Senate President, Abubakar Bukola Saraki, on Tuesday said the ongoing investigation and trial of former National Security Adviser, Sambo Dasuki, could have been prevented if members of the National Assembly were alive to their oversight responsibility.
Saraki added that things would have been done differently in the country if only members of the National Assembly had taken their oversight functions conscientiously.
The Senate President, who spoke while summing up contributions on a motion on abandoned projects in the country, noted that the rot being uncovered in the office of the former NSA would have been exposed if members of the National Assembly did not shy away from their oversight functions.
He said the mind boggling revelations coming from the ONSA had brought the oversight function of the National Assembly to question.
He sought immediate change of attitude by Senate committees on their oversight functions.
Saraki said, “Distinguished colleagues, I want to thank you very much for your contributions that we have all added today but really, distinguished colleagues, I think we have shied away today from one of the main reasons (for abandoned projects) because some of the projects are duly appropriated in the budget and embarked upon by various ministries and agencies.
“The motion whether we like it or not is a partial indictment on us in the National Assembly and we must accept that because these projects that we are talking about under Section 88 of the Constitution, 1(a) (b) is our responsibility to oversight these projects to ensure they are not abandoned and to ensure that the funds appropriated are properly used.
“So distinguished colleagues, I want us in this 8th Senate to ensure that our committees carry out proper oversight and we the leadership, we are going to ensure that we too find a way to make sure that committees do their work on oversight because truly that is the bottom line to this.”
Lawyers have hailed the Federal Government for resorting to the Public Procurement Act (PPA) in the trial of some individuals accused of diverting funds meant for arms procurement under the President Goodluck Jonathan administration. They argue that the application of the law will strengthen it. Eric Ikhilae reports
• Dasuki
The fight against corruption has truly begun. Those who have cases to asnwer are being hauled to court. So far, charges have been filed against former National Security Adviser (NSA), Sambo Dasuki; ex-Minister of State for Finance, Bashir Yuguda, former Sokoto State governor, Attahiru Dalhatu Bafarawa and his son, Sagir Attahiru, among others.
Emeritus Chairman of Daar Communications, Chief Raymond Dokpesi and his firm were charged under the Public Procurement Act (PPA).
Others were charged under the Penal Code. And, of the six counts contained in the charge against Dokpesi and his firm, four were brought under the PPA. Offences under the Act carry a minimum of five and maximum of 10 years with no option of fine.
• Dokpesi
In count one, Dokpesi and his company were accused of conducting “procurement fraud by means of fraudulent and corrupt act, to wit: receipt of payment into the account of Daar Investment and Holding Company Limited with First Bank of Nigeria Plc, of public funds in the sum of N2,120,000,000 from the account of the office of National Security Adviser with the Central Bank of Nigeria for the funding of media activities for the 2015 presidential election for the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP),” an offence contrary to Section 58(4)(b) of the PPA and punishable under 58(6) and (7) of the Act.
The PPA
The PPA serves a response by the Federal Government to the clamour for transparency in government’s procurement process. Steps leading to the birth of the law in 2007 began in 1999 when the former President Olusegun Obasanjo inaugurated the Country Procurement Assessment field work.
• Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami
The outcome of the field work produced the Country Procurement Assessment Report (CPAR), which recommended the establishment of Bureau of Price Monitoring and Intelligence Unit (BMPIU), among others, to address the shortcomings of the observed inadequacies in the country’s public procurement process.
But the Federal Government went further by initiating move to institutionalise the operations of the BMPIU. It evolved a Bill to that effect – the Public Procurement Bill – which it sent to the National Assembly in 2003/2004. The National Assembly passed it into Law on May 31, 2007 and was subsequently signed into law on June 4, 2007, by late President Umaru Yar’Adua.
The Act requires public institutions and other relevant parties to ensure that all public procurements are conducted in a manner that is transparent, timely and equitable and based on the guidelines, thresholds and standards.
The National Council on Public Procurement (NCPP), headed by the Minister of Finance, and which supervises the Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP), which oversees the procurement activities of all the procuring entities (and indirectly, oversees all public procurement affected by the provisions of the Procurement Act) and is responsible for the issuance of procurement “Certificates of No Objection.”
A “Certificate of No Objection” is the document that confirms that due process was followed in the conduct of a procurement process and authorises the procuring entity to enter into the relevant contract.
Before PPA, public procurement in the country was haphazardly handled based on the Treasury Circulars of 1958, which provided only guidelines on public expenditure management.
The PPA, as enacted by the National Assembly is only applicable to federal institutions. However, states like Edo, Delta and Rivers have taken steps to enact their own versions of the law while a few others are in the process of doing so.
What constitutes legitimate contract under the PPA
The procedure for the award of contract under the Act is explicitly captured in Section 16, Part 4.
Section 16(1) provides: Subject to any exemption allowed by this Act, all public procurement shall be conducted: (a) subject to the prior review thresholds as may from time to time be set by the Bureau pursuant to Section 7(1) (a)-(b); (b) based only on procurement plans supported by prior budgetary appropriations and no procurement proceedings shall be formalised until the procuring entity has ensured that funds are available to meet the obligations and subject to the threshold in the regulations made by the Bureau, has obtained a “Certificate of ‘ No Objection’ to Contract Award” from the Bureau; (c) by open competitive bidding ; (d ) in a manner which is transparent, timely, equitable for ensuring accountability and conformity with this Act and regulations deriving therefrom ; (e) with the aim of achieving value for money and fitness for purpose ; (f) in a manner which promotes competition, economy and efficiency; and (g) in accordance with the procedures and time-line laid down in this Act and as may be specified by the Bureau from time to time.
Punishment for infraction
Under the Act, any breach of its provisions constitutes an offence. And, punishment for offences relating to public procurement, the court with jurisdiction to try such offences, and who should prosecute offender are stipulated in Part 7, Section 58 of the Act.
In the case of a natural person, Section 58(1) states: “Any natural person not being a public officer who contravenes any provision of this Act commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a term of imprisonment not less than 5 calendar years but not exceeding 10 calendar years without an option.
In the case of a public officer, Section 58(5) states: “Any person who while carrying out his duties as an officer of the Bureau, or any procuring entity who contravenes any provision of this Act commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a cumulative punishment of:(a) a term of imprisonment of not less than 5 calendar years without any option of fine; and (b) summary dismissal from government services.
Where it is a company that violates provisions of the law, Section 58(6) provides: “Any legal person that contravenes any provision of this Act commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a cumulative penalty of: (a) debarment from all public procurements for a period not less than five calendar years; and (b) a fine equivalent to 25 per cent of the value of the procurement in issue.
Where a company is convicted, the law also provides punishment for its directors in Section 58(7) which states that: “Where any legal person shall be convicted pursuant to subsection (4) of this Section, every director of the company as listed on its records at the Corporate Affairs Commission shall be guilty of an offence and is liable on conviction to a term of imprisonment not less than three calendar years but not exceeding five calendar years without an option of fine.
Exceptional cases
However, the law, in Part 3, Section 15(2) provides for exception as it relates to procurements carried out under national security or defence. But, such exemption must be with the consent of the President.
Section 15(2) states: “The provisions of this Act shall not apply to the procurement of special goods; works and services involving national defence or national security unless the President’s express approval has been first sought and obtained.
Notable cases before now
Notable individuals, who have, before now, been subjected to trial under the law include former directors of the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) – Olabode George (ex-Chairman), Aminu Dabo (ex-Managing Director), Abdullahi Aminu Tafida, Oluwasegun Abidoye, Zanna Maidaribe and Sule Aliyu and former Director-General of the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA),Temisan Omatseye.
George and other directors of the NPA, who served between 2001 and 2003, were convicted and sentenced to two years’ imprisonment on October 26, 2009 by a Lagos High Court. The Court of Appeal, Lagos affirmed the trial court’s decision in its January 21, 2011 judgment.
But the Supreme Court, in a unanimous judgment by a five-man panel head by the now retired Justice John Afolabi Fabiyi, in a judgment delivered in December 2013, voided George’s and others’ conviction on the ground they were charged under a a law that was not in existence when the alleged offences were committed.
Omatseye, who was arraigned sometime in 2010, is being tried under the Act for alleged “contract rigging.” He is conducting his defence.
Experts said though no substantial success has been recorded in the prosecution of violators of the Act since its enactment in 2007, the decision by the new government to charge notable individuals under the Act will provide an opportunity to further test its workability.
Lawyers, including Dr. Abdulkair Lawan, Adekeke Abegunde and Jude Nwanchukwu of the Centre for Public Accountability (CPA) are of the view that it would be premature and prejudicial to begin to examine the chances of both the defendant and prosecution in the current cases.
Lawan said the success of the prosecution is dependent on the quality of evidence he presents before the court. He added that “barring no extraneous influences, the prosecution, with compelling evidence, should be able to wrap up these cases in record time.I wish them good luck.”
Abegunde said the PPA remains the only law guiding public procurement in the country, and trial for any perceived crime committed in relation to public procurement must be brought under the Act.
“We are not saying the law is perfect, having been enacted almost over eight years ago. But I think we should continue to apply it to enable us understand its shortcomings and move for amendment when necessary.
“I recall that public procurement practice in the country before the enactment of the PPA, was done unprofessionally, inefficiently and ineffectively as it was based on the Treasury Circulars of 1958, which provided only guidelines on public expenditure management.
“The guidelines of these circulars on public procurement practice were grossly inadequate and created rooms for malpractices and high level corruption in contract management,” Abegunde said.
Nwanchukwu noted that the defendants could only be successful by the strength of the defence they put up. He argued that there is hardly any law without its loopholes. He noted that the defence could explore these loopholes, where they exist, and puncture the case of the prosecution.
“I do not know the facts of these cases now, but if they are in relation with the arms contracts, which has to do with national security or defence, the defendants could rely on the provision of Section 15(2) of the PPA in their defence,” he said.
The Federal Government Tuesday filed charges against businessman and media proprietor, Raymond Dokpesi before the Federal high Court, Abuja in relation to his alleged receipt of about N2.1billion in the from the last administration from funds meant for the purchase of arms.
The Nation learnt that filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has six counts. It is marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/380/2015.
Dokpesi is charged along with his company – Daar Holding and Investment Limited.
They are accused of violating the Money Laundering Act, the EFCC Act and the Public Procurement Act. The charge is yet to be assigned to any judge for hearing.
Dokpesi is the second person to be charged among some highly placed Nigerians accused of involvement in the mismanagement funds meant for the purchase of military wares under the Goodluck Jonathan administration.
Already, a former National Security Adviser (NSA), Sambo Mohammed Dasuki is being tried before the Federal High Court, Abuja for illegal possession of firearms and money laundering.
Dokpsi, who is currently on bail from the EFCC, was last Friday ordered to be produced by Justice Gabriel Kolawole (also of the Federal High Court, Abuja)
The order followed an ex-parte application by Dokpesi, who claimed to have been unlawfully detained beyond 48 hours by the EFCC.
The judge, who heard Dokpesi’s lawyer, Mike Ozekhome (SAN) in chambers, ordered the EFCC to produce Dokpesi before his court on the next hearing date ofDecember 14.
Ozekhome, who told journalists what happened in the judge’s chambers, said the judge also ordered the EFCC to show cause why he should not grant Dokpesi’s prayer for unconditional or conditional bail.
Dokpesi had, in the application, prayed for an order compelling the respondent to produce the applicant who is presently in its custody or any other place of detention before this court on the date this application comes up for hearing.
He also sought an order admitting the applicant to bail on self recognisance or on such favourable and liberal terms as this court may deem fit to make in the circumstances of this case, pending the formal arraignment of the applicant before a court of law.
He hinged his prayers on the ground that no formal charge has been brought against him, over 48 hours after his detention.
The applicant said he went to honour a verbal invitation from officials of the EFCC on December 1 and had been detained since then after subjecting him to hours of “unprepared interrogation.”
He argued that the offences alleged against him “are ordinarily bailable.”
He promised not to jump bail, not to interfere with witnesses or the course of justice if any formal charge was filed against him.
Dokpesi said, with his social status, the court could grant him bail on liberal terms. Or on self recognisance as he has no criminal antecedents or record.
He promised to attend court if eventually he is formally arraigned.
In a supporting affidavit, the applicant said he was arrested over his inability to honour an invitation by the office of the National Security Adviser (NSA) inviting Daar Investment and Holding Limited (an arm of Daar Communications Ltd) “for discussion on the supply and services rendered to the Office of the NSA.”
He stated that while he was yet to perfect the bail granted him by the EFCC “on the most onerous,” it went before a Magistrate’s Court to procure an order to legitimise and further detain him.
Lagos lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN) has said that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) did not commit any illegality for detaining suspects arrested in connection with the $6 billion arms scandal.
Falana, in a statement titled, “$6 billion arms gate: suspects’ rights not violated” issued Sunday contended that “the detention of the suspects is in strict compliance with the rule of law”.
He was reacting to criticisms against the commission and the government that the detention of the suspects by the commission was an act of illegality.
The erudite lawyer drew the attention of the critics to sections 293-299 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 (ACJA) which stipulate that a suspect arrested for an offence which a magistrate has no jurisdiction to try, shall within a reasonable time, be brought before a magistrate court for remand.
He stated that “the order which shall be for a period not exceeding 14 days may be further extended provided that if the investigation is not concluded within 28 days the court may summon the appropriate authority to show cause why the suspect should not be unconditionally released.
“Suspects who are remanded in custody are at liberty to ask for bail or apply to the appropriate high court to secure the enforcement of their fundamental right to personal liberty. In view of the clear and unambiguous provisions of the law it is misleading to insist that a magistrate court lacks the power to grant the application filed by the EFCC for the detention of the criminal suspects.”
He recalled “last week, some of the principal suspects implicated in the probe of the $2.1 billion and N643 billion arms gate were nabbed by the Economic and Financial Commission. Pursuant to the ex parte orders validly issued by the courts the suspects have since been detained for the purpose of investigation. But in a desperate move designed to divert the attention of the Nigerian people and the international community from the grave allegations of reckless and criminal diversion of the public funds earmarked for arms procurement to prosecute the war on terror, some reactionary politicians have accused the Buhari administration of engaging in impunity for detaining the suspects beyond 48 hours without trial.
He also recalled that a senior lawyer had said that “a magistrate court has no power to issue a holding charge warrant.”
But Falana urged the Muhammadu Buhari administration to ignore the reckless campaign of calumny of certain people who have lost their sense of shame pointing out that as far as they are concerned the suspects should be left alone to enjoy their loot while soldiers are losing their precious lives due to lack of adequate weapons.
He rather counseled the federal government to ensure that all individuals and corporate bodies indicted in the criminal diversion of public funds are made to face the full wrath of the law.
“The anti graft agencies should disregard the cheap blackmail, speed up the investigation and charge all indicted suspects to court while the courts are enjoined to conduct the trial of the suspects under the ACJA which requires that the trials be conducted day by day. The federal government should open a dedicated account to warehouse the recovered loot with a view to using the fund to provide equipment for the armed forces, create jobs for our army of unemployed graduates and fix our dilapidated public schools, hospital and roads.
“However, it is pertinent to correct the error in respect of the extent of the amount of money involved in the arms gate. The well publicized $2.1 billion is the foreign component of the loot. The actual amount stolen is $2.1 billion and N643 billion. The total missing fund is $6 billion.
“In the light of the earth-shaking and ear-aching revelations oozing out of the EFCC to the effect that a handful of individuals cornered and shared the huge fund earmarked for the procurement of military hardware to prosecute the war on terror all the convicted military officers and soldiers who have been convicted including the 70 who were sentenced to death should be released forthwith.
“As I have repeatedly maintained the soldiers were committed and sentenced to death for asking for weapons to fight the terrorists. They were ordered to fight with unserviceable equipment on the ground that there was no money to purchase new weapons. In the process, the well-equipped insurgents routed and massacre thousands of the country’s ill-equipped soldiers due to the diversion of the fund set aside to purchase equipment. The suspects must bear full responsibility for committing such grave crimes against humanity.
“Consequently, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, 2011 we have applied for a certified true copy of the report of the arms procurement panel with a view to ensuring that some of the suspects are prosecuted by the Special Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity,” he added.
The Federal Government on Thursday urged the Federal High Court, Abuja to stay execution of its earlier order granted to former National Security Adviser, Sambo Dasuki, to travel abroad for medical treatment.
Counsel to federal government, Mr Oladipo Okpeseyi (SAN), made the oral application at the resumed hearing of the case before Justice Adeniyi Ademola.
Okpeseyi told the court that the federal government had filed a notice of appeal at the Court of Appeal, Abuja against the ruling of the court.
He said the prosecution filed the motion pursuant to section 169 of the Administration of Criminal Justice (ACJ) Act 2015.
The lawyer also disclosed that the prosecution had filed another motion before the court seeking to revoke the bail earlier granted to Dasuki.
Dasuki, who is facing charges of money laundering and illegal possession of firearms, had been granted bail on self- recognition.
Akposeyi said they were seeking the revocation of the bail to enable the prosecution to conclude investigation into the alleged crime.
The lawyer said if the defendant was kept in the custody of the Department of State Services (DSS), he would assist in the investigation process.
Akposeyi also claimed that there was never a time the prosecution flouted the court’s order as it was claimed by the defense counsel.
The defense counsel, Mr. Ahmed Raji (SAN), opposed the oral application.
He alleged that the prosecution flouted the order of the court by laying siege on his client’s residence and preventing him from travelling as ordered by the court.
Raji also said the case was slated for hearing of the application brought by the prosecution seeking the revocation of the defendants’ bail.
Justice Adeniyi Ademola adjourned the case to Dec. 8 for continuation of hearing.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on Wednesday began the grilling of a former National Security Adviser, Mr. Sambo Dasuki , following his transfer by the Department of State Security Service(DSS).
There were indications that the anti-graft commission may extend its probe to the seizure of $9million cash-for-arms by South Africa and quiz all those involved in the botched deal.
An Israeli suspect implicated in the deal was said to have bolted away after throwing a lavish party at his Wuse residence.
But there was no respite for ex-Governor Attahiru Bafarawa, High Chief Raymond Dokpesi and ex-Minister Bashir Yuguda who were battling for bail on Wednesday.
The Nation learnt that the EFCC was planning to arraign some of the suspects in court to enable the agency keep more than 22 suspects being interrogated in custody.
The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has described the arrest of Daar Communications Emeritus chairman Raymond Dokpesi as persecution.
In a statement by its National Publicity Secretary Olisa Metuh, the opposition party said:
“While the PDP is not against the war against corruption, we insist that the crusade must be carried out within the limits of the law and not as a guise to persecute and torture opposition elements in the country.
“Our fear is that with the pronouncement of guilt even without being given the opportunity within his rights as a citizen to state his own side of the story, the President Buhari-led government is sidestepping the laws to ensure that Chief Dokpesi does not get justice in the court, a plot which they want to extend to other PDP leaders.
“The PDP therefore demands an open and public trial of all those arrested so that all issues and charges against them as well as their defence therein would also be in the public domain.
“We demand a proper investigation and lawful prosecution instead of the reprehensible resort to outright political persecution, which can only have a place in a military regime.
“We also note that this development may not be unconnected with the planned onslaught against the media, following its commitment in holding this dictatorial regime accountable since it took office.
“We call on the international community and rights bodies worldwide to note the growing impunity and gross violation of human rights by the President Muhammadu Buhari-led government tailored to decimate the opposition and cow the media in Nigeria.”
Senate President, Abubakar Bukola Saraki, on Tuesday dissociated himself from the N60billion arms deal involving the immediate past National Security Adviser, Col. Sambo Dasuki (rtd).
Saraki in a statement issued by his Special Adviser (Media and Publicity), Mr. Yusuph Olaniyonu, said that contrary to report published on an online medium, SaharaReporters, he never had anything to do with purchase of security equipment.
The Senate President noted that in his entire political career he never served in any committee or body which had any link with defence or national security.
It said: “As a member of the Seventh Senate, Dr. Saraki was not a member of any of the committees with oversight function on the Ministry of Defence or the intelligence and national security apparatus.
“If he was tagged the leader of the opposition to the Jonathan administration, how then will he be privy to arms purchases and have the influence to blackmail any government agency or institution over the release of funds.”
After a month siege and legal fireworks, the Department of State Security Service (DSS) on Tuesday arrested a former National Security Adviser, Mr. Sambo Dasuki for interrogation on the $2b arms deals.
Dasuki is expected to be handed over to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) after relevant security checks by the DSS.
The EFCC also intensified the ongoing probe of the arms deals by arresting ex-Governor Attahiru Bafarawa and the Emeritus Chairman of Africa Independent Television (AIT), High Chief Raymond Dokpesi.
While Dokpesi was picked up for allegedly collecting N2.1billion from the Office of the NSA, Bafarawa hauled N100million cash at a go.
The EFCC has however launched manhunt for a former National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Mohammed Haliru Bello, in connection with some diverted arms cash.
But at time of filing this report, one of the suspects in EFCC custody has refunded N200million.
He also pleaded for bail to source about N1billion credited to him as diverted funds.
The Department of State Security (DSS) has arrested a former National Security Adviser, Mr. Sambo Dasuki.
The DSS operatives whisked Dasuki away to its headquarters early Tuesday morning for interrogation in connection with $2billion arms deals.
The ex-NSA’s arrest came barely 14 hours after a former Minister of State for Finance, Bashir Yuguda and 20 others were picked up by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in connection with the arms deal.
Dasuki’s arrest ended a month-long siege and legal ding-dong between him and the DSS.
