U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

63–273 WASHINGTON : 2000

NIGERIA: ON THE DEMOCRATIC PATH?

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

Tuesday, August 3, 1999

Serial No. 106–83

Printed for the use of the Committee on International Relations

(

(II)

COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York, Chairman

WILLIAM F. GOODLING, Pennsylvania

JAMES A. LEACH, Iowa

HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois

DOUG BEREUTER, Nebraska

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey

DAN BURTON, Indiana

ELTON GALLEGLY, California

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida

CASS BALLENGER, North Carolina

DANA ROHRABACHER, California

DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California

PETER T. KING, New York

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio

MARSHALL ‘‘MARK’’ SANFORD, South

Carolina

MATT SALMON, Arizona

TOM CAMPBELL, California

JOHN M. MCHUGH, New York

BILL LUTHER, Minnesota

LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina

ROY BLUNT, Missouri

KEVIN BRADY, Texas

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina

PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio

GEORGE P. RADANOVICH, California

JOHN COOKSEY, Louisiana

THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado

SAM GEJDENSON, Connecticut

TOM LANTOS, California

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California

GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American

Samoa

MATTHEW G. MARTINEZ, California

DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey

ROBERT E. ANDREWS, New Jersey

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio

CYNTHIA A. MCKINNEY, Georgia

ALCEE L. HASTINGS, Florida

PAT DANNER, Missouri

EARL F. HILLIARD, Alabama

BRAD SHERMAN, California

ROBERT WEXLER, Florida

STEVEN R. ROTHMAN, New Jersey

JIM DAVIS, Florida

EARL POMEROY, North Dakota

WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York

BARBARA LEE, California

JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York

JOSEPH M. HOEFFEL, Pennsylvania

RICHARD J. GARON, Chief of Staff

KATHLEEN BERTELSEN MOAZED, Democratic Chief of Staff

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman

AMO HOUGHTON, New York

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio

TOM CAMPBELL, California

GEORGE RADANOVICH, California

THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado

DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey

ALCEE L. HASTINGS, Florida

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York

BARBARA LEE, California

TOM SHEEHY, Subcommittee Staff Director

MALIK M. CHAKA, Professional Staff Member

CHARISSE GLASSMAN, Democratic Professional Staff Member

CHARMAINE V. HOUSEMAN, Staff Associate

(III)

C O N T E N T S

Page

WITNESSES

Howard Jeter, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Africa Affairs, U.S.

Department of State ............................................................................................ 4

Bronwen Manby, Researcher, Africa Division, Human Rights Watch ................ 14

David C. Miller, Jr., President ParEx, Inc. ........................................................... 16

Lloyd Pierson, Director, Africa Division, International Republican Institute .... 18

APPENDIX

Chairman Edward R. Royce .................................................................................... 32

Chairman Benjamin A. Gilman .............................................................................. 33

SUBMISSIONS

Congressional Delegation Royce (Nigeria) Report ................................................ 36

(1)

NIGERIA: ON THE DEMOCRATIC PATH?

Tuesday, August 3, 1999

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA,

COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS,

Washington, D.C.

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:10 a.m. in room

2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Ed Royce (Chairman of

the Subcommittee) Presiding.

Mr. ROYCE. This hearing of the Subcommittee on Africa will

come to order. Nigeria is one of the most important countries on

the continent. Its economic and political potential is unmatched in

Africa. Unfortunately, Nigeria has not come close to meeting its potential since independence. With the installation of democratically

elected President Olusegun Obasanjo, there is reason to be cautiously optimistic about Nigeria’s future. For now, Nigeria’s legacy

of military rule has been suppressed.

Today it is crucial that the United States and others work with

the new Nigerian Government and Nigerian civil society to see that

civilian rule takes root and that the talented Nigerian people are

empowered. Examining such an U.S. effort is one focus of this

hearing.

There is considerable congressional interest in Nigeria. The

Ranking Member of this Subcommittee, Mr. Payne, Congresswoman Lee, Congressman Meeks, and I had the opportunity to observe Nigeria’s Presidential elections in February. We are also

Members of the Congressional Caucus on Nigeria. The caucus is

committed to helping forge stronger political and economic ties between the two countries.

In all our efforts, we need to be realistic. Nigeria faces great

challenges. The country is suffering from widespread poverty,

which has increased significantly over recent years. Many young

Nigerians have never lived under civilian rule. To them, civilian

rule and democracy are novel concepts, and unfortunately, little

foundation for the rule of law exists in Nigeria. Establishing a democracy respectful of human rights in this climate will be a great

and long-term challenge. Economic reform, particularly the selling

of state-owned mismanaged enterprises, will be essential to meet

this challenge.

The greatest short-term challenge to Nigeria’s democratic

progress is the deteriorating political situation in the Delta. Violence there is escalating with ethnic clashes growing and oil companies coming under frequent physical attack. Increasingly, producVerDate 11-SEP-98 11:57 Jun 15, 2000 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 63273.TXT HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
2

tion platforms are being occupied and facilities are being sabotaged. Hundreds of Nigerian lives are being lost in the Delta.

The central challenge for the Obasanjo government in the Delta

is to write new rules of the game that address legitimate grievances while isolating the militant element of political activists who

are resorting to violence and who will never be satisfied as the

United States itself become active in the Delta. By aiding nongovernmental organizations, we must carefully guard against empowering destructive elements. The Delta is a tinderbox, and the

U.S. Government has no business being there or in other regions

where ethnic strife is flaring, unless we exercise a great deal of

deftness in our civil society work.

The United States needs to be engaged with Nigeria in a significant way. We should proceed aggressively, enthusiastically, but

also cautiously.

[The information referred to appears in the appendix.]

Mr. ROYCE. At this point, I would like to recognize the Ranking

Member of this Committee, Mr. Payne, for an opening statement.

Mr. Payne.

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I commend you for calling this very important hearing. As you indicated,

we have traveled to Nigeria on several occasions, having the opportunity more recently to observe the elections in February and also

to get to the swearing-in of President Obasanjo.

Over the years this Subcommittee has held numerous hearings

on Nigeria, and at times the main topic was corruption in the military dictatorship. The difficult transition toward the democratic

governance and a market-based economy in Nigeria took another

step with the election of President Obasanjo on February 27th of

this year. Retired General Colin Powell, former President Carter,

yourself, Chairman of this Subcommittee, led the delegation. Congressman Meeks, Lee, and retired Senator Kassebaum and I traveled to Lagos and Abuja to monitor the elections. We felt that the

elections were relatively fair and free, and any fraud didn’t have

an impact on the outcome of the elections.

In a country that has been under military rule for 28 of the 39

years of independence, it is acknowledged that this process will require the support and strong support of the international community.

U.S.–Nigerian relations are extremely important. Currently U.S.

investments in Nigeria total some $8 to $10 billion. However, Nigeria still must help to combat narcotics transmission and international business scams in order for U.S. investors to remain in the

country. One area that General Obasanjo must tackle is the

amount of corruption in Nigeria.

In the following months after Sani Abacha’s death, revelations

about the massive scale of corruption in his regime began to surface. The government recovered $63 billion of the Abacha’s family

wealth, but the full extent of what was stolen will never be known.

New accounts reveal that in 1997 Abacha demanded and received

$4 billion nira, about $180 million, from the Central Bank on 1 day

alone.

The economy meanwhile is in a critical state. Oil, or rather the

misuse of oil money by the military elites, left the country in shamVerDate 11-SEP-98 11:57 Jun 15, 2000 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 63273.TXT HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
3

bles. So I think it is unfair to look at the great burden that General

Obasanjo has and how this entire debt, which is over $30 billion,

will have to be reconciled with the international community.

Let me just conclude by saying that I am very concerned about

the continued tensions in the rich Niger Delta. The people who live

there have watched billions of dollars flow out of their soil, and all

they have done is to grow poorer and sicker. This must end. As we

know that the execution of Ken Saro-wiwa and the Ogoni 8 several

years ago led to clashes between the Ogoni people and Chevron,

the government needs to work closely in the next few months to

come up with some reconcilable program in order to work out this

very serious situation in the Niger region.

I think the Delta problem is probably one of the most difficult,

but we need a strong and healthy Nigeria. We look forward to its

leadership in Africa. If Nigeria is well, we think that Africa will become well.

Mr. ROYCE. Thank you, Mr. Payne.

Mr. ROYCE. The Vice Chairman of this Subcommittee, Mr.

Houghton of New York.

Mr. HOUGHTON. No opening statement.

Mr. ROYCE. We will go to Mr. Hastings of Florida.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Chairman, I don’t have any opening statement.

Mr. ROYCE. Thank you. Mr. Campbell of California.

Mr. CAMPBELL. No opening statement.

Mr. ROYCE. All right. Ms. McKinney of Georgia.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do have an opening

statement which I would like to submit for the record.

Mr. ROYCE. Thank you.

Ms. MCKINNEY. I would like to welcome the panelists who are

here today, and I especially look forward to hearing from all of you.

Welcome again, Mr. Ambassador. I think we all welcome the end

of the dictatorship and the beginning of democracy, but as we all

know, democracy consists of more than having an election. Democracy is what happens after the election, and then of course not only

that, but a successful and a smooth transition as well.

Good governance issues are going to be very important as well

as the issue raised by our Ranking Member on the Subcommittee,

the $30 billion debt that Nigeria suffers from, labors under today.

But I am particularly concerned about the conduct of U.S. corporations on the continent, and I am particularly concerned about

the conduct of U.S. corporations in the Delta, particularly Chevron,

and I will have some questions along that line about what the U.S.

Government response is to the problem of the conduct, increasingly

bad conduct of U.S. multinationals on the continent.

I look forward to hearing the testimony from the panelists, and

thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. ROYCE. Thank you, Ms. McKinney.

Mr. ROYCE. We will now go to our first panel Ambassador Howard Jeter, the new Deputy Assistant Secretary for African affairs,

has had a very distinguished diplomatic career. He has served as

the U.S. Ambassador to Botswana and Special Presidential Envoy

for Liberia, in addition to postings in Botswana, Lesotho, Mozambique, Namibia, and Tanzania. Ambassador Jeter is recently reVerDate 11-SEP-98 11:57 Jun 15, 2000 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 63273.TXT HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
4

turned from co-leading a 17-member interagency task force to Nigeria. We are very eager to hear about your experiences there. Ambassador Jeter, it is a pleasure to welcome you again to the Subcommittee.

STATEMENT OF HOWARD JETER, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY, BUREAU OF AFRICA AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT

OF STATE

Mr. JETER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and Members

of the Subcommittee. It is indeed a pleasure to address this Subcommittee on Nigeria’s prospects for democracy and stability. Just

11⁄2 years ago, Nigeria was still ruled by one of Africa’s harshest

dictators, going down a treacherous path of continued economic and

political decay and international isolation. Last February, Nigerians went to the polls to elect their first civilian democratic President and legislature in over 15 years.

Despite daunting challenges, we believe Nigeria now has the best

chance in decades to turn to a new democratic chapter in its history and to begin finally to realize its enormous potential to bring

greater prosperity and stability to its own people and to others on

the continent.

Mr. Chairman, U.S. goals in Nigeria prior to the transition, as

well as today, remain constant. We seek a stable Nigeria that respects human rights, promotes democracy and enhances the welfare of its people.

We also have sought better cooperation with the Government of

Nigeria in combating international narcotics trafficking and crime.

We hope to be in a position to promote favorable trade and investment partnerships in what is the largest economy on the continent.

Thus, Secretary Albright has designated Nigeria as one of four priority countries in the world, along with Colombia, Ukraine, and Indonesia, whose democratic transition we have a vital national interest in backing.

A number of senior administration officials have traveled to Nigeria over the course of a year to discuss long-term U.S. Nigerian

engagement. President Clinton, Secretary Albright, and Treasury

Secretary Rubin met with President-elect Obasanjo on March 30th

and assured him we would provide continued and active support at

this critical juncture in Nigeria’s history. Finally, at the President’s

request, an interagency assessment team, which I co-led, traveled

to Nigeria from June 19th to July 2nd to explore with the Nigerian

Government, civil society leaders and the U.S. and Nigerian business communities proactive assistance programs this year and beyond.

Mr. Chairman, we are investing in this high-level commitment in

Nigeria because the stakes are so high. Nigeria is our second largest trading partner in all of Africa. American companies have invested over $7 billion in the country’s petroleum sector. Nigeria is

large and it is influential. It has an ancient culture, tremendous

human talent and enormous wealth. The most populous African nation, Nigeria is home to more than 100 million people with over

250 ethnic groups and an abundance of natural resources.

Equally important, Nigeria is a major force in the sub-region and

has played an invaluable role in helping to bring stability to this

5

volatile neighborhood. It has been the major troop contributor to

the peacekeeping force of the Economic Community of West African

States Monitoring Group, ECOMOG. With a resolution of the conflict in Sierra Leone, Nigeria hopes to be able to divert more resources to its own internal reconciliation and reconstruction efforts.

Nigeria’s new leadership deserves enormous credit, Mr. Chairman, for last year’s transition. Against considerable odds, General

Abdulsalami Abubakar effectively guided the process, releasing political prisoners, persuading the military to make concessions and

working with the World Bank and the IMF to improve the economy.

The United States is encouraged by President Obasanjo’s first

moves as head of state as well. First, Nigeria’s leadership has

begun to address both systemic and entrenched corruption and civil

military relations. With the former, President Obasanjo has an

enormous task ahead of him. Corruption in Nigeria is longstanding

and pervasive. In addition to setting up a panel to review all government contracts over a span of 20 years, including those awarded

during his own previous tenure as head of state, President

Obasanjo has suspended all contracts and appointments made by

the last military regime. He also has committed to setting up an

anticorruption agency and introduced an anticorruption bill in Parliament.

These measures are essential to ensure that widespread corruption does not rob Nigerians of the significant benefits of a future

healthy economy and free body politic.

After decades of military leadership, returning the military to

their barracks and establishing a professional nonpolitical army is

one of Nigeria’s highest priorities and one that will take significant

time and energy, as well as strong assistance and support from the

international community.

Mr. Chairman, we applaud President Obasanjo’s bold steps to

take control of the military establishment so early in his administration by retiring 143 senior military officers, including 93 officers

who had held political positions in previous military governments.

This move indicates that Obasanjo, himself a former general, will

not be intimidated, and it bodes well for the turnover of leadership

to a civilian, democratic government.

In this regard, Nigerian leaders must also continue their efforts

to establish functioning democratic institutions and to respect

human rights. Today, Nigeria has an elected civilian government

at all levels: local, state, and national. The country also has made

real progress in improving its human rights record by releasing political prisoners last year, including those, Mr. Chairman, accused

of plotting against the Abacha regime.

In a very positive step, President Obasanjo has named a Committee, headed by a former Supreme Court judge, to examine

human rights violations that took place during successive regimes

since 1983. We hope Nigeria’s leaders will continue this vital dialogue, including with elements of civil society and the opposition in

their efforts to reconcile the Nation and establish the mechanisms

essential for democratic consolidation.

Nowhere is dialogue more critical than in the Niger Delta region,

where continued ethnic unrest could threaten Nigeria’s political

6

transition and economic stability. Discontent caused by living in an

economically depressed, ecologically ravaged environment, while

great oil wealth is pumped from the same area, has exacerbated

ethnic strife in this region.

Problems in the Delta, Mr. Chairman, are symptomatic of prolonged government neglect and corruption that have devastated Nigeria’s economy and led to massive poverty and gross inequities in

all corners of this huge country. Despite its rich resource endowment, Nigeria remains one of the poorest countries in the world.

Nigeria has funded the International Monetary Fund Staff Monitoring Program since February. If the country can remain sufficiently on track with its SMP, the IMF could recommend that its

board approve an enhanced structural adjustment facility. This

could pave the way for balance-of-payments support and possible

debt restructuring.

To reach this goal, Nigeria needs to continue to pursue a realistic

budget and institute tax reform and an effective program of privatization. These reforms are also necessary to build business confidence and to attract domestic and foreign investment. Without

these measures, broad-based growth and development could stall

with negative implications for political stability and democracy.

Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, the road ahead for

Nigeria is a steep climb; nevertheless, the United States stands

ready to be an active and supportive partner. Since the Abubakar

transition, we have steadily increased lines of communication with

our Nigerian counterparts and rewarded progress with serious attention, hands-on counsel and, when appropriate, bilateral assistance.

U.S. assistance to Nigeria for the period of October 1998 to September 1999 will be approximately $27.5 million, targeted toward

democratic institution building, health care, and the strengthening

of civil society. We plan to target some remaining fiscal year 1999

funding toward additional reconciliation and resolution programs

in the Niger Delta region and other conflict areas in Nigeria.

We want to work closely with Members of Congress, including

with this Subcommittee, toward a significant increase in assistance

to Nigeria in fiscal year 2000 and beyond. Such cooperation is in

both countries’ interest.

We look forward, Mr. Chairman, to working with you, with Members of the Committee, to make clear to the new leadership that

we support them as they consider the vast implications of a triumphant Nigeria to West Africa and beyond, and choose the right

path toward democracy and economic reform.

Mr. Chairman, Members of the Subcommittee, I would be

pleased to take any questions you might have.

Mr. ROYCE. We thank you, Ambassador Jeter.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Jeter appears in the appendix.]

Mr. ROYCE. I don’t think we are going to start the questioning

yet because of the votes, but I will at this point introduce and acknowledge the presence of a distinguished 8-person delegation that

we have from Mozambique, visiting the United States as an electoral study mission under the auspices of the National Democratic

Institute.

7

Mozambique has many lessons to teach African countries about

national reconciliation and economic reform. The delegation is

made up of representatives of FRELIMO, the ruling party, and

RENAMO, the largest opposition party, who will be facing off in

elections before the end of the year. Less than a decade ago, they

were adversaries on the battlefield. The FRELIMO delegation is

led by Mr. Antonio Maton-say, Chief Press Advisor to the

FRELIMO electoral campaign. Mr. Chico Francisco, head of External Relations for RENAMO, heads his party’s delegation as they

now peacefully prepare to go into the election cycle. I would ask

that the delegation stand at this time. Would the Mozambique delegation stand to be acknowledged? Ladies and gentlemen, we appreciate you visiting our Committee today.

I would like to welcome Zainab Bangura, the head of the Campaign for Good Governance in Sierra Leone. I recently had the opportunity to meet with her and hear firsthand about the situation

in her martyred country. She spoke eloquently about the role of

civil society in guaranteeing that the peace agreement holds which

was signed on July 7th by the Sierra Leone Government and the

Revolutionary United Front holds.

I trust that the gross human rights violations committed during

the war will not be simply swept under the rug. We must also be

on guard so that unrepresented groups with shadowy foreign support cannot murder and maim their way into power. I would ask

if Ms. Bangura would stand at this time.

We will start with the questioning, Ambassador. We have 10

minutes. We will go for 5 minutes, then what we will do is adjourn,

recess for 15 minutes, and come back to continue the questioning

at that time. I will start questioning now.

Ambassador Jeter, the U.S. will be working with civil society, I

assume, in the Delta region, hopefully dimming the flames of violence there. How will we ensure that our aid efforts do not empower destructive elements, and how do we sort among the various

political and civil society groups who are the potential aid recipients?

Mr. JETER. Mr. Chairman, I think that one of the things that our

embassy in Nigeria has done, they have given special attention to

coverage of the Delta. They know, I believe now, who the key players are, both those who are constructive players and those who are

destructive players.

During visits to Nigeria, President Carter also had an opportunity to meet with self-selected Delta leaders to discuss the problems and the turbulence in the region. Reverend Jesse Jackson, the

President’s Special Envoy for the Promotion of Democracy in Africa, also had an opportunity to meet with Delta leaders, both in

Lagos during one of his visits there, as well as travel to the Delta

as well. I had the honor of traveling with him there, so I think that

the key players are known.

There are members of the various youth groups there who have

taken more radical policies, and I think that there is no real uniformity in terms of the elements in the Delta, and I think that we

can identify those with whom we would like to work.

Mr. ROYCE. I thank you, Ambassador.

8

Various Nigerian organizations have been attacking and sabotaging the facilities of American oil companies and kidnapping

their personnel in the Delta. I will point out also that Nigeria has

been faced with severe gasoline shortages due to refinery breakdowns and smuggling to neighboring countries. This has had a real

effect in terms of creating an attitude among people about the inability of the government to provide basic resources.

Long gas lines have a direct effect on the economy and on the

Nigerian people’s view of their government. Is the availability of

gas improving for the man on the street in Nigeria at this time?

Mr. JETER. Mr. Chairman, I think it is. During our recent visit

to Nigeria, the gas lines that we had seen several months before

were certainly shorter. As a matter of fact, in many instances, not

even visible at all. The Nigerian Government has undertaken a

program—there are four refineries in Nigeria, and the Nigerian

Government has undertaken a program to try to rehabilitate those

refineries, some of which are operating now at, I am tempted to

say, near capacity, but certainly this is an issue for the new government.

As a matter of fact, this rehabilitation started during the regime

of General Abubakar, and I think it is going to take some time before this rehabilitation is completed, but certainly a good faith and,

I think, serious effort has already begun. Those gas lines are disappearing.

Mr. ROYCE. When we were there, two of the refineries, half of the

refineries in the Lagos area, were down and it was having a pronounced effect.

Nigeria has announced that on August 26 it will begin a phased

withdrawal of its troops assigned to the ECOMOG peacekeeping

mission in Sierra Leone. Do we know anything about the pace of

this withdrawal, and how is the U.S. helping ECOMOG? Are we

encouraging Nigeria to maintain troops in Sierra Leone?

Mr. JETER. I think, Mr. Chairman, that in our discussions with

President Obasanjo, he has given assurances that the withdrawal

of Nigerian and ECOMOG troops from Sierra Leone would not be

precipitous. We have heard that pledge repeated over time. I think

that there is a distinct possibility that ECOMOG, which is predominantly a Nigerian force, will take part in the actual disarmament, the mobilization and reintegration of combatants in Sierra Leone. This is a decision certainly on the part of ECOMOG

itself, but there is an ongoing dialogue between the regional leadership and the United Nations.

As a matter of fact, today, the ECOMOG force commander is in

New York for discussions with the Department of Peacekeeping Affairs there to try to assess next steps.

Our hope, Mr. Chairman, is that decisions on this issue can be

made quickly so that the process of disarmament and demobilization can begin soon.

Mr. ROYCE. Thank you, Ambassador Jeter. We are going to go to

Mr. Payne, and afterwards we are going to recess for this series of

votes and then come back shortly after to finishing the questioning.

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much, Mr. Ambassador. Let me commend you for your outstanding work that you did in Liberia and

also your negotiations in Sierra Leone and also your recent visits

9

to Liberia for the destruction of the weapons, and I commend you

for your continued good work.

Let me ask a question regarding the military. Many generals

were retired when President Obasanjo came into power. What has

been the reaction of the military, and has this been accepted, and

do you feel that the former generals who had some power, General

Babingitha and General Abubakar are supportive of these moves?

Mr. JETER. Thank you, Congressman Payne, and thank you very

much for those kind words. I do appreciate it.

The steps that President Obasanjo took in helping to ease out

senior military leaders I think is a bold step. In addition to the retirements of the service chiefs, other senior military leaders, and

the retirement of General Abubakar himself, he also mandated

that those officers who had participated or who had held political

positions over the last 15 years should also resign from the military.

I think, Representative Payne, that if there was not support from

the military, we wouldn’t have seen such a smooth transition.

There is a perception, which I believe is erroneous, that the military flourishes and prospers under military governments. That was

certainly not the case under the Abacha regime. The military was

diminished as an institution. I think it was in some ways devastated, and what those officers are now looking toward is the rebuilding and the reprofessionalization of the military. There has so

far certainly not been any backlash from senior members of the

military or others.

Mr. ROYCE. We only have a minute left so why don’t we continue

with Mr. Payne’s questioning when we return?

Mr. PAYNE. OK.

Mr. ROYCE. Thank you. We are in recess, Ambassador.

[Recess.]

Mr. ROYCE. We are going to reconvene this hearing at this time,

if everyone would take their seats. We are going to start with our

Ranking Member, Don Payne. He was in the middle of questioning

of Ambassador Jeter, and we will restart the clock here, Don.

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much.

Ambassador, as you know, there are several problems as related

to corruption in Nigeria. Some of it internal, as we know, contracts

and so forth. But also there was the whole question of 419, and it

was felt that there had to be officials looking the other way in

order for it to be so pervasive, with official-looking documents going

out to people, and these scams.

Have there been any discussions about 419 as it impacts on people outside of Nigeria primarily? As you know, it is common

throughout the world and indeed in the USA, and I just wonder

whether they have taken a look at trying to repair the tarnished

image that Nigeria has as it relates to the scam and some of those

problems? Then I have one final quick question. I will let you respond first.

Mr. JETER. Thank you, Congressman Payne. I think that there

has been an ongoing dialogue beginning with the Abubakar administration on the question of financial fraud or, as it is known, 419

scams. That dialogue has been, I think, accelerated with the new

government. I think that the Obasanjo administration recognizes

10

that the image of Nigeria is a deterrent to increased foreign investment, to improving the world’s view of Nigeria as a country to do

business with.

There has been progress on the 419 front. There are 30 serious

cases that have been adjudicated in the courts. They have led to

some convictions, and I think that this is an area where we will

have enhanced cooperation with the current government.

Mr. PAYNE. Finally, as you indicated you recently returned, there

were a number of people from the administration, almost every sector, State, Transportation, USAID, Defense and so forth, and that

I imagine you also were in Lagos or Abuja. Did anyone visit the

Niger Delta region, and just what is the administration’s assistance

to Nigeria as it relates to the difficulty in the Niger region?

I know it is an internal matter, but there are U.S. and multilateral oil companies that are involved there. Have we attempted to

be of any assistance since that is going to continually be a serious

issue in Nigeria?

Mr. JETER. Again, there are some of my colleagues here who actually participated on the interagency assessment team, including

the co-leader of the team Mr. Keith Bramm from AID. We have

some Members here from the Department of Energy and others,

and I would like to use this forum, Mr. Chairman, just to commend

them for the hard work that they did and the very productive work

that they did.

The Niger Delta, I think the problems are well-known in the administration, our administration. The problems are well-known I

think in the Obasanjo administration. One of President Obasanjo’s

first acts as President was to go to the Delta, engage with the full

spectrum of leadership down there. That is something that would

have never happened under predecessor governments.

The approach of the Abacha regime was to use the iron fist. I

think that General Abubakar started a dialogue. That dialogue is

now ongoing with the Obasanjo government. The government itself

has drawn up a master plan for the Delta. They have started to

tender for technical assistance to implement the master plan.

We do plan to have activities in the Delta. As a matter of fact,

we have activities under OTI, Office of Transitional Initiatives, in

the Delta now. We plan to have a more expansive program there,

and they will deal with conflict resolution, community development,

and other issues. But, Representative Payne, the firm outlines of

those programs have not yet been detailed in full, but we do plan

certainly to be engaged.

Mr. ROYCE. Thank you, Mr. Payne. Mr. Hastings of Florida.

Mr. HASTINGS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Ambassador, I hear you say that this is a work in progress, but

are there timetables that were established as a result of the Interagency Assessment Team’s activities or, for example, when Stu

Eizenstat was in country in Nigeria, the joint-economic-partnership

kind of undertaking arose. Are there timetables on any of this?

Mr. JETER. I think, Mr. Hastings, that we are near the process

now of finalizing the report of the interagency assessment mission.

That report will be presented formally to our government, the

White House and other agencies. It will be made available to Members of this Committee, I am sure, and will be a public document,

11

and the recommendations that are contained therein carry a price

tag. I mentioned this morning that our assistance to Nigeria is $27.5

million for this year. Given the size of the country, the nature and

scope of the needs, the priority that we placed on Nigeria as one

of the key transition countries in the world, it is obvious to us,

those of us who participated on the assessment team, that our assistance to Nigeria has to be increased and perhaps dramatically

increased. We don’t have a specific timetable, but we are working

all very hard on trying to make sure that our recommendations are

known and that they are taken under consideration in formulating

next year’s budget.

Mr. HASTINGS. On page 6 of your written testimony, Ambassador,

you reflect the following. One of the major barriers to increased

United States assistance to Nigeria, as Members know, has been

the lack of cooperation in countering narcotics. We cannot provide

direct assistance to any government not meeting the standards for

either certification or a waiver.

Let me preface my remarks and then put a question to you, because it was not on your watch that decertification arose as an

issue. I have continuously argued that our government has mixed

standards for determining who ought and who ought not be decertified. When you make a statement that is in here, ‘‘we cannot provide direct assistance,’’ then I want to know why we are providing

direct assistance to Mexico, for example, where most of the drugs

come from, or why we are providing direct assistance to Pakistan,

where a whole hell of a lot of Nigerians are involved in transatlantic shipments dealing with drugs. I can go on and on and on

around the world where this just doesn’t hold water, and it kind

of troubles me about Nigeria.

I guess what I need to know from you is, what efforts are being

made and what is the current status of decertification? Coupled

with that, is how much longer is Nigeria going to have to pursue

the requirements of the FAA before Lagos is opened up? It is clear

to me that unless we can travel and people can have ingress and

egress on a regular basis with all of the requirements being met,

we are going to keep this country limping along for some time in

the future.

Again, Ambassador, both of these issues didn’t rise on your

watch, I understand that. The question is, do you have any answers?

Mr. JETER. Thank you, Representative Hastings. On the question

of decertification and our policy on counternarcotics vis-a-vis Nigeria—I can’t really speak to the issue of Mexico—but on Nigeria,

what we are seeing now is in sharp contrast to what we saw in previous governments. We hardly had a dialogue during the Abacha

regime on the question of counternarcotics.

It is known in Nigeria that Nigerian nationals are responsible for

significant quantities of narcotics, including heroin, that enter this

country. There are international standards that have to be met,

and I think Nigeria under Abacha certainly didn’t come to meeting

those standards; therefore, they were decertified.

There has been progress made. The certification that was given

was based, however, on the President’s determination that it was

12

in the U.S. national interest to grant certification so that we could

more fully engage with Nigeria. At every opportunity, at every turn

during our assessment mission to Nigeria during the Ambassador’s

meeting with senior officials in Nigeria, we emphasized the need to

move forward on this, and I am happy to report I think certainly

the dialogue on this question is much, much improved.

Certification, the question of certification comes up again in

March. We hope that progress can be made. There are some extradition cases in court now, and we hope that those can be expedited

because that would be a signal of commitment.

The airport issue is an important one. It certainly is for Nigerians. We have officials from the FAA who are in Nigeria now, actually working with Nigerian counterparts on the question of security and bringing the airport up to standard. They have made considerable progress in upgrading the Murtala Mohamed Airport in

Lagos. We can’t predict these things, but one would hope that the

airport would be certified in the not-too-distant future.

Mr. ROYCE. Thank you, Mr. Hastings.

Ms. McKinney of Georgia.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Ambassador, I have three questions that I would like to pose

to you. The first one is that I know that my quality of life has been

enhanced by the $7 billion that you noted earlier of American corporations in Nigeria, but could you tell me how that investment

has positively impacted the quality of life of the Nigerian people at

large?

Second, could you tell me what U.S. policy is on the Niger Delta

crisis?

Finally, what confidence do you have that Nigeria has wealth

will be shared by the population at large by the actions of the new

government?

Mr. JETER. Thank you very much. I think all of those questions

are pertinent ones and very important questions.

On the question of investment, Nigeria derives over 90 percent

of its foreign exchange earnings from the export of oil; 40 percent

of its GDP is constituted by earnings from oil. I believe upward of

80 percent of the national budget is made up of revenues from oil.

The infrastructure that we see in Nigeria—and it has diminished

but it certainly has potential—is based on an oil economy. We believe that there is an overreliance on oil, but nonetheless, it is a

major feature of the Nigerian economy.

So I guess if we look at it, Nigeria has earned substantial resources from oil exports. Those revenues have not been adequate

or well managed. If we get a situation and a system in Nigeria

where those resources could be used to better the welfare of the Nigerian people, certainly U.S. investment in the oil sector could have

a major impact.

Our policy on the Delta, I think we recognize the seriousness of

the situation there. We would like to be helpful. There are problems that are very, very complex. Sometimes I think we don’t understand all of the complexities because they deal with ethnic tensions that go back from time immemorial. You have generational

differences there, traditional structures have broken down, and

13

there is an element of criminality now, I think, that has crept into

this.

We would like to see, as I am sure the American companies that

have made investments in the Delta would like to see, stability and

peace development in that area. We recognize that it is an area

that has been subject to ecological devastation. That is a problem

that has to be dealt with. It is also characterized by deprivation on

the part of the people. I think the Nigerian Government—and we

certainly encourage this—is trying to make some amends for not

providing the needed assistance in the Delta over the years.

The system that was in place was very corrupt. I think that this

new government plans to put in place a new system. We would like

to work with international partners, with NGO’s, with the oil companies to see what we can do in collaboration one with another.

Wealth sharing. One of the impressions that we came away with

from our 2-week assessment mission is the tremendous popularity

of this government, the Obasanjo administration, and I think it is

because the Nigerian people perceive that this President, this leader, given his background, his experience, he has been there once

before, and perhaps even his sincerity, will make their lives better.

If you have less corruption in the system, you are bound to have

a greater equity, greater sharing of equity and wealth.

The constitution. The new constitution, I think, addresses this

issue as well by providing for 13 percent of national resources to

be distributed among the localities and states. So I think that there

is some progress being made on that. It is a big socioeconomic issue

that the Nigerians are going to have to deal with, and I am sorry

for the long answer.

Mr. ROYCE. Ambassador Jeter, we want to thank you for your

testimony here today, and that is going to complete our first panel.

We very much appreciate it. We wish you success in your mission

as envoy, and thank you so much.

Mr. JETER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and my thanks

to all the Members of the Subcommittee.

Mr. ROYCE. Very good.

As we go to our second and final panel, we will ask our three witnesses to come forward. As our witnesses are taking their seats, I

will make a couple of observations. We already have a copy of your

written testimony. We have had them for several days and the

Members read them last evening. I would really urge you to give

us 5 minutes of summation, and I would urge you not to read your

testimony, just share it with us.

I will introduce to the panel our witnesses here today. Ms.

Bronwen Manby is a researcher in the Africa Division, Human

Rights Watch, where she is responsible for the organization’s work

for Nigeria and South Africa, as well as advocacy work on other

countries. The work on Nigeria has recently focused on human

rights in the Niger Delta. She is the author of The Price of Oil:

Corporate Responsibility and Human Rights Violations in Nigeria’s

Oil Producing Communities.

We also have with us Ambassador David Miller, Jr., President

and CEO of ParEx, a privately held investment company based in

Washington and Lucerne, Switzerland. Ambassador Miller, in his

distinguished career, has served as Special Assistant to the PresiVerDate 11-SEP-98 11:57 Jun 15, 2000 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 63273.TXT HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
14

dent for National Security Advisor Affairs and Ambassador to both

Tanzania and Zimbabwe. He spent 4 years in Nigeria where he

worked for Westinghouse. Ambassador Miller is coauthor of The

United States and Africa: A Post-Cold War Perspective. Ambassador, welcome back to the Subcommittee.

Mr. Lloyd Pierson is the director of the Africa Division for the

International Republican Institute. He was Associate Director of

the Peace Corps prior to joining the IRI. Mr. Pierson served as the

Peace Corps Country Director in Ghana and Botswana from 1984

to 1991, and he is no stranger to Capitol Hill, having served as a

congressional staffer.

We will start with Ms. Manby.

STATEMENTS OF BRONWEN MANBY, RESEARCHER, AFRICA

DIVISION, HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH

Ms. MANBY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for this

invitation to Human Rights Watch to address the Subcommittee on

human rights in Nigeria.

Mr. Chairman, Human Rights Watch believes that the developments in Nigeria over the last year offer a real hope that the country can take its rightful place as a leader of the African Continent

and that its citizens can enjoy the respect of the human rights to

which they are entitled. However, the new government faces huge

obstacles in achieving this goal in the face of the patent and widespread and systematic abuse that it has inherited from its predecessors, especially considering the shaky electoral foundations on

which it stands.

In particular, we are concerned that the government may be

tempted to respond violently to the discontent in the Niger Delta,

a response that would catastrophically reverse progress toward respect for human rights in Nigeria as a whole.

The U.S. Government can play an important role in supporting

legal and practical reforms by the Nigerian Government through

technical assistance and diplomatic pressure and by assisting civil

society organizations working toward increased respect for human

rights.

U.S. military assistance to Nigeria should be carefully tailored to

ensure that it cannot be used to benefit officers who have been responsible for human rights violations or in situations where human

rights violations are likely.

The U.S. should also make clear to the Nigerian Government

that any attempt to resolve the crisis in the Delta in a way that

does not respect the rights of those who live in the oil-producing

region is unacceptable. Equally, the administration should insist

that the U.S. oil companies working in Nigeria must play their part

in ensuring that oil production does not continue only due to the

threat or actual use of force against those who protest their activities.

I will go on to highlight some of those points, International and

domestic observers of the elections in Nigeria that led to the inauguration of President Obasanjo welcomed their peaceful completion

as an important step forward in the return of Nigeria to civilian

government, but they also noted some serious flaws in the process.

Irregularities included vastly inflated figures for voter turnout,

15

stuffing of ballot boxes, intimidation and bribery of both electoral

officials and voters, and alteration of results at collation centers.

These irregularities were widespread but were particularly serious

in the South-South zone of the country, as it is called, the Niger

Delta region.

While Human Rights Watch shares the view of most domestic

groups that there is no choice but to accept the election results, we

do urge the U.S. Government to work with state institutions and

NGO’s in order to strengthen the links between the current government structures and their constituents and to ensure that the next

elections held in Nigeria do represent a more genuine process.

Similar problems arise in relation to the lack of a democratically

drafted constitution. There is consensus among Nigerian civil society organizations that the process by which the constitution which

came into effect on May 29th was adopted was illegitimate and

that the arrangements in relation to a number of crucial areas are

not acceptable. Human Rights Watch believes that the U.S. Government should urge the Nigerian Government to treat the current

constitution as an interim document and institute an immediate,

inclusive, and transparent process for drafting a new constitution

which would be legitimate in the eyes of all Nigerians.

The new government also faces a huge task in restoring the rule

of law. Although certain reforms have been announced and are welcomed, in particular the repeal of a wide range of military decrees

in the last days of the Abubakar regime, they are only the very

first steps. There is an urgent need for the government to focus on

issues relating to the administration of justice in order to restore

respect for human rights and the rule of the law, a respect that is

essential not only for the rights of the Nigerian people but also to

promote the external investment that will be necessary to bring Nigeria out of its current economic crisis.

Potentially one of the most important steps toward establishing

a rule of law is the appointment of a panel to investigate assassinations and other human rights abuses and to make recommendations to address past injustices and to prevent future violations.

The U.S. Government should support this process and emphasize

the importance for the investigation to be a thorough one to ensure

that the cycle of impunity for human rights violations that has

been the rule in Nigeria is broken.

With the inauguration of a civilian government, U.S. sanctions

against Nigeria have been lifted, allowing for the resumption of

military assistance to Nigeria, including under the IMET Program.

Human Rights Watch is concerned that military assistance should

include strict human rights conditions and should be in the context

of a thought-out strategy for increasing democratic accountability

of the Nigerian military, while emphasizing that any future attempt by the military to seize power will be met with tough sanctions.

Finally, I will turn to the Niger Delta where most U.S. investment in Nigeria is concentrated. The crisis in the oil-producing regions is one of the most pressing issues for the new government

and has the greatest potential to lead to a serious deterioration in

respect to human rights. In response to increasing discontent in the

Delta, large numbers of soldiers and paramilitary mobile police

16

have been deployed. Although there is a clear need for law and

order to be reestablished in some areas, security forces have both

failed to protect civilians from violence in many cases and have

also themselves carried out serious and widespread violations of

human rights. Oil companies operating in Nigeria often fail to acknowledge any responsibility when security force action is taken in

nominal defense of their facilities, although they have in many respects contributed toward the discontent and conflict within and

between communities that has resulted in repressive government

responses.

While President Obasanjo has visited the Delta area and held

discussions with local leaders and promised to bring greater development to the Delta, leaders of ethnic groups based in the Delta

have rejected a bill for the establishment of a Niger Delta Development Commission, since it does not address their central concerns

surrounding revenue allocation and resource control.

Human Rights Watch believes that the U.S. should urge the Nigerian Government, among other steps, to appoint an independent

judicial inquiry to investigate human rights violations in the Delta,

including during the Ogoni crisis and over the 1998–99 New Year

period when a heavy crack-down took place, and to discipline or

prosecute those responsible and compensate the victims.

The government should take steps to replace soldiers carrying

out policing duties in the Niger Delta area and elsewhere with regular police and should institute negotiations with freely chosen representatives of the people in the Niger Delta to resolve the issues

surrounding the production of oil.

U.S.-based oil companies operating in Nigeria, especially Chevron, Mobil, and Texaco, which operate joint ventures with the Nigerian Government, also share a responsibility to ensure that oil production does not continue at the cost of violation of those who live

in the areas where oil is produced. Given the deteriorating security

situation, it is all the more urgent for the companies to adopt systematic steps to ensure that the protection of company staff and

property does not result in summary executions, arbitrary detentions, and other violations.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I would like to say that the U.S.

Congress has played a very important role in monitoring U.S. Administration policy toward Nigeria over the past years, and in this

context, I would like to recognize and thank Congressman Payne

in particular for his efforts.

Although the situation in Nigeria has improved, we welcome

these hearings to look at, prospectively, U.S. policy, and think that

Congress and this Committee has an important role to play for the

future.

Mr. ROYCE. I thank you, Ms. Manby.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Manby appears in the appendix.]

Mr. ROYCE. We will now go to Ambassador Miller.

STATEMENT OF DAVID C. MILLER, JR., PRESIDENT ParEx, INC.

Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I can follow on with her

comments, which is to say thank you very much for having these

hearings. It is great to see your Committee taking the time to focus

on Nigeria. I think this is the fourth time I have been here to reVerDate 11-SEP-98 11:57 Jun 15, 2000 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 63273.TXT HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
17

view the subject, and certainly today is a happier day than we have

seen in the previous three.

As we are operating under General Scowcroft’s rules, as I understand it, which is we have 5 minutes to cover everything, I will try

to be as quick as I can. I would like to submit the statement for

the record and to summarize its major observations.

The first is that oil companies are still pursuing the same policy

that they were 5 years ago, which we have called loosely a responsible engagement. Our donations for the past 5 years have been

larger than the USAID Program for Nigeria and will probably

maintain that status for this year, sadly.

As Ambassador Jeter said, it is time to look at a dramatic decrease in aid to Nigeria and we would be more than pleased to appear here next year and say that our programs are substantially

smaller than the U.S. Government programs.

As you know, we are also very active with Vision 2010 and the

definition of an economic future for Nigeria, which we believe the

Obasanjo government is going to find very helpful.

That said, we believe that democracy is going to flourish if the

economy works, and today, we are still looking at a 50 percent malnutrition rate among children 2 to 5. We are looking at a 20 percent death rate in children before the age of 5, and they just completed a study on poverty in Nigeria which put 67 percent of the

Nigerian people living in poverty. It is hard to build a democratic

government on that foundation.

We do believe Nigeria is on the road to a solid democratic government, and when we last appeared we were talking about General Abubakar and the skepticism with which his promises were

met in the United States. He indicated that he was going to turn

over by May 29 and have elections, and most people here said surely that is not going to happen. It did, and I think that Obasanjo’s

first 9 weeks have been very good. His inaugural speech was tough.

He hit corruption very hard in the opening part of his speech.

As Ambassador Jeter has pointed out, a lot of senior officers are

no longer in office. The inquiries are going to go back 20 years. The

Speaker of the House was removed. That is all fine until you look

at what he faces, and that is a reduction in the Federal budget by

40 percent, foreign currency reserves are down to 4.6 billion from

7.1.

The thing that I think is hardest for him is when he pushes or

pulls on levers, he gets no response. The civil service has really

been destroyed over a period of years. The university system, if you

really want to cry, is to talk to the Governors to hear about ABU

being closed, schools that had a great reputation across the continent aren’t functioning today.

The political parties right now are vehicles for individuals more

than for ideologies, and over time we need to build a party structure in Nigeria that speaks to ideology and not just personality.

Clearly, everybody is concerned about the Delta, and there is

probably enough horrible things that have happened in the Delta

at one time or another to cover an entire presentation. I would simply like to offer the following observation.

In Nigeria, the problem of the Delta is simply one problem

among a terribly serious and long list of problems. We have to deal

18

with it. It has the possibility of really blowing up under our feet,

but when you are in Abuja, the Delta looks like just one of the multiplicity of challenges.

Listening to this presentation and talking to my friends here in

town, I think it is a wonderful time for the U.S., public sector and

private sector and NGO’s, to get together and work together. Nigeria needs help today and it will for the next 5 years, and there is

absolutely no reason we can’t work together.

Two observations on that. I don’t think we ought to set the bar

too high. We in the United States have a tendency to expect our

friends abroad to be able to perform miracles, I fear, in days, and

I think we are going to have to give President Obasanjo and his

colleagues some running room and tolerance as they try to perform.

The last point is, I don’t think we need to go to Abuja; everybody

in the world is visiting Abuja right now to tell General Obasanjo

what he should do. My colleagues and I would very much like to

go to Abuja and say, Sir, if there are ways that we can contribute,

we would like to do that. It is your country. If you can tell us what

you would like, we would try to help.

We have a lot of specific recommendations. At this point, Scowcroft would strangle me with my tie and tell me to be quiet. So I

will. If you want to read the recommendations, they are all there,

Mr. Chairman.

Mr. ROYCE. We thank you, Ambassador Miller, and we thank

General Scowcroft, and we hope we all follow those admonitions.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Miller appears in the appendix.]

Mr. ROYCE. We will go to Mr. Pierson. I want to thank all of the

panelists for traveling here to testify today. We will conclude with

Mr. Pierson.

STATEMENT OF LLOYD PIERSON, DIRECTOR, AFRICA

DIVISION, INTERNATIONAL REPUBLICAN INSTITUTE

Mr. PIERSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I will forego

the reading of the testimony and address some of the very key

issues that we feel are important in Nigeria. I first would like to

once again thank you very much for being the chair of our Election

Observation Delegation to Nigeria for the Presidential elections on

February 27th and for Congressman Payne to be a co-leader of that

delegation. It is very much appreciated and well remembered, the

very hard work that you did.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank a number of staff

people who were very helpful and also participated in that mission.

I want to make sure that I do not forget anybody and would like

to pay particular respects to Tom Callahan, Les Munson, Charmain

Houseman, Charisse Glassman, Tom Sheehy, Malik Chaka, and

Joel Starr with Congressman Campbell.

We believe that the first 60 days of the Obasanjo administration

has started the country on a very good path. The expectations so

far generally have been exceeded within this first 60 days, and we

do temper that with some caution because we know that Nigeria

can be a country of extremes, but the policies and process that

have been laid out so far mark a very good start for democracy in

Nigeria.

19

We were contacted toward the end of the transition period by

USAID and by representatives of President Obasanjo to put together a week-long conference prior to the inauguration in order for

the President-elect to establish with incoming cabinet officers and

senior government officials what would be the tenor of the administration.

We met for a week in Abuja, and I will tell Members of this Committee that if there was any one paramount factor, one paramount

issue that the President-elect insisted to the incoming members of

his administration, advisors and others, was that anticorruption

would be a hallmark of the Obasanjo administration.

We were very fortunate, Transparency International was there

also to talk about accountability and transparency issues. We had

a bipartisan delegation from the United States that also participated. Representative Beryl Roberts Burke, a Democrat from Florida, and Republican State Senator Raymond Haynes from California, both received standing ovations for their discussions about

democracy.

What we really feel we are looking at in Nigeria is the quality

of leadership at the top. We all know the history of Nigeria. We

know about the Abacha regime, but what we are looking at, hopefully, is a new day in Nigeria in which this administration sets

very high standards for its conduct.

In the inaugural address, President Obasanjo outlined a 5-point

plan for the country: food security, unemployment, developing social and physical infrastructure, attacking educational problems,

and resolving the Niger Delta crisis by the end of this calendar

year.

One of the major problems that we see in Nigeria is the lack of

a multiparty system. Our research there, the longest lasting political party in the history of Nigeria has been one that lasted for 7

years. Generally, they have lasted for only a 2- to 3-year period. So,

as we know a democracy in which there is a strong political system, with an opposition that is an antidote to corruption and good

government from the majority, there is no history of that in Nigeria, and that has been and is the principal focus of our work there.

We are very hopeful. Once again, Mr. Chairman, we believe the

first 60 days have been very effective, and particularly we would

like to thank you and other Members of the Committee for this

hearing today. Thank you.

Mr. ROYCE. Thank you, Mr. Pierson.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Pierson appears in the appendix.]

Mr. Royce. I will start by asking Ms. Manby a question. In your

testimony you state that those who peacefully protest the manner

in which oil is currently produced have a right to make their voice

heard, but what are the limits on this right of protest? Does it include the right to occupy oil platforms and shut down production,

in your view? Or does it include the right of sabotaging operations?

Those of us that were there during the elections heard both political candidates speak to the issue of trying to apportion revenue in

the Delta which would go for the state and local governments to

be spent regionally to address these concerns. How about this right

to protest and how far does it go?

20

Ms. MANBY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There are criminal activities taking place in the Delta, many of them on what I would

describe as a freelance basis, by people who are essentially looking

for money, although they—some of them—would also express their

activities in political terms. Clearly, hostage taking is one of those

activities. In addition, attempts to occupy flow stations cause criminal damage in some cases as well.

Those acts are criminal offenses under Nigerian law, and where

individuals have undertaken criminal damage, hostage taking and

so forth, certainly I think that the correct response to those activities by the Nigerian Government is to arrest individuals, try them,

sentence them as appropriate.

However, there are situations in which large-scale demonstrations have been carried out, which are peaceful, unarmed, and the

response has been that of military crackdown. I think most recently of the period over the New Year period when there was a

military response to large demonstrations which led to the deaths

of possibly up to 200 people. Those were demonstrations where people have a right to assemble and so forth.

Mr. ROYCE. What about shutting down production? Is this criminal in your view?

Ms. MANBY. Under Nigerian law, certainly that is the case. The

problem has been that the laws relating to economic sabotage have

provided for trial before tribunals which do not respect due process.

I am not absolutely up to speed with what the current situation is

with regard to the laws. A range of military decrees were repealed

as Abubakar went out of office, many of them setting up the special

tribunals for the trial of sabotage. I have been actually trying to

find out, but I am not yet completely cognizant of the current laws

that are provided.

I think that if you have a regular criminal justice system and

people are being tried for recognizable criminal offenses before regular courts, that is fine. The issue is where people are being tried

before special tribunals, without the right to legal representation,

without the right to appeal, and in some cases to be sentenced to

death even without the right to appeal. It is a question of due process.

Mr. ROYCE. Thank you, Ms. Manby.

Ambassador Miller, the oil companies operating in the Delta are

now building schools and other public facilities for local government. They also negotiate security contracts with local chiefs.

These efforts, which you refer to as development aid, cost the companies a considerable amount, and they are coming under increasing pressure there to spend more.

Do foreign companies face similar operating environments elsewhere in the world or is Nigeria unique in this situation, and do

the companies risk crossing a line where expectations become unrealistic?

Mr. MILLER. That is a lot of questions. Probably Nigeria is one

of the more difficult environments in which our companies operate.

I think the level of contribution of our companies in Nigeria is extraordinary. If we really sat down and did a global survey, you

might find that the level of charitable activity in Nigeria was No.

1 or approaching No. 1.

21

The issue you raise about is assistance appropriate or not is

what we are facing today. When the government didn’t work, our

companies stepped in to provide governmental functions around

their installations and in their neighborhoods and for their employees because there was no functioning government. Today, we have

an elected government, and one of the keys is for our companies

to help those governments retake their functions, if you will, and

to get the Nigerian citizens to begin to look at their government as

the provider of services and not foreign companies. We are engaged

in a number of dialogues on that, but I think that is terribly important for the next 2 or 3 years.

Mr. ROYCE. I thank you. I have one short question for Mr. Pierson. It is about the shape of the state and local governments in the

Delta region. When we were there, it seems that that was the region with the lowest voter turnout and the most problems during

the election. Give us your view of the condition of state and local

government there in the South-South.

Mr. PIERSON. I think it is very serious, Mr. Chairman, and part

of it derives back to the Constitution of Nigeria, the existing one

originally from 1979, and then the decrees that were promulgated

just shortly before the Abubakar transition government left office.

State and local government authority, not only in the Delta area

but throughout Nigeria, is not well addressed, well addressed in

terms of exactly what the authority is for state and local governments, as well as what kind of revenue that local governments can

produce.

One of the principal areas that we feel needs to be addressed,

that the Delta crisis is very serious; the crisis there is a threat not

only to democracy in Nigeria but to a stable democracy, and this

question of community participation, of the kind of resources that

are available to the local governments and the type of participation

that local governments have, is exceedingly important to the resolution of that.

A central government decision or resolution of that, probably no

matter how benevolent, will not be a full resolution unless local

governments are really vested with power in the Delta. We consider it a serious problem.

Mr. ROYCE. Thank you very much. We will go to Mr. Payne of

New Jersey.

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much.

Ms. Manby, thank you very much for the work that you do and

for so many years, and thank you for your compliments earlier, too.

Let me just ask a question. I indicated in my initial remarks that

I felt that the election of Chief Obasanjo was not totally fair and

free. I also, though, indicated that in my opinion, the fraud—and

as you have mentioned some of it—was not of the magnitude that

would alter the outcome. It doesn’t make corruption right because

it is not enough to alter the outcome.

In other words, the Obasanjo party had won local election and

won the state election, had won the Federal Congressional Elections, so it was no surprise; and the margin was about the same,

although I think they did a little too much in some areas when

they got 120 percent of the vote, but 100 percent might have looked

better.

22

But I just wonder whether, in your opinion, that with the name,

the support, the financial support, the fact that Obasanjo had been

a general, a tough general, no-nonsense person when the war between the eastern states went on, then gave the government over

back to the civilians, was imprisoned himself—in my opinion, he

was probably the best person at this time, military or not, feeling

too uncomfortable, he knowing that there needs to be a new path.

I guess my question is: Do you feel that in your opinion the corruption was significant enough to, in your opinion, alter the outcome?

Ms. MANBY. It is a difficult question to answer in the context of

turnout, which was probably in the region of 20 percent, although

reported as 70 to 80 percent. Given that low turnout it is actually

very difficult to say what the result would have been had there not

been fraud.

I think that Obasanjo does have genuine support. I think it is

also the case that his selection as the candidate for the Peoples’

Democratic Party was marked in the party primaries by blatant

purchasing of votes. Who is to say whether or not he would have

got that nomination anyway? I think it is actually very difficult to

assess that point.

Just to finish with an anecdote: I was talking to a colleague from

a human rights organization in November last year, before any of

the elections took place, and I asked him whether he was planning

to participate. He said ‘‘no, they have already decided who is going

to be President’’ and he named Obasanjo.

Mr. PAYNE. I did have a lot of—I have been in campaigns. I know

sometimes people—this guy runs for President, has got so much

money he doesn’t know what to do with it, and so it does have an

impact all over the world.

Let me just ask a question to anyone on the panel. Do you think

that the U.S. has been able to come up with a policy toward Nigeria today? One of my criticisms of the Clinton administration,

which I am a supporter of, was that they had no policy; that, the

President said if Abacha took his jacket off and put on a suit and

got elected, he would recognize him.

Of course, Human Rights had said the week before that if

Abacha ran for President and took his military uniform off, they

didn’t think he should be the President. We are pushing sanctions

here, and I think Ambassador—what is his name, second in command at the state Department—so we don’t think——

Mr. MILLER. Johnny Carson.

Mr. PAYNE [continuing]. We don’t think should be sanctions, so

we had a lot of different policies. The Secretary of State had one

view. Do you think that currently, now, we have a specific policy,

and do you think it is going to be able to work in the context, Ambassador Miller or Mr. Pierson or even you, Ms. Manby?

Mr. PIERSON. Congressman, I can address in the democracy and

governance area in terms of that policy and what the process has

been. As we came into the transition period, roughly I believe, last

August and October, funding and a decision on exactly what the

participation of democracy in government organizations would be

was not really determined at that time.

23

National Endowment for Democracy had done some excellent

work previously with human rights groups, but beginning roughly

in September—as everybody really looked forward and we kept

talking in terms of there was not just one election in Nigeria, there

really were four, local government beginning on December 5th, the

funding mechanism and the emphasis on democracy in government

activities—we began accelerating.

We are in another one of those transition periods right now in

terms of program decisions and funding that would be related to

those program decisions. We are in a very, very tight squeeze right

now, but we know that USAID is aware of that. They are working

on it, and we think it will get resolved; but overall, we are very

happy with the democracy and governance.

Mr. PAYNE. Let me just very quickly, with this last point, with

these problems with this oil, it seems that there was a problem before they started sabotaging, the military was able to sell, would

get petrol and sell it 5 times for what people could get it at the

pumps, and that was part of the problem.

One of the dangers I think of getting a Niger Delta policy is that

some people from the Niger Delta have got two extremes. First, the

government did virtually nothing in that region. On the other

hand, people from the region feel that actually all of the money

should simply remain in the region.

We have got two very far policies there. I think the government

was totally wrong by not having some of the benefit of the funds

in the Delta region because of the environmental degradation, all

of those other problems, but by the same token, even in the U.S.—

I mean, Louisiana is probably one of the poorest States in the

Union, but they pumped all of the oil. Texas has never been up

there in the days when oil was pumped in the U.S.A. So it is going

to be difficult to try to say because of the wealth of a particular

region, that they should get all of it.

So it is a great divide, and I wonder if any work is being done

on trying to get the government to do things in the region that

should be done. But on the other hand, try to say that because the

oil is pumped here, that all the money should remain here; and I

don’t want to get into Chevron’s policy, I have got a whole question

on that about ransoms and so forth. Once you start something, you

simply encourage people to kidnap—if someone wants some currency—will just go and kidnap a couple of employees because they

are going to pay the ransom, and it is just an incentive to have

that continued and escalate up.

I think it is a flawed policy. Once they started it, now they are

caught up with it, and therefore had to feel that they needed to get

heavy military people to assist them in their bargaining power. So

it is something that started. If they had asked me, I might have

had a suggestion, but they didn’t.

Just on that last question. I know my time has expired.

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Payne, what has happened in Nigeria is what

happens in this body. The most important issue before this body is

the allocation of national revenue. That is what a democratic government is all about, and you know that better than any of us sitting here. Those are the toughest votes: What are we going to do

with the tax bill?

24

Until these elections, Nigeria did not have the mechanism to discuss this in an open and candid way in public life. So I think the

long-run answer is that the steps we have taken to see Nigeria

elect representatives, to talk about revenue sharing, is the ultimate

answer because that is ultimately what a democratic government

does.

Ms. MANBY. To follow on from that, I think that certainly there

is a much greater scope for dialogue now around the issues of revenue allocation, which I would entirely agree are key to the crisis.

I think that there are points where the people who live in the Delta

and the national government can meet in terms of revenue allocation.

Human Rights Watch itself will not take a position on where

that should that be, but I think that a genuine attempt to negotiate

with people could achieve a solution, although it won’t be easy to

do so.

I think, however, that the elections were especially problematic

in the Niger Delta, where there were many places with turnout of

5 percent or lower, which means that the people who were elected

from the Delta are not especially representative and that there is

going to be a need to be imaginative about who you are going to

talk to, though there are people there who can be talked to, who

do represent the constituency. It is going to be difficult to do that.

I think the government could do it. The Nigerian Government, I

mean.

I think it is not going far enough at the moment. The appointment of a Niger Delta Development Commission, which has very

little new money, and the bill itself has been very poorly drafted,

had a lot of criticism from groups in the Delta. That does not go

far enough.

They are going to have to look at the constitution itself and at

those issues, including how the revenue is allocated. It is not going

to be easy, but I think it is possible to achieve a solution if it is

addressed seriously.

Mr. ROYCE. Thank you, Mr. Payne.

Ms. McKinney was next.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Ms. Manby, could you please tell me what was the Internal Security Task Force? What were the criminal incidents undertaken by

the ISTF? Did the oil producers know that the ISTF was committing human rights abuses?

Then I would also like for you to discuss a little bit about page

16 of your book, The Price of Oil, about the Parabe platform and

the whole issue of proportionality of response.

Ambassador Miller, I would have a question for you after we

have heard Ms. Manby’s response.

Ms. MANBY. Thank you. The Internal Security Task Force was

set up in Rivers State, one of the States in the Niger Delta, in response to the protests led by Ken Saro-wiwa and the Movement for

the Survival of the Ogoni People. During the period 1993 to 1998,

it was responsible for very serious violations, including widespread

detentions, arbitrary detentions, summary executions, rapes, and

extortion of money.

25

The oil companies in the Ogoni area which were specifically the

target of the crisis there, which is Shell and Chevron, were certainly aware of those violations, and indeed, the head of the Internal Security Task Force used to complain that they didn’t appreciate his efforts enough in ensuring that the MOSOP demonstrations were suppressed.

Human Rights Watch has issued several reports criticizing especially Shell for its failure to protest the activities of the Internal

Security Task Force to the degree that we and groups on the

ground would have thought appropriate and to ensure that force

was not used in defense of its installations. I should state, however,

that the task force was a government body, not an oil company

body.

In response to your question about the Parabe platform incident,

which was in May 1998 when an offshore platform belonging to

Chevron was occupied by about 200 youths, and Chevron invited

the Nigerian navy and other military units to come to the platform,

using its helicopters, where an incident took place in which two of

the youths were killed, and who, Chevron admitted had been unarmed. Human Rights Watch has expressed its concern about that

incident and about an incident also involving Chevron in January

of this year when, again, Chevron helicopters were used or helicopters leased by Chevron were used by the military to attack a

couple of villages where up to 50 people may have been killed.

While Human Rights Watch accepts that there may be some

cases in which an oil company has no choice but to allow the military to requisition its equipment—for example, one could imagine

a case in which there was a serious fire and oil company equipment

was needed to address the fire—we do think that they should be

taking much stronger steps to ensure that in such cases there are

not human rights violations that result; in this case, 50 or more

deaths.

That would include agreements in advance with the military

about the circumstances under which equipment could be requisitioned and also, for example, if, nonetheless, soldiers come and

take equipment at gun point, making representations to the head

of state about those situations, ensuring that victims are compensated and so forth.

We have a very detailed series of recommendations which are in

our reports.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Thank you.

Ambassador Miller, could you, after hearing at least this, we also

hear that similar situations have arisen in India and in Colombia

as well, where U.S. companies are facing security threats as a result of unstable situations in the local host areas. Would you be

supportive of—some of these responses, by the way, are just common sense responses that these corporations ought to engage in,

but for some reason, they are not.

Would you be supportive of a corporate code of conduct that

would enlighten our corporations so that their responses would be

more in line with common sense and less in line with human rights

abuses?

26

Mr. MILLER. I think that is a loaded question. Let me try a response. I will take a bye on Colombia or India but let me talk

about Nigeria.

The situation in the Delta calls for a thoughtful and well-educated and well-disciplined police force and probably the withdrawal

of army troops. In the United States, when we have deployed army

troops to do police functions, they frequently have not done them

terribly well because they are not trained to act as policemen, and

their unit discipline is designed to achieve things other than policing functions.

In point of fact, the companies have been in a dialogue with,

among others, Ambassador Jeter, trying to work out a way for the

companies to support a U.S. Government initiative to provide police

training to the Nigerians so that we can have a police force in the

Delta, rather than army in the Delta; and if we get that far, I think

you will see a decrease in the violence, because a thoughtful police

force ought to be able to decrease the likelihood of violent confrontation.

I am not sure that you need a code of conduct to achieve it. I

think all of our corporations are terribly concerned that somebody

is going to lose their life in a confrontation where that really need

not happen.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. ROYCE. Thank you, Ms. McKinney.

We will go to Mr. Tancredo, and then to Mr. Meeks.

Mr. TANCREDO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is really quite

interesting. It seems like a complicating obstacle to dealing with

the situation in the Delta is the difficulty in distinguishing between

legitimate civil unrest and human rights grievances, and maybe

you just touched on it with the creation of a—I think you said

thoughtful, well-disciplined police force. Maybe that is really where

we have to go with this.

But what I am wondering, especially from Ambassador Miller

and Ms. Manby, do you agree with me, first of all, that there is this

difficulty in making a distinction in the Delta area about what is

actually happening, which groups are responsible for what kind of

activity? Is there an attempt, to the best of your knowledge, to actually deal with them separately; deal with the issues of, as I say,

legitimate civil complaint and/or just gangsterism?

Ms. MANBY. Thank you. I think that there is on some occasions

an overlap between pure criminal activities into legitimate political

processes, and also that sometimes those who are engaged in essentially personal revenue-seeking do express their aims in political terms.

However, I also think that it is fairly easy to discover people who

are genuinely committed to improving the situation on the ground

in the Delta and are adopting legitimate means of doing that. That

is to say, noncriminal means, not involving threats to life, et cetera.

I think that historically there has been no attempt at all to distinguish between those two sets of people, between hostage-takers

and those who are demonstrating, for example, in support of their

legitimate expectations that greater revenue from oil should come

back to the Delta. The current government has shown certainly

27

much more commitment to making that distinction than in the

past.

However, it is still the case that, for example—this is since the

inauguration of Obasanjo—young men who go through military

roadblocks, of which there are still many in the Niger Delta, who

are carrying material relating to demands for greater revenue allocation to the Delta, get arrested, detained, beaten up.

While there has been a greater attempt to make that distinction,

it is still the case that on the ground, people are facing arbitrary

harassment because of their political views. What happens, of

course, is those people become more and more angry and more and

more determined to take other steps in order to express their

views.

Mr. TANCREDO. So would you agree, then, with the statement of

Ambassador Miller that more effort should perhaps go into the creation of this more sophisticated police force?

Ms. MANBY. Certainly one of the recommendations we have been

making, is that the army should be replaced with police in the

Delta. I completely agree with the position that the army is not

equipped for policing, and that one should be aiming for them to

be withdrown, and that the police should be properly trained and,

in particular, that individuals who have historically been involved

in abuses should be screened out of that process.

I think that in terms of who should be doing that training, we

would be much more comfortable with an initiative by a multilateral body, the United Nations, the Commonwealth, and so forth.

But certainly the question of properly trained police is an important one. On this issue, generally, I also think that an important

related area is the question of military assistance to Nigeria. If, for

example, one is looking at supplying military material to Nigerian

troops operating in Sierra Leone under ECOMOG, there needs to

be a lot of care taken to ensure that type of weaponry does not find

its way into the Delta, is not used in terms to suppress protest in

the Delta, and I think that there is a real role for this Committee

to play in overseeing those types of military assistance initiatives.

Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Ambassador, comment?

Mr. MILLER. In my previous life with General Scowcroft, I also

worried about counterterrorism, and one of the things we see in the

Delta that really is disturbing to me is this emergence of freely associating youth that are moving more into criminal activity, because they don’t see any other way to express their grievances.

Once that begins, maintenance of law and order is very difficult.

I think Ms. Manby is right, I think we can identify leaders in the

Delta today. I think if we get behind the Nigerian Government and

help them reach out to these communities that we can solve the

problems in the Delta, and the Nigerian Government will come up

with a revenue sharing formula, and we can find a police force that

will work, and so on and so forth.

If we don’t, they are at just the beginning of what feels like the

Bekaa Valley, where every other week there was a new group announced that was out to promote peace, freedom, and justice in the

name of somebody. That is a very, very difficult situation for anybody’s government to deal with, let alone a Nigerian Government

that is really struggling with getting its feet on the ground.

28

Mr. TANCREDO. Thank you.

Mr. ROYCE. Thank you. Mr. Meeks of New York.

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With the election of Mr.

Obasanjo, and thus far, from what everyone is saying within the

last 60 days, that they have all been saying good things, and it

seems as though the country of Nigeria is on its way to democracy,

and that is a big test for them.

I also see it, though, as a big test for us in the United States of

America. It is, an opportunity for us to stand up and show that we

care about the Continent of Africa, and what we do now will be

what the rest of the world and the rest of the Continent of Africa

will look at. If we do something good for Nigeria to stabilize it and

show that America truly has an interest in Nigeria, then maybe it

will show a signal that America really has an interest in the Continent of Africa and not just in Europe and in other places.

So I say all that to say that, in the discussion that I have heard

thus far, we talk about political parties and whether or not a number of individuals came out, what percentage came out to vote. In

my trip with the congressional delegation during the election, I

talked to a number of individuals who were not concerned about

the election simply because they had lost hope and faith in any political system or any political party, that it would not make a difference.

What the people on the ground wanted to know was, how are our

lives going to be made different? They have been made a hopeless

people. I understand now that the problem of fuel shortages have

been reduced, but I also saw that there were blackouts periodically

throughout. I saw that there was a lack of complete sewer systems

and infrastructure that was not in existence.

Then you look at what is happening in the Delta, and basically

it is a situation where individuals are made to live or are living in

an impoverished area, and as long as they feel that they don’t have

any other opportunity because someone is taking all of the wealth

out of the country, they are going to fight to do that.

My question to you is, basically, what can we do? What do you

see as our role in restoring the infrastructure in Nigeria which will

then, I think, give the people a real sense of hope again in a government that is willing to do for the people? They can see infrastructure improvement and see—and I know that some of our

major corporations are there, and I heard that if you take it on en

masse as to what they contribute to charity, it is substantial. But

I think that the people are not looking necessarily for that kind of

charity. They want to know what can those major corporations who

are making large dollars there give back or give in technology so

that they can create the kind of infrastructure that is necessary,

whether it is in the Delta or anyplace else in Nigeria.

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Meeks, sir, that is a great question, and I have

been a colleague of Howard Jeter for years. I think Howard’s comments were great. I think this administration needs to think very

seriously about what more could be done for Nigeria, because it

speaks volumes about our country that we will criticize when people are failing, but when they try and they are succeeding, we have

an aid program of $28 million, which is just entirely too small.

29

In terms of what the private sector can do, in the last two pages

of my written statement, let me just run through very, very quickly. Nigeria flares 75 percent of its gas. It has a shortage of electrical power in country. It is insane to do that.

We have been in a conversation with Secretary Richardson on his

trip coming up. We hope Nigeria will develop a natural gas policy

that will allow us, in essence, to use the natural gas that is being

burned today.

Second, all the oil companies’ funds are kept offshore, which is

also a tragedy for Nigeria. If the Treasury Department could work

with Nigerian authorities and we could come up with good corresponding banking relationships and mass amounts of money

could be kept in Nigerian banks with the same safety that they are

kept offshore today, that would make a great difference, and a

number of our officials have been pushing for this, and it would be

great to see that happen.

Third, there is a lot of Nigerian money abroad, and the question

is how do we get the money back? With U.S. financial managers

and a mutual fund for Nigeria, we think that there is an opportunity to bring back a lot of Nigerian money from abroad, which

is only to say if your Committee had another 2 days and we got

everybody up here and we sat down and we came up with a game

plan, we could do a tremendous amount for Nigeria than we are

today.

I am sorry I talked so long. I get excited.

Ms. MANBY. To respond to your question, I think there is a great

deal that U.S. corporations can do and certainly there are infrastructure projects that are needed in relation to electricity and so

forth. This is not really Human Rights Watch expertise or area.

But I must say that in the context of the Niger Delta in particular,

there has been a real problem with oil companies paying toward infrastructure projects that have effectively been vehicles for corruption, for people to take a 30 percent cut as they have happened.

While development spending is welcomed, there is a need for that

to be transparent, for local groups to know what is happening, for

accountability processes to be in place. Otherwise you risk creating

more discontent, more conflict and exacerbating the situation.

Mr. PIERSON. Mr. Meeks, I would also like to mention a number

of specific areas that we feel should be pursued in Nigeria. One is

strengthen the judiciary. Two is help strengthen the rule of law

through courts and the constitutional system in Nigeria. Political

parties need to be strengthened. There needs to be a great deal

more coordination between different agencies of the Nigerian Government. We believe there needs to be some very strong assessments at the state and local government area as to exactly what

their authority is and what kind of changes should be made, and

that we should help, to the extent that we can, to build true federalism in Nigeria.

The past governments, as we know, have worked toward the benefit of the government and not toward the benefit of the people and

restoring faith and building confidence in the government. Much

will be dictated by the actions of what the administration is doing.

Mr. ROYCE. Thank you, Mr. Pierson. I thank all our witnesses

who came from great distances, especially Ms. Manby who came all

30

the way from London today. There are three other individuals we

would like to recognize and thank at this time as well. These hearings throughout the year have been organized and assisted by

three interns who are with us today. This will be their last hearing.

So I would like to ask the three of them to stand to be recognized:

Neda Farzan, Meytal Kashi, and Lori Schwarz, if you will all stand

and be recognized by the Committee. We appreciate very much

your good work. Thank you, and this hearing is adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 12:40 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

(31)

A P P E N D I X

MAY 25, 1999

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72