MKO Abiola and ITT: From the Horse's Mouth

[Mobolaji E. Aluko <maluko@scs.howard.edu>]

July 7, 1997

BEGIN QUOTE:

"Glasgow also looms large in his life because there he got
married to his first wife, the late Alhaja Simbiat Abiola,
and there they had their first two children, Kola and Deji.
Literally, after his final examinations in Glasgow, he returned
home in March 1966 to a country torn apart by an imminent
civil war. His first job was with the University of Lagos
Teaching Hospital and subsequently he worked for Pfizer.
In August 1968, he joined the International Telephones and
Telecommunications (ITT) as its Finance Controller. That decision
was to change the course of his life.

Since this phase of Abiola's life has been over-romanticised
in tales that take on the air of folkloric myth, the facts of
the matter should be restated for the record. Fortunately, Chief
Abiola has been forthcoming with details in this regard. While
admitting to support from a myriad of people, both at home and
abroad, in his rise to financial prominence, he identifies
the ITT link as the source of his first break-through. Basically
what happened was that he used his connections with friends in
government, among them the late General Murtala Muhammed, to
win key government concessions for ITT. But instead of settling
for the usual fixed salary, he opted for shares of the business.
Let us listen to Abiola tell the story himself:

I proceeded immediately to London with the cheque and to report
the affairs in the office and I insisted I could only carry on
in the company if I became the managing director and at the
same time was given no less than 50 per cent of the shareholding
of the business. The managing director aspect of the request
was granted immediately, but the shareholding part of it, I was
told, required top policy consideration which would be resolved
within six months on......The bottom line, in fact, was that I
was requesting that at the determination of the profit for any
year, half of that profit should be left behind in recognition
of my contributions for making the whole profit. No more no
less.
- Excerpt from Chapter 1: "Behind The Legend" of
"Legend of Our Time: The Thoughts of MKO Abiola"

"In my many years of association with the ITT, within which I grew to
become the executive vice-president of the corporation for Africa,
Middle East and Asia, the most difficult part of my career was
getting ITT to leave South Africa in 1975. Although a most painful
decision because the South African market is four times the size of
the market of the rest of black Africa, I was able to persuade ITT
to abandon the tele-communications market in South Africa.

Most of my colleagues did not feel strongly about the issue of South
Africa. So it became my duty to point out the implication of ITT's
continued trading with South Africa and my country and I was pleased it
was dealt with in only one meeting: the discussion lasted less than two
hours within which I was able to get ITT to understand that the future
lies not in South Africa. That is the only contribution I claim to have
made in the determination of ITT policy in the world. "

- June 12, 1983 speech, excerpted from book

END QUOTE

Dear Netters:

The first time I read the very graphic phrase "to put lipstick on
frog to make it beautiful" was in description of MKO Abiola in a Time
Magazine article after he was detained by Abacha's junta. The article's
incredulous point was that Abiola was so corrupt that he was no Nigerian
version of Mandela. It quoted the usual street talk about Abiola - his
friendship with the military, his women - and ITT. His being a
millionaire - or billionaire - was always connected with ITT, and
Nigerians have for ever blamed him for our poor telephone lines.

I have always believed that too, especially since I had never heard that
he defended himself on it. Only within the past month, when I began to
serialize his book "Legend of Our Time" have I talked with people (and
others have emailed me privately) who seemed to have heard or read several
times his explanations of the famed ITT debacle - AND EVERY ONE OF THEM
SEEMED TO BELIEVE ABIOLA'S VERSION OF THE EVENTS. In fact, Abiola seemed
to go to every length to explain himself to people high and low. Quite
frankly, independent of his present political debacle, I have begun to
feel sorry for him, that AT LEAST ON THAT ITT SCORE, he has dealt "a bum
rap," has been done a disservice if people don't read his own account and
at least give him a benefit of the doubt.

For example, in Uzoma Chukwu's recent "Hit Parade of Stashed-away Fortunes
of African Dictators", Uzo has repeated the broadside charge of government
kickbacks to Abiola on ITT contracts. Luckily Francis Ifejika, apparently
not having read Part 1 of my recent excerpt of the book (at least he did
not refer to it), has given his own understanding of Abiola's previous
explanation during a TV interview in Nigeria.

In the account below, I have excerpted from my Part 1 excerpt, now
HIGHLIGHTING only the ITT era of Abiola IN HIS OWN WORDS. In the process,
I have put back the two sections of deleted and highly relevant sections
which I promised our dear and departed Ely Obasi just two days or so
before his death that I would put back in time.

For objectivity sake, I ask to you read the account again, and at least
reconsider the calumny against MKO Abiola's name on account of the ITT
debacle. He might yet be president of Nigeria, but then, he also has a
name.

Best wishes all.

Bolaji Aluko

----------------------------------------------------------------------

BEGIN Excerpt from Chapter 36 of Book: "A Legend of Our Time: The Thoughts
of MKO Abiola"

Now, the International Telephone and Telegraph (ITT) system has dual
leadership: that is, the general manager and managing director on one hand
and the controller on the other, both of whom have direct reporting
channels to headquarters. We had in Nigeria at the time a general manager
who did not quite understand what was going on and if he understood he did
not do much about it.

The general manager spent more time in Lagos boat club than in the office.
He had no marketing leadership or any form of managerial leadership to
give to his team and people under him. A long-standing debt of UK3.5
million owed by the Army for three and half years had been the subject of
more than six volumes of inter-company memoranda between the headquarters
in London and New York. A delegation from London consisting of twelve top
brass of ITT African and Middle East had been scheduled to meet the Army
signals inspector, Lt.-Col. Murtala Muhammed on April 4, 1969.

Naturally, I joined the delegation. Eleven of us waited in the Inspector
of Signals waiting room from 7:30 in the morning till 3:30 in the
afternoon when he left the office. The Inspector of Signals did not even
say hello. We repeated the second and the third day with the same result.

The United Kingdom delegation went bak in disarray and frustration. The
issue of the debt with the Army became urgent because on April 9, 1969,
the first chequre I signed as controller of ITT Nigeria Limited was
returned unpaid with the inscription "refer to drawer." It was for UK500.
Up till that stage in my life, I had never had to meet a bank manager to
ask for overdraft.

I took all the files on the Army transaction home and stayed up all night
to get a proper handle of the situation. At 5:30 in the morning, I
proceeded to the office of the Inspector of Signals. I arrive at seven
o'clock on the dot. Lt. Col Muhammed met me standing at his office at
7:29 am. He did not respond to my greeting but instead attempted to brush
me aside. I refused to be brushed aside. The exchange of hot words
ensued and continued for about half an hour during which time the Chief of
Army Staff, then titled Chief of Staff, Army, Brigadier Hassan Usman
Katsina, arrived at the scene.

He called the two of us into his office to question whether I knew who Lt.
Col Muhammed was and I answered by asking whether Lt. Col Muhammed knew
who I was.

That really infuriated Lt. Col. Muhammed. But I made it clear to the
Chief of Army Staff, that I would like to reserve all statements until the
arrival of the then Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Alhaji Yusuf
GObir of blessed memory, who was quickly sent for by Brigadier Katsina. I
then told the Chief of Staff Army that Lt. Col Muhammed had prevented the
government from fulfilling government obligations to my company by
wrongful refusal to sign the voucher for more than three years.

Lt. Col Muhammed's reply was that my company, ITT Nigeria Limited, made a
20 percent profit on the transaction, to which I quickly replied that if
it were only 20 percent ITT made on the supply of sophisticated army
communication system, the Army still owed 11 percent of the amount on the
invoice because the interest of 31.5 percent was being taken off the
company by bankers. Alhaji Gobir admitted that the vouchers were for
settlement for a long time, due to the refusal of the inspector of signals
to authorise payment.

After a prolonged argument, it was decided that the money should be paid
to us. And I collected the cheque before the close of business that day.
But while waiting for the cheque, I had phoned to tell the general manager
of the development. On getting back to the office, to my greatest
surprise, I found all the staff in a merry-making mood.

I proceeded immediately to London with the cheque and to report the
affairs in the office and I insisted I could only carry on in the company
if I became the managing directore and at the same time was given no less
than 50 per cent of the shareholding of the business. The managind
director aspect of the request was granted immediately, but the
shareholding part of it, I was told, required top policy consideration
which would be resolved within six months.

I made it clear to ITT that to be able to give my best, I needed to work
in an atmospher and environment in which I would see myself as a landlord
and not a tenant. I told them that the economic relationship that should
exist between free peoples must not be like that of master and servant,
but one based on mutual reliance and confidence. And that I saw no future
in any business relationship I may establish with ITT if it did not
guarantee the type of sense of belonging I was asking through partnership
and control of the enterprise.

To those I spoke with in the headquarters, my sentiments were totally new
ideas and, realistically, bearing in mind their own position in the
organisation, a position based on master and servant to the organisation,
there was great restriction on the amount of support I could expect from
them. What I was asking from the corporation was a status that has not
been given to anyone else in the half a century history of the
organisation.

The issue was of such a fundamental nature, that it did not allow for the
usual type of negotiation like the payment of extra bonus, commission and
so on. The bottom lin, in fact, was that I was requesting that at the
determination of the profit for any year, half of that profit should be
left behind in recognition of my contributions for making the whole
profit. No more no less.

The whole approach was predicated on the fact that I had such a
contribution to make on the success of the business that needed to be
specially recognised and rewarded over and above the bread and butter
issues of salaries, bonuses and commissions. I gave an example with the
difference between my approach to the collection of the UK3.5 million from
the Army and those previously adopted by both the headquarters and the
Nigerian management of the corporation to the same issue and the degree of
success I attained. Anyway, I agreed to leave the matters to them for
decision within six months.

While I accepted to be the managing director of the company, I refused to
take the big house that came along with it at the low density are of
Apapa. Instead, I preferred to stay in my Surulere residence of No. 7,
Shofidiya Close.

There was a lot of anxiety by ITT that I should move to what they called a
"respectable" area in order to facilitate my interaction with, and
entertainment of VIPs and to be near the company of those they believed
would help the progress of the organisation through membership of elite
clubs and so on. Thus, when they though deeply about my objection to the
Apapa house, they offered alternatives also at Victoria Isalnd and another
at Ikoyi. But as far as I was concerned the answer was the same. I saw
no reason why the performance of a particular office should take me out of
the house I had built for myself. The pressure to move was such that I
finally had to tell them that my father, having never been to school,
would have problems in locating my residence in such low density areas and
that in his old age, I should not give additional aggravation to his state
especially since he had to see me on a regular basis being his first
child. I emphasised that doing that would be frowned upon by the customs
of our people and therefore it should never be done. In further analysis,
I concluded, if after six months in considering the issue of partnership I
became such a failure in the management of the enterprise, the basis of
the increased status would have fallen to pieces automatically.

If living in a particular location would have enhanced my chances of
success, I would require no persuasion to jump to it. So, most
reluctantly, I was allowed to continue living in my house. My appointment
as managing director was subsequently announced.

Within the six months, and by the grace of God, a lot of improvement was
recorded in every aspect of the operations of the company. The staff
strength went up to 72, and we moved into a bigger office. The finances
of the company were very healthy and our competitive position in the
telecommunications industry improved beyond recognition.

At a meeting called at the headquarters at the expiration of the six
months, every other issue was discussed except the issue of partnership.
At the end of it, I offered my resignation as managing director of ITT
giving the normal three months notice. The whole request I had made was
treated as a joke which I did not find very funny.

I returned to plan my exit from ITT and formed the Radio Communications
(Nigeria) Limited (RCN). I got an initial contract through the tender
process, of course, in the Ministry of Defence and through the
encouragement of Col Murtala Muhammed who had become a close friend
following the earlier misunderstanding.

It took two and a half months to finalise the first RCN contract which
came to about UK 3 million. But, somehow, someone leaked the UK3 million
contract to ITT at UK 30 million and with only two days to go to the
expiration of my resignation notice, ITT suddenly became interested in my
new company and wanted a partnership with it. They radioed at the 11th
hour to offer me the partnership I had asked for, provided, they said, I
should consider giving them the same kind of partnership in the RCN.

After some negotiation, therefore, ITT sold me 49 percent of the shares
(42 per cent for certain technical and corporate reasons) and retained 51
percent for purposes of "apparent control."

Shortly after that, the negotiations for their coming into partnership in
RCN broke down and for some reasons, the negotiation was never reopened,
the RCN remained in 100 per cent ownership of Chief MKO Abiola.

The growth of ITT, however, continued by leaps and bounds. So did the
growth of the RCN. We became the only telecommunications company
controlled and run by Nigerians in Nigera. We there had greater access to
the customer and greater understanding of his requirements.

My position in the two companies would become meaningless unless I
encouraged other Nigerian men and women to join the running of the affairs
of the organisation. The value of the shares in the company increased
astronomically as progress was made. I had the support of most Nigerians
in both the civil service and the government and in the services and I
ensured prompt deliveries and an efficient after sales services - the
cornerstone of our success.

In early 1975, ITT had a breakthrough in the national telecommunications
award to provide telephone exchanges in 38 locations in some parts of
Nigeria. The Eastern part of the country was awarded to another company
mainly for technical reasons. That was the period of port congestion and
to facilitate the entry of equipment, the ministry of communications got
us the permission to fly in telecommunications equipment. It involved 120
flights to accomplish the task in the allocated time.

Simultaneously with the telephone exchange contract, was the award of
telephone exchange buildings contracts to local contractors. We were
exclusively responsible for manufacturing and installing the equipment,
but wer not party to the construction of telephone buildings. Barring the
fact aht we made available the size of equipment room required, it was the
duty of the architects, structural and electrical consultants of the Posts
and Telecommunications and local contractors to make the buildings
available. It is sad to say that ten of those buildings are not yet ready
for the installation of equipment as at this morning that I am talking to
you.

So many reasons have been adduced, depending on whom you talk to. The P &
T have different reasons from those given by consultants. And the
contractors have an entirely different set of reasons. As an informed
observer what I thing has happened is not that the P & T failed to award
those contracts to the right calibre of contractors or that it was due to
bad consultants. The failure to construct those telephone buildings was
due to non-availability of land on whcih to start the buildings at all.
For example in Sokoto, the contractor was chased out on three occasions by
irate landowners or occupiers. The inadequacy of the land space made
availabel in some places to the P & T was another factor as in Akure where
the contractor struck a huge pool of water two feet from the surface.

We knew all along that piecemeal awards always lead to delay and waste.
Some operational problems encountered by the contractors included, but
were not limited to, the irregularity of payments as they fell due. THis
would have been avoided if a turnkey approach had been adopted "ab
initio". A much more responsible company would have been saddled with the
responsibility of total performance in each case.

The reason, of course, why that was not done was the fact that the
critical importance of contractors involved in the installation of the
telephone exchanges was very badly underplayed.

There was also the Nigerian attitude which, unfortunately, is still
prevalent, that if you make a contract a turnkey contract, you would end
up putting more money in the pockets of a few people. That, of course, is
nonsense since the authority to award the turnkey contracts also confers
authority to appont the contractors, leaving the turnkey contractors to
run the coordination for which they would naturally be paid. WHat is now
realised too late, is that the system of achieving the same level of
coordination through consultants is a lot more costly and very indecisive.
It is costly in the sense that you have to pay a series of expatriate
consultants exhorbitant fees totally disproportionate to the various works
they are "consulting" on. It is indecisive also in the sensen that for
their own reasons, those contractors disagree among themselves and another
set of consultants have to be emplyed to iron out these differences.

To make matters worse, the turnkey switching contracts of 1976 which
followed still excluded construction from the telephone exchange
installations, with the result that the buildings which were 60 in number
and were supposed to be completed in 1977 are still to commence today,
June 12, 1983.

Not only does this lead to colossal increase in the cost of installation
(it is inconceivable that the cost of installation in 1973 could be
applicable for 1983/84 installation), it exposes the equipment to long
storage in circumstances in which deterioration automatically sets in.
There was no plan at the beginning to put the equipment in warehouses for
seven years, a period for which some of them have been there. The revenue
loss, caused by the delay in completing the exchanges to the P & T on top
of the additional cost of long-term warehouse charges and insurance is
more than 200 million naira so far.

The cost to the economy of the loss of project realisation must be a
multiple of that sum. I regret to say that as far as the provision of
telephone service are concerned, not much progress has been made since
1976.

......previously deleted materials put back starting here......

The issue of oil glut is an all-embracing reason being advanced for most
of these things. Relative to our level of development, however, all I can
say is that a dialogue with the telecommunications companies would have
presented a solution. It is a general saying in our industry that a
company has nothing to be proud of until the exchanges are functioning and
providing funds for the P & T.

We would wish that more telephone exchanges would be bought and installed
to provide service to customers everywhere, and vital social, political,
economic links made with every community in the country and the world
community as a whole.

These were problems in Nigeria caused by the delay in our
telecommunications development which has robbed us of the pride we deserve
and are entitled to by efforts we have put in training more than 1,500
Nigerians in the four training schools we set up for that purpose, and the
efforts we have made in the establishment of first-class maintenance
facilities. It is a great pity indeed. An even greater pity was the fact
that what looked like a profitable business at the beginning has turned
out into an embarrassing loss because of our inability to complete the job
on schedule, even years behind schedule, due to factors beyond our
control.

It need not be emphasised that no contractor knows where he stands until
he has successfully completed the job and handed it over to the customer.
We are suffering the same type of delay, hopefully not to the same extent,
on the transmission contract whic was negotiated in the last dayys of the
military administration and awarded in the present administration. We
expect all impediments to be removed and delays limited to around two
years.

--- previously omitted material put back ends here ----

Enough has been said to indicate that all is not well with ITT, but the
gravest disappointment that I have is the fact that having persuaded ITT
to establish a factory here as far back as 1978 and having done the
feasibility study and having got those studies approved by the Federal
Ministry of Information, and having acquired a large plot of land from the
Ogun state government on the Lagos-Abeokuta Road, and having committed ITT
to 63 million naira initial investment for 2,400 people in two shifts in
employment, and having secured the approval of the Minister of
Communications that the factory should be built, we were still held up for
five years because P & T could not tell us what type of equipment to make,
or commit themselves to the volume they would buy over the initial
five-year period.

Since the P&T is the sole purchaser of telecommunications equipment by law
(others purchase under license from them), it would be foolhardy for
anyone to start manufacturing without proper assurance of patronage and
acceptance of the products by the P&T.

What pains true Nigerians is that those things we import can be made here
in Nigeri in manners that would suit our environment and at the same time
generate employment for our technicians, technologists and engineers
without the headache of the importation of raw materials we hear som much
these days. That would have saved a lot of foreign exchange and provided
a profitable avenue for the utilisation of local resources.

..... previously materials deleted now put back starting here ----

On a personal note, it would enable me attain my ultimate objective of
forging a partnership through the highly technological factory with the
ITT corporation, for I believe that once a factory has started, it makes
it difficult for any company to pull out of the country.

With the long, rather interminable, delay in the realisation of the
factory project, I had to bring about the second phase of the partnership
agreement by which I made sure that ten per cent of the shares of ITT
donated by myself were divided to the generality of the staff in a formula
that takes account of the length of service and the level of individuall
personnell. THere is a programme to increase the number of shares in the
trust fund. But the principle behind it all is the establishment of a
sense of belonging among all levels of staff in the company.

At the height of growth of the ITT, we had 3,000 staff, in late 1979.
Owing to the long delay in completing buildings and other infrastructure
for the commencement of installation and recent problems in the payment of
bills by the P&T, we had to cut back severely to about half that number.
But the ITT still remains the largest telecommunications company in
Nigeria. I am proud to say that my personal shareholding in the company
is higher than that of ITT. That aspect is what means so much to people.
In the present circumstance, the shares are not worth much but by the
grace of God, better times are ahead.

In addition to just giving employment, ITT has provided free medical
services since 1974 to all employees and their immediate relations, as
well as generous housing and transport allowances long before the
government provided same. All this is in addition to accident and
retirement insurance. We give study leave with pay without introducing
any bond with the staff. We run a virile football club that came second
in division one in Lagos state football league. We are involved in
various areas, handball, cricket, athletics. We take part in seminars and
present papers in our field, and give a lot of advice in the field of
telecommunications, much of which is turned down, but which we will
continue to give and generally play a leadership role in the
telecommunications industry in this part of the world.

In my many years of association with the ITT, within which I grew to
become the executive vice-president of the corporation for Africa, Middle
East and Asia, the most difficult part of my career was getting ITT to
leave South Africa in 1975. Although a most painful decision because the
South African market is four times the size of the market of the rest of
black Africa, I was able to persuade ITT to abandon the
tele-communications market in South Africa.

Most of my colleagues did not feel strongly about the issue of South
Africa. So it became my duty to point out the implication of ITT's
continued trading with South Africa and my country and I was pleased it
was dealth with in only one meeting: the discussion lasted less than two
hours within which I was able to get ITT to understand that the future
lies not in South Africa. That is the only contribution I claim to have
made in the determination of ITT policy in the world.

---- previously deleted material ends here -----

May I take the opportunity to take on the international interference of
ITT in the affairs of other countries. While it is natural for some of
our colleagues who have problems to discuss them in their various
countries, it has never been my experience to adopt a confrontational
attitude to any authority. We put our own point of view usually to the
P&T or the ministry of communications. It is only in the most exceptional
circumstances that ITT ever sought to bring its relationship with the P&T
to powers highter than the Ministry of Communications at any time.

To my knowledge and belief, most of what has been written about ITT has
been unduly sensationalised, thereby giving the corporation an incorrect
image. I must say here that those of us in the corporation have not seen
adverse consequences from the publicity we have received over the last ten
years. On the contrary, sales have been going on, and so have incomes
despite the pressure. This is due to the fact that ITT operates in so
many countries - 93 in all all, and sells 7,013 types of products grouped
in many product groups all over the world. Our success is that depression
does not affect everything and everyone at the same time and in the same
way. So, we end up doing a little better than all the adversities put
together.

END EXCERPT

_______________________________________________________________________

On Tue, 8 Jul 1997, Francis Ifejika Achike wrote:

> Dear Uzoma,
>
> Thank you for this posting. Look at what Babangida did to us. Yet he

--- materials deleted ------
>
> Finally Uzoma, I disagree with your mention of Abiola (in the last para
> of your mail). Your reference to him is derogatory and is unfair.
> Abiola cannot be rightly accused of stealing our money until proved in a
> court or by a judicial panel. If you accuse him that way then you have
> to accuse every other businessman in Nigeria in thesame tone. And I am
> sure one close or distant relation of yours shall thus, be affected. In
> summary I am saying that Abiola was just another businessman in Nigeria
> who was lucky to have the type of connections every other businessman in
> Nigeria and beyond longs for. Using his business contacts as every other
> businessman does he won for his company a very huge contract. If there
> is any illegal dealing in the winning of that country the government of
> the country is to blame. If the country was short-changed in the
> process, it is the duty of those running the government to protect
> public interest. And if individual nigerians have evidence that there
> was improper dealings they have a right to take Abiola and his company
> to court. My feeling is that you are trying to sing the same irrelevant
> propaganda song that the evil oligarchy rmachinery has consistently
> tried spreading in order to discredit Abiola and thus, June 12. The
> powerful machinery that is behind this propaganda has all the resources
> it takes to bring Abiola and his erstwhile company to justice (I mean
> real justice not Abacha justice) if indeed there was / is any evidence
> of culpable malpractice on the part of Abiola. Please do not fall into
> their distracting traps. Abiola (a businessman) has just 1 billion and
> Babangida (a civil servant) 30 billion. That is your country for you.
> Even if Abiola has ten times more than Babangida, that is nobody's
> business. Abiola was a businessman and like 99% of men who did business
> in Nigeria he probably (probably) gave kickbacks or got kickbacks. If
> he is wealthy as a result that is his luck. Nigerians never put him in
> charge of any of our resources. Those we put in charge (or who forced
> themselves in charge) like Babangida are the ones who owe us a duty to
> account for our money. And if they have evidence that from among them
> have given some of our wealth undeservedly to Abiola, the fault still
> lies with them (those in government). On Abiola and the issues
> surrounding June 12, please make sure your intellect is alert at all
> times for there is much propaganda stuff out there aimed at confusing
> facts and usurping the will of the people.
>
> For your information, MKO had in a TV (NTA) interview a few years ago
> absolved himself of any wrong doing as far as it relates to the ITT
> contract. He was working for ITT and the company won the contract. Is
> there any sin in that? No! According to Abiola in that nationwide
> telecast his company produced all that was required of it in the
> contract; and that was mainly the equipments. He mentioned that terms
> of the contract was such that the government was to produce the
> structures (buildings). His company brought in all that was required of
> it but the government did not do its own side of the contract. The
> result was that many of the equipment were lying outside NITEL
> facilities covered with tarpauline and wasting away. He, in that
> interview challenged anybody (including the government) to prove him
> wrong if they could. What else could the man have done? Did he comit a
> crime for trying to make a living? The criminals we have are those
> heading our government- just look at what you have here on Babangida.
> And the shame to us all is the ease with which we fall to their selfish
> propaganda machinery.
>
> May God give us men times like this demand.
>
> Francis
> >----------
> >From: Uzoma Chukwu
> >Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 1997 5:19 AM
> >To: NAIJ...@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> >Subject: Hit Parade of Stashed-away Fortunes of African Dictators
> >
> >Netters,
> >
> >Shortly after the demise of Mobutu Sese Seko, the French Magazine
> >_Evenement du jeudi_ (22-28 May, 1997) published a hit parade of the
> >hidden fortunes of African dictators. The values of their loots have
> >been given in French Francs.
> >
> > Name Country Loot (in FF)
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> >1. Felix Houphouet-Boigny Ivory Coast 35 billion
> >2. Ibrahim Babangida Nigeira 30 billion
> >3. Mobutu Sese Seko Zaire 22 billion
> >4. Henri Konan Bedie Ivory Coast 2 billion
> >5. Denis Sassou N'Guesso Congo 1.2 billion
> >6. Omar Bongo Gabon 500 million
> >7. Paul Biya Cameroon 450 million
> >8. Mengistu Haile Mariam Ethiopia 200 million
> >9. Moussa Traore Mali 10.8 million
> >
> >Let me also add that, in the same publication, M.K.O. Abiola was
> >mentioned as being worth more than 1 billion FF, part of which came from
> >kick-backs from the ITT contract to modernize Nigerian telecom network.
> >
> >Uzoma Chukwu
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________