upsetting to see and hear,' Louis-Juste, 23, said of the travel ban. 'I don't think it's a good thing. I think it's very upsetting.' William Lopez, a 75-year-old property investor who arrived from Cuba in 1967, supports the travel ban. 'These are people that come but don't want to work, they support the Cuban government, they support communism,' Lopez said at a restaurant near Little Havana in Miami. 'What the Trump administration is doing is perfectly good.'
Arab News
3 days ago
- Arab News
Nepal ex-PM faces graft charge over land deal with Indian yoga guru's firm
KATMANDU: Authorities in Nepal have charged former Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal with corruption and demanded a million-dollar fine over the purchase of land by a firm owned by Indian yoga guru Baba Ramdev, a court official said on Friday. Nepal, prime minister between 2009 and 2011, faces charges of allowing Patanjali Yogpeeth Nepal's company to purchase more land than it was legally allowed to own for herb production, processing and a hospital in the Himalayan nation 15 years ago. Both Nepal and Patanjali Yogpeeth deny any wrongdoing. The 72-year-old Nepal heads a small opposition group in parliament and his United Socialist Party says the prosecution is an act of 'political vendetta' against him. The Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA), a corruption watchdog, alleged that some of the land, in Kavre district, was later allowed to be swapped with other land, or sold at a higher price, causing a loss to the state. 'I have not done anything illegal nor indulged in any corruption concerning Patanjali land deal causing any loss to the state,' Nepal told the Kantipur daily newspaper. The Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority a corruption watchdog, alleged that some of the land, in Kavre district, was later allowed to be swapped with other land, or sold at a higher price, causing a loss to the state. The allegations were set out in a charge sheet filed by the commission on Thursday at the Special Court in Katmandu. The commission demanded Nepal be ordered to pay a fine of 185.85 million Nepali rupees ($1.35 million). If found guilty he could also be sentenced to up to 17 years in jail. A spokesperson for Patanjali in India denied any wrongdoing, saying it bought the land privately through due legal process. 'Patanjali has not acquired any government land. It is unfair to drag our name in local political vendetta actions and proceedings,' S K Tijarawala, Patanjali's spokesperson, told Reuters in a text message. The commission also charged 92 others, including some former ministers and officials, some of whom are already dead. Yaga Raj Regmi, information officer of the court, said Nepal would receive a formal court notice giving him 15 days in which to present himself at court and the hearing would start after that.
Asharq Al-Awsat
5 days ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
The Invisible Enemy in the Sudan War
Sudan's new Prime Minister, Dr. Kamel Idris, faces formidable challenges as he navigates the most complex and critical moment in the country's history. Sudan has been ravaged by a devastating war, its economy has been enfeebled, its infrastructure is crumbling, its institutions are decaying, and its resilient population is suffering. In his inaugural address after being sworn in, Prime Minister Idris acknowledged the weight of the responsibility on his shoulders and promised to realize the vision that he laid out in the two books and presented publicly on camera. While the government has a long agenda. Its gravest challenges may not be its visible tasks, though they are many. An 'invisible enemy' that has been hollowing out the state from within for years: is corruption. Although corruption has long weighed on this wounded nation, it has acquired new and more dangerous dimensions during the war. Indeed, in times of conflict, state institutions are weakened, effective oversight disappears, and individuals exploit dire security and economic conditions to abuse their power and loot both public and private resources. Since the war began, numerous accounts of rampant corruption have surfaced everywhere: from humanitarian aid and government appointments to public funds and even the moral fabric of society. These are not merely rumors. Officials have publicly addressed the issue. Lieutenant General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan has criticized fraud in the civil service and nepotism, while Vice President of the Sovereignty Council Malik Agar acknowledged that corruption had been deeply entrenched. The reality is that corruption in Sudan is no longer a problem of isolated incidents or the product of individual misconduct; it has become a 'way of life.' Not only does it harm the economy, it also presents an existential threat to the state. That is why Sudan today needs to wage a serious and relentless battle against corruption, going beyond statement and rhetoric to deliver results through structural reforms of state institutions. Fighting corruption under these conditions is not just a demand of the masses or institutional idealism; it is a national imperative- a requisite for reform, reconstruction, attracting investment, and rebuilding trust between the government and its citizens. Clear political determination is not enough. Sudan needs a fully-fledged campaign armed with effective tools and actionable plans. Where Do We Begin? The government of Dr. Kamel Idris can take different approaches to open horizons in the fight against corruption. To succeed, it will need the full backing of all other state actors. Among the steps the state can take are: Establishing an independent national anti-corruption commission with real authority. Creating a specialized court for corruption-related crimes that combines efficiency with speed, ensures that cases are not trapped into bureaucratic limbo. Passing a strict financial disclosure and asset declaration law that applies to senior officials and all public sector employees. Expanding the digitization of public services to reduce direct contact and curb bribery, building a single online portal for customs, taxation, procurement, licensing, and more. Launching a nationwide media campaign under the banner of 'Fighting Corruption.' It must raise compelling and relatable slogans that speak directly to the public and are repeated enough times to become catchphrases that resonate even in the halls of government. In parallel with efforts to raise awareness, protecting journalists is essential for allowing them to expose corruption through investigative reporting. A whistleblower protection system must also be established. Reform will remain incomplete before a purge in sensitive posts in the judiciary, police, customs, taxation, ports, and border control. Civil society must also be empowered so that it can contribute to public oversight and help ensure transparency and accountability. There are many successful examples of countries that have tackled corruption through their determination and bold reforms, and they demonstrate that change is possible when there is political will. Take Rwanda, for instance: following the genocide of the 1990s, it was a failed state crippled by violence and corruption. However, it chose the path of reform and reconstruction, adopting a zero-tolerance policy on corruption. It strengthened the Office of the Auditor General, created a dedicated anti-corruption body and specialized courts, and prosecuted high-profile offenders. Another example is Singapore, which had been a poor country with limited resources and rampant corruption until the 1960s. It embarked on a path toward reform and revival, enforcing robust oversight mechanisms and ensuring judicial independence, as well as passing strict anti-corruption laws. It also offered competitive salaries to civil servants and law enforcement officials (in the judiciary, police, customs, and tax agencies) to reduce the temptation of bribes, while simultaneously imposing strict systems of oversight, accountability, and prosecution. If Dr. Kamel Idris's government appeases the corrupt, it will only add to the frustration. However, if it governs like it is the country's "last chance" and receives the support of other officials, this government's tenure could become a turning point for Sudan. However, the battle will not be easy. It requires political courage, a moral revolution, and a conviction that corruption is not inevitable and that this a battle that must be won if Sudan is to recover and rise.
