WE wholeheartedly welcome the Anti-Corruption Commission's (ACC) probe into the wealth statements submitted and income tax statements declared by seven current and former lawmakers of the ruling party. This paper has in the recent past raised the question as to why the graft body was not undertaking serious investigation into the wealth statement affidavits submitted by aspirant members of parliament prior to the last national parliamentary elections. While ACC has begun looking into the activities of some of these seven individuals in an attempt to piece together how they amassed such wealth and whether these monies and assets were earned through legal means, we are equally perplexed at the “go slow” policy with others.
The question begs to be asked as to why the former state minister for housing and public works is let off from quizzing on the grounds of being “sick”. Precisely what drove the ACC into giving preferential treatment to this former minister with regards to his being present to answer questions at the anti-graft watchdog body's offices on February 20? We will certainly keep a watch on how the case is treated. However, we would like to see this whole exercise to be a rigorous effort on the part of the ACC. The watch dog body's activities are certainly under the radar and its credibility will be on the line on the way it treats these test cases. Any attempt to deviate from unearthing graft will do little to uplift the government's image in the public eye.