Corruption and international organization funding: the Teodoro Obiang case

Propriety of International Organizations Instituting Awards or Prizes Funded by Corrupt Dictators Like Theodoro Obriang of Guinea Equatorial

It defies convention that, in this modern era, powerful and autocratic dictators come into power and cling on to their seats with military backings and continue to rule their countries without any legal impediments. Their wish is the rule of the law in their countries, and many have been accused of creating Auschwitz like camps, torturing their opponents into submission, and some say there are those who even indulge in cannibalism to seek black power supposedly to enhance their staying power and for protection against attempts on their lives.

One such dictator who ideally fits all the description enumerated above and has been a continuous ruler of his country for the past 32 years is Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, dictator and president of Equatorial Guinea who came into power in a bloody coup in 1979 after assassinating the then homicidal president, and his uncle Macias Nguema. Teodoro Obiang was at that time the director of the national guard of Equatorial Guinea and used his position of power to betray and assassinate his uncle. As late as in January 2010, his henchmen have been accused of kidnapping four Guniean's from the Repulic of Benin, torturing them and forcing them to confess to plotting the assassination of the president, after which they were summarily executed by a Kangaroo Court (Joshua, 2011).

The recent findings of fossil fuels such natural gas, and oil has boosted the economy by $3 billion a year, and the western countries are playing fiddle with the president for oil concessions, to offset the unpredictability of the middle east oil scenario (Joshua, 2011). A large part of the oil wealth is slated to vet the hungry foreign accounts of the president and his close kin. Forest's clearing and felling of prime timber have been accorded to the president's son Teodorin Obiang, who has now been accused of ordering a $380 million yacht from a German yacht maker (Robet, 2011).

In the wake of the foregoing facts and conjectures, another controversy has been stirred up by the world watchers in the form of a funding of $3 million given to the Unesco by President Obiang for the institution of a UNESCO life science's award in his name. The question now is whether contributions from such vile dictators who are gobbling up their country's economy to fill their own pockets, should be accepted by the unesco to give away awards in their name. Several factors contribute to prevent such an award by unesco, who themselves seem to be divided, currently in favor of issuing the award, but by the name of the country and not the president (Tutu et al., 2012).

1) Equatorial Guinea under President Teodoro Obiang has a very dismal and poor track record on human rights issues.

2) The Unesco Executive Board is of the opinion that the President has put himself above the country.

3) Criminal Investigations are reported by the United States into the large transfer of funds through Banks like Wachovia, UBS and Bank of America, allowing Teodorin to funnel over $100 million to the U.S. In record time. Earlier Riggs Bank in Washington DC was indicted on unscrupulously helping dictators like Obiang to shfit their money abroad and buy Palatial mansions in the U.S. with this money.

4) Global Organizations like Global Witness have produced astounding proof of a nexus between corrupt dictators and politicians worldwide with errant and unscrupulous banks, who will stop at nothing for massive profits. Even renowned banks like HSBC, Citibank, and Barclays, have been reported to have transacted with the world's most corrupt regimes like Equatorial Guinea, Charles Taulor's Liberia and Turkmenistan not to speak of the 100s more who are indulging flagrantly in such clandestine business (Andrea, n.d.). This kind of country bashing and money laundering by corrupt dictators can be stopped only if the countries concerned, strictly warn their banks against such transparently fraudulent transactions.