Keyamo Vs Sowore Latest

[Public Information Project]

Dear Sowore,
I apologise for not reacting on time to your last letter. Expectedly,
I always have a hectic daily schedule and I hardly find time to attend
to other things which do not ordinarily fall within the purview of my
daily routine as our correspondence these last few days have been. So,
this will be my last correspondence on this matter as I intend to
concentrate on other more pressing matters.

I do not intend to say much other than to sum up the white, black and
gray areas that have emerged from our various correspondence. These
areas are:

That I left Gani Fawehinmi Chambers in 1995 for my own private
practice, and you said you met me when I was there. That should be
between 1994 and 1995. So my claim that “we have known each other for
nearly fifteen years now” is correct.

That you agreed you have been sending me mails and having telephone
conversations with me these last few years, so we both agree to some
cordial relationship.

You said, after much rigmarole, that you were eventually treated by
one Dr. Allen Keller in New York for a year. So my account that you
went for treatment is correct. But I will no longer insist on the
medical records, because, really, that is beside the point.

I am happy you have changed your die-hard position on Nuhu Ribadu to
“if today or tomorrow you find anything on Nuhu Ribadu that you think
the public should know, do not hesitate to send it to us” and “no
matter whose ox is gored, including Ribadu’s.” This is more in tune
with the advice I gave to you not to be caught in an embarrassing
position regarding Ribadu and my position that I cannot vouch for any
public officer, whether it is Waziri, Ribadu or Aondoakaa.

On some of the accusations against Waziri and Aondoakaa, I want to say
I respect your work as a journalist and the information you gather
through painstaking investigation. One cannot wish away all the
wonderful work you have done on account of some disagreement over
issues concerning just one case, and I hope you think so of my work
too! But unfortunately, I am a trained lawyer, not a journalist, even
though I have been maintaining a column in a national paper for years
now. Some of the evidence you gather, I cannot use as a lawyer, if not
I run the risk of unprofessional conduct. Not that I run away from
such charges, but there must be some modicum of acceptable evidence I
can use to defend myself. So, one of our disagreement is the level of
evidence you have supposedly gather with which I am expected to go to
town. I disagree with most of them.

You made the point that I am in pole position to get further evidence
myself from the authorities. But in your first letter, you did not
require my co-operation to get documents and information for you. You
only subtly accused me of maintaining a “stoic silence”. You did not
admit that your evidence was insufficient. You appear to be sending me
on wild goose chase over certain documents and facts. Now, your
present position appears to be an admission that further evidence is
required to prove some of your allegations which may be substantially
true or substantially false.

But to highlight my point, I took up one of your allegations regarding
withdrawal of monies from the EFCC account. My inquiries indicate that
the dates and amounts you mentioned are not only false, but they are
concocted beyond the acceptable limits of imagination. However, you
may be innocent regarding this. Your source(s) may be one of those who
thought Ribadu would be a life EFCC Chairman and may have fed you with
total crap in a bid to pull down the present leadership of Waziri at
all cost. Now, the embarrassing position you may find yourself over
this now is the legal position that he who alleges must prove. You
cannot insist I should make available to you the true figures and
dates of my findings. It is you who alleged the original figures and
dates that must provide evidence. This, you have failed to do.

I commend the work you listed that you did against some public
officers in the past. I have also done countless in this regard. This
is not a forum to blow our trumpets. The public is well aware of this.
My accusation of non-action in this regard was not directed at you,
but at your darling Ribadu who did nothing in the face of mass of
evidence. Thankfully, you did not defend him again on this score.

The Doris Uboh’s case you mentioned is particularly interesting. It is
because of the respect I always had for your work that is why I
decided to take up that libel case free of charge for National Daily
believing you must always have further evidence to back up your
claims, since the story emanated from you. I will not make my
professional opinion know here, but time will tell whether we are
vindicated or not on this issue in which we find ourselves together.

Finally, I note that you remarked that “it is on the strength of the
regard I have for you as an uncompromised activist … that I wrote you
the letter that is now the subject of our present exchange. It was
simply asking you to stay the course. Anyone can see that it was not
an accusation of impropriety on your part.”

I want to assure you that nothing can derail my commitment to the
Nigerian project. As I write you, I have petitions concerning nothing
less than ten (10) SERVING GOVERNORS and public officers before EFCC
and other anti-corruption agencies. It is in tune with the new
philosophy of “see something, say something.” This was a campaign that
the EFCC launched on December 10, 2008 in Abuja which was a huge
success as it was hugely attended by people from all walks of life in
Nigeria including the President, Five (5) Governors, LG Chairmen,
Traditional Rulers, Diplomatic Community, Civil Society Groups etc.
Curiously, you reported the next day that it was poorly attended when
even the most critical papers in Nigeria reported it as lead stories
the next day and agreed it was hugely attended. Your sources in
Nigeria may mislead you sometimes because it so hard for you to be in
far away America and be reporting events in Nigeria authoritatively.

Finally, prosecuting alleged corrupt persons on behalf of the EFCC is
not tantamount to running with the hares and hunting with the hounds.
Why? Because, those renowned activists who were paid consultants to
EFCC under Ribadu still stand tall in their believes and you have not
accused them of running with the hares and hunting with the hounds.

I wish you well in the United States of America. I hope the cold is
not too much out there?


Festus Keyamo.