The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Budget padding

  • BUDGET PADDING: These our arrogant legislators

    BUDGET PADDING: These our arrogant legislators

    If the Speaker’s role in all this was reprehensible, that of the Whip, Ado Doguwa, was not only off putting, it was so tear inducing you begin to ask yourself how Nigeria came to this sorry pass.

    Last time around, it was the crudity of the 8th Senate we showcased on these pages. When that happened, little did we realise we were soon going to have the mother of all insults from the lower chamber. But listen to any of these our so-called representatives/senators speak, no talk down to us, and you would think they own us – so ‘Trumpian’, you would feel like puking. Such has been the disdain with which the leadership of the House has treated Nigerians these past two weeks. You would have thought it was shameful enough to be caught attempting to steal from the public coffers, but no, not with our current National Assembly members.

    I had first noticed their condescending put down when, in responding to questions arising from this selfsame shameful budget padding, long before Nigerians came to know its full extent, Abdulmumin Jibrin had said things that were so repulsive I couldn’t help writing about it when I quoted him here as saying: “It is true that there are projects allocated to my constituency just like other members did. Just because I’m the chairman of the appropriation committee, my constituents should not get projects? Are my constituents not Nigerians? Every member has one project or the other in his constituency, so I don’t think I did anything wrong by having some projects in my constituency.”

    You would hardly believe that these do-gooders’ projects for their beloved constituencies were such mundane things as tricycles, town halls, classrooms; solar street lights, rehabilitation and construction of roads in Kiru/Bebeji, pedestrian bridges, and now we have been told of bore holes for the Speaker’s farm. Of the four against whom Jibrin alleged fraudulent dealings – Speaker Dogara, Chief Whip Alhassan Ado Doguwa, Minority Leader Leo Ogor and Deputy Speaker Yusuf Lasun, the first two had taken time off to poke their fingers on our faces.  As if it was not insulting enough that on the very grounds of the Presidential Villa, Dogara had come out from a meeting with the president posing, and grandstanding, telling Nigerians there is nothing like padding and sending journalists on errand to begin researching the word, he has since returned to lecture us all. ‘We cannot be tried,’ he declared magisterially. It was at the Civil Society Dialogue Session on one year of legislooting, sorry, legislative agenda organised by the Policy and Legal Advocacy Centre, Abuja, that he told Nigerians that “no member of the  National Assembly can be investigated or charged to court for performing his constitutional responsibility of law making including passing the budget.” According to him, only the legislature has powers to scrutinise the revenue and expenditure estimates submitted by the president. He then went on to tell us about how Section 80(4) of the 1999 constitution further reinforces that.

    Reading through Speaker Dogara’s submission and similar ones by his colleagues, you have a feeling these people are deficient in the Use of English. As Dr Tunji Abayomi once taught the Chairman of the House Committee on Publicity, where in Dogara’s above submission is the word ‘add’? By his own words, the legislature can only SCRUTINISE the president’s budget estimates.  According to Abayomi, preparing that budget estimate is an EXECUTIVE function, never that of the legislature. Indeed, he went further to explain that it is solely in the case of passing the budget that the constitution makes very specific provisions as to who does what. And it stands to reason that a body that has the constitutional duty of passing the budget can NEVER have that of MAKING (Preparing) it. By that token, they CANNOT add any new item of expenditure.  Also the Speaker couldn’t have known what he was saying when he declared as follows: “On constituency projects, it is the only means through which lawmakers can attract federal projects to their constituents. This is necessary because the process of selecting constituency projects lacks integrity as it is always lopsided against most federal constituencies.”

    Trying to further justify this bunkum, he added: “If you come from a constituency like mine for instance, right now, we don’t have a permanent secretary anywhere, we don’t have a director anywhere, so if you look at the 2016 Budget, if you were to go as proposed by the executive, there is no single federal funded borehole, even if it is N50, there is no N50 meant for any project in my three local governments. Why? Because I don’t have anybody where they are preparing, SHARING (emphasis mine) or making allocation.” Just look at those bellyaching about injustice. Even if all he said about his constituency were true, is it remotely possible that only his constituency is in that position in Nigeria? Who are those other Speakers who will conjure bore holes for their farmsteads? Why does he think the constitution prescribes a minimum of one minister from each state? And, anyway, is he or any of his colleagues allowed by the constitution to take over the functions of the executive? I sincerely hope that in no distant date, a ‘Mr Khizr Khan’ would pull off, from his inner pocket, a small version of the Nigerian constitution and gift it to these mostly absentee legislators so they can read, know and internalise the functions prescribed for them by that grundnorm. And by the way, can somebody please tell Mr. Speaker that the only tidy way to get a project sited in his constituency is to liaise with, and lobby the appropriate department in the executive. Also, if what they are quarreling with is the word padding, Nigerians will then change their offence to that of not only sexing up, but egregiously forging the president’s budget estimates which forged document they subsequently passed as the Appropriation Law.

    If the Speaker’s role in all this was reprehensible, that of the Whip, Ado Doguwa, was not only off putting, it was so tear inducing you begin to ask yourself how Nigeria came to this sorry pass. I had tuned on to Channel’s TV only to see this arrogant, small man, in some outlandish Babariga, literally telling Nigerians to go to hell. Having gone through their usual routine of saying there is nothing like padding the budget, he now began to regale Nigerians with how he had been a legislator for 24 years – a period which he thinks, no actually said, entitled him to just about anything in the House, though this time around, he got only a paltry N1.8Billion locked up for him and his constituency. So damn nauseating!

    I think all these things should actually accelerate the move towards restructuring in Nigeria even though I verily believe that President Buhari’s immediate, urgent duty now, and into the next one year, is to fix the Nigerian economy which is currently hobbled beyond description. As I said on these pages last Sunday, things are now so bad with oil rich Venezuela that far beyond the crippling hunger and crime, relatives can no longer claim the corpses of dead relations from the morgue. Their only sin, like ours, was the failure to diversify their economy when petro dollars were gushing in and former President Chavez even arrogantly offered to give Americans petrol free. We have had enough of these legislators that at restructuring, we just must adopt a single chamber legislature and hope to be able to manage/handle even that.

     

    ADIEU UNCLE LAI

    The minute I turned to the back page of The Nation of Thursday, August 11, 2011, I threw it off like it was a red hot iron.  Why? Ambassador Dapo Fafowora was by his tribute breaking, for me, the translation into glory of my darling egbon, the dapper, quintessential Bankole Olayiwola Bolodeoku, about whom I am certain, God willing, to soon pay a full-throttled tribute on these pages. Egbon was absolutely the non pareil, and for now, I am far too short of words to write about a man so unique. Ambassador Fafowora wrote about his unstinting love for his family, Sis Bimbola and the children. But what the highly regarded diplomat failed to add was that Uncle Lai simply loved all. With him, there was neither Jew nor Gentile. He loved and treated me like his own uterine brother. The good Lord will sure rest him in perpetuity. My condolences to the family he left behind.

    The good Lord will uphold you all. Amen.

  • Budget padding sails into definitional labyrinth

    Budget padding sails into definitional labyrinth

    ABDULMUMIN Jibrin, the bitter and combative House of Representatives member from Kano State, has continued his unrelenting attack on 13 of his colleagues, including Speaker Yakubu Dogara, whom he accused of budget padding and other crimes. For Hon Jibrin, the definition of the crime in question is simple. The 13 members put pressure on him when he was Chairman of the Appropriation Committee, to surreptitiously allocate funds to certain projects particularly in their constituencies. He resisted the pressures as much as he could, he said, but was eventually sacked because he thought the exercise excessive, unlawful and indefensible, and loudly remonstrated against the pracice. Since the scandal broke, a scandal some House members have described as a storm in a teacup, Hon Jibrin has shed more light on what he terms an unlawful exercise and provided documents and petitions to virtually all the law enforcement agencies in the country.

    Hon Dogara, however, argues that there is no crime called budget padding. The legislature is empowered by law to examine the revenue and expenditure estimates submitted by the government, and where necessary reduce or add to them. He has relied on a very narrow technical definition of budgeting, and dares anyone to contradict him. Hear Hon Dogara: “The Constitution talks about the estimates of revenue and expenditure to be prepared and laid before the National Assembly. The Constitution does not mention the word budget. And the reason is very simple. Budget is a law. Going by the very pedestrian understanding of law, which even a part one Law student can tell, is that the functions of government is such that the legislature makes the law, the executive implements, and the judiciary interprets the law.

    “The budget being a law, therefore, means it is only the parliament that can make it because it is a law. And I challenge all of us members of the media and civil society organisations  (CSOs) to look at our law and tell me where it is written that the president can make a budget. What I am saying is further reinforced by Section 80(4) of the Constitution which says that no money shall be withdrawn from the Consolidated Revenue Fund or any other fund of the federation except in the manner prescribed by the National Assembly. I want this thing to sink so that we can understand it from here and perhaps it may change the ongoing discourse.

    “If you say the National Assembly doesn’t have the powers to tinker with the budget; that we just pass it. When it is prepared and laid we turn it into a bill. If it is a bill how do other bills make progression in the parliament in order to become law?…The budget is a law and nobody can object to the fact that only the legislature can make law, so it is only the parliament that can conclude it.”  Hon Dogara then concludes that no lawmaker can be investigated or prosecuted for a crime such as budget padding, which he argues does not exist.

    Former speaker Ghali Umar Na’Abba appears to toe the same Speaker Dogara line of argument. Hear him waffling about padding: “Well, it all depends from what angle one is looking at it. The responsibility for appropriation in this country belongs to the National Assembly, So, there is no way the National Assembly can vote anything and it will be called padding. If you are talking about padding, which I believe is generally accepted to be illegal, it must be a situation whereby certain members of the National Assembly will add certain items of expenditure behind their colleagues. If any item of expenditure is added behind the backs of other members, then that item can be said to be illegal and it can be called padding.”

    In sum, there are about four definitions of budget padding mesmerising everyone out there. One, that there is nothing like padding. Hon Dogara and his co-accused subscribe to this definition. Two, that if it is done surreptitiously behind the backs of fellow lawmakers, then it becomes padding. Otherwise, it is not an offence. In this group is former Speaker Na’Abba. Three, that it is padding when funds are allocated unlawfully and specifically by essentially presiding officers who have now been described as a camorra. Here Hon Jibrin stands regally. But what if the revised estimates, whether openly done or covertly done, were nonetheless passed by the House in plenary? And, four, that any expenditure not included in the estimates by the executive could not be added by the legislature, and certainly not secretly. Here the public stands. But what if the executive saw the additions and nonetheless assents? And why couldn’t legislators assume the same responsibility in adding to the estimates as they do subtracting from the estimates?

    Obviously, the country is unnerved by a definitional crisis. It will not be easily resolved. In the implausible opinion of Hon Dogara, the law enforcement agencies, who in responding to the petitions of Hon Jibrin have begun investigations, will meet a brick wall sooner rather than later. What is not in doubt, however, is that quite some secrecy accompanied the reworking of the estimates submitted by the executive, and either because of collusion or carelessness, the altered figures were passed by the lawmakers in plenary, up to the Senate which has appeared to maintain a deafening silence, and assented to by an executive wearied by public grumblings. If the legislature thinks it is not confronted by a crime in the ordinary and open meaning of the word ‘padding’, it nevertheless faces a moral quandary regardless of the lessons lawmakers have presumably learnt from the fiasco. Overall, neither the legislature nor the ruling APC can pretend that the controversy can be wished away or resolved as long as those who voted them into office remain disgruntled and befuddled.

  • Budget padding: Jibrin sues Dogara, principal officers

    Budget padding: Jibrin sues Dogara, principal officers

    Former Chairman, Appropriation Committee, House of Representatives, Abdulmumin Jibrin, has sued the Speaker, Yakubu Dogara, his Deputy, Yusuf Lasun, and other principal officers of the lower chamber over an alleged plan to suspend him.

    In the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/595/2016, commenced by way of writ of summons and filed at the Federal High Court, Abuja on August 9, 2016, Jibrin  seeks principally to restrain the House of Representatives and its principal officers from giving effect to their alleged plot to suspend him as member of the House.

    Jibrin, an All Progressives Congress (APC) legislator representing Kiru/Bebeji Federal Constituency of Kano State, has also filed an ex-parte motion seeking, among others, an other restraining the defendants from taking steps to suspend him pending the determination of the substantive suit.

    Listed as defendants in the suit are: The House of Representatives, the Clerk of the House of Representatives, Yakubu Dogara, Yusuf Lasun, Alhassan Ado Doguwa, Leo Ogor, Herman Hembe, Umar Mohammed Bago, Zakari Mohammed, Chike Okafor, Dan Asuquo, Jagaba Adms, Haliru Jika and Uzoma Abonta.

    Jibrin, in the substantive suit, seeks a declaration that the defendants are bound to comply with the provisions of Sections 49, 54, 56 and 60 of the 1999 Constitution and the Standing Orders of the House of Reps, regulating its sitting, procedure and other matters in the conduct of its legislative functions as provided in the Constitution and the Standing Orders made pursuant to the Constitution.

    He also wants the court to make a declaration that the decision taken by the defendants at a meeting held on August 3, 2016 to suspend the plaintiff as a member of the House of Reps without granting him the right to fair hearing is unlawful.

    The plaintiff stated, in a supporting affidavit, that Immediately the 3rd to 14 defendants (Dogara and other principal officers)  got wind of the petitions presented against them by the plaintiff to the Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission (ICPC), Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) and others, they held a meeting on August 3, 2016, where they allegedly resolved to suspend him immediately as member of the House of Reps.

    He said that the defendants also agreed to urgently reconvene the House from its current recess “with a desperate agenda to suspend the plaintiff contrary to the Rules of the House”.

    “That one of such meetings was held by the 3rd to 14 defendants at the residence of the 3rd defendant (Dogara) in Apo, Abuja on August 3, 2016.

    “If the reliefs of the plaintiff are not granted, the plaintiff will be suspended as a member of the House of Reps, and this will greatly prejudice him and thousands of his constituents, who rely on him to afford them their due representations in the Federal Legislature,” Jibrin said.

    It could not be confirmed when filing this story yesterday whether any proceedings had been conducted in court in relation to the motion ex-parte or whether a date had been set for hearing by the court’s current vacation judge, Justice Okon Abang.

  • Budget padding: Jibrin sues Dogara, others

    The former Chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Appropriation, Abdulmumin Jibrin, has sued the Speaker of the House, Yakubu Dogara, his deputy, Yusuf Lasun and other principal officers of the lower chamber over an alleged plan to suspend him.

    In the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/595/2016, which commenced by way of writ of summons and filed at the Federal High Court, Abuja, August 9, Jibrin asked the court to restrain the House of Representatives and its principal officers from suspending him as member of the House.

    Jibrin, an All Progressives Congress (APC) legislator representing Kiru/Bebeji Federal Constituency of Kano State, also filed an ex-parte motion, seeking among others, an order restraining the defendants from taking steps to suspend him pending the determination of the substantive suit.

    Listed as defendants in the suit are – The House of Representatives, the Clerk of the House of Representatives, Dogara, Lasun, Alhassan Ado Doguwa, Leo Ogor, Herman Hembe, Umar Mohammed Bago, Zakari Mohammed, Chike Okafor, Dan Asuquo, Jagaba Adams, Haliru Jika and Uzoma Abonta.

     

  • Budget padding: We won’t sanction Dogara, Jubrin – APC

    Budget padding: We won’t sanction Dogara, Jubrin – APC

    The All Progressives Congress (APC) has ruled out the possibility of sanctioning the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Yakubu Dogara and the former Chairman of the House Committee on Appropriation, Abdulmuminin Jibrin over allegations of budget padding.

    The APC  Deputy National Chairman (North), Senator Lawal Shuaibu, told journalists in Abuja that although the party constitution empowers the party to take certain steps on the matter, it will not play the role of a law enforcement agency.

    He said, “Article 7 subsection 5 of APC Constitution gives us the power to do certain things. So, you see, what we are doing is the right thing. But only we don’t want that in the public gallery.”

    While ruling out the possibility of imposing sanction on the feuding duo, Shuaibu added, “what is padding? The party does not sanction anybody on that. What is of concern to us is where any member contravenes the party constitution in his conduct.

    “That is why I refer you to Article 7, subsection 5 of our party constitution. We are not a law enforcement organisation. We don’t enforce law. We only ensure that the constitution is complied with. All members of the party are answerable to the party and answerable to their constituency.

    “The two members that are subjected to this are elected or appointed members of the party including those that are holding public office. So, you expect the party to sit down and watch. No. We have to do our work. So, the question of sweeping anything under the carpet does not arise at all. But we don’t want to do it in the market place, but at the party secretariat.”

  • Rep faults colleagues’ defence of budget padding

    Rep faults colleagues’ defence of budget padding

    The member representing the Warri Federal Constituency in the Federal House of Representatives, Mr Daniel Reyenieju, has expressed surprise over attempt by those involved in the alleged padding of the 2016 budget to defend their role in the saga.

    Reyenieju, who was elected on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), described as disgusting the whole incident of alleged budget padding in the House of Representatives

    While decrying the “arrogance and insensitive to the feelings of other Nigerians” being displayed by those involved, the lawmaker urged those involved to come down to earth and be sobbered by the sordid revelations.

    He said: “I remain most pained when you hear those accused of being involved in the saga arrogantly telling the world of attracting to their respective constituencies projects worth over a billion Naira.

    “Yet, at the same time (they are) not honorable enough to further give information on what their colleagues in the House that are outside the coterie of the leadership hierarchy got as constituency projects’.

    Speaking to our correspondent yesterday on telephone from Abuja, he noted that this incident even though painful by virtue of the fact that it has brought the House into disrepute given the dominant public opinion, added that “it is no doubt a watershed by virtue of the fact that the public has now become aware of certain realities particular how some colleagues got meagre allocation to their constituencies.

    He lamented that some of his colleague could take undue advantage of their leadership positions to the disadvantage of the majority of members, as it is not possible for all members to be in the leadership cadre.

    Reyenieju said: “We individually represent different constituencies, and constituents expect each of us to attract projects to the different constituencies we respectively represent.

    “Which member will be happy to tell her/his constituents (for example) that a colleague got over a billion of Naira worth of constituency projects, while you can only attract projects worth few scores of millions of Naira to your constituency.”

    Reyenieju added that if a Federal Constituency like the Warri Federal Constituency has no federal minister, and even a permanent secretary/director at the federal level, such constituencies are hardly captured in the federal budget.

  • We are elected to pad budget – Lawmaker

    The Chairman House of Representative Committee on Legislative Compliance, Abiodun Olasupo has insisted that ‘budget padding’ remains a constitutional responsibility of the legislative arm of government and as such the House of Representatives did not err in the current ‘budget padding’ controversy.

    Olasupo, representing Iseyin/Itesiwaju/Kajola/ Iwajowa federal constituency stated this during the inspection of some his zonal intervention projects and federal government projects within his constituency on Wednesday in Oke-Ogun area of Oyo State.

    ‎He said Sections 80 and 81 the Nigeria constitution,guarantees the lawmakers the Powers to alter the Budget Proposals‎.

    The lawmaker argued that budgets presented by the executive arm of government do not often reflect true federal character hence the need for ‘padding’‎.

    ‎”If you look at the Nigeria Constitution, what Honourable AbdulMuminin Jibrin refer to as padding is tantamount to what the constitution defines as the function of a member of House of Representative because the constitution guarantees the three major function of making law, appropriation, and over sight.

    “In appropriation it is either for us to add, subtract or change and what Hon Jibrin has been trying to say is that we are changing, inserting and adding, so if that is what he calls padding then that is what the constitution expects the house of representative to do.

    “In my own opinion been an active member during the budget defence, I was involved in the budgeting system of up to six ministries, I participated in FERMA, NAVY, health institutions, governmental agencies and a whole lot of them. The entire budgeting system make it possible that if you are elected as a member of national assembly and you are not ready to do what Muminin Jibrin calls padding then you are a failure, because basically the budget that is been brought to the national assembly does not reflect the principle of federal character as guaranteed by the constitution.” he said

    ‎Olasupo said all projects and employments from the executive should be done in a way that it reflects all parts of Nigeria, adding that:” but what do we get in the budget, you will see a disapprotionate distribution of projects and basically if you look at it reflects mostly on where the minister is coming from since it is the executive that brings in the budget.”

    ‎The lawmaker went further that:” When the executive are bringing the budget they are not considering my constituency, so they will bring a budget to me and I am expected to approve it, and if it doesn’t have the interest of my constituency you want me to keep quite, no I won’t, what I will also do is to insert what will favour the people of my constituency which is what Jibrin calls padding.

    “I am not saying somebody is wrong or right but I do not see what is bad in attracting projects to my constituency. For the first time in the history of this country a budget presented by the executive was reduced when a president personally presented the budget to the national assembly personally. It means that we are shifting away from impunity, and corruption that has characterised the government of the past.”

    ‎Olasupo noted that the legislature have only had an unhindered experience of 16 years when compared with the executive, appealing to Nigerians to be patient with the national assembly to get right all their lapses in no time.

  • Budget padding: EFCC writes Clerk, Perm Sec

    Budget padding: EFCC writes Clerk, Perm Sec

    Buhari not executing padded budget, says Minister Udoma

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has written the National Assembly Clerk, Mohammed Sani Omolori, and the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Budget and National Planning over the budget padding scandal, it was learnt yesterday.

    The EFCC, which yesterday began probing the scandal rocking the House of Representatives, asked Omolori and the Permanent Secretary to produce documents on the contracts awarded by the Assembly and the budget.

    At a Town hall meeting in Abuja, Minister of Budget and National Planning Udoma Udo Udoma said the government is not implementing a padded budget.

    In the August 3 letter, Omolori was asked to furnish the commission with the details of all contracts awarded and executed by the Assembly from June 2015 to date.

    The Permanent Secretary is to provide documents on the budget.

    For about four hours yesterday, EFCC grilled former House Committee on Appropriations Chairman Abdulmumin Jibrin, who blew the scandal open following his removal by Speaker Yakubu Dogara.

    Jibrin accused Dogara, Deputy Speaker Yusuff Lasun, Chief Whip Alhassan Ado Doguwa, Minority Leader Leo Ogor and nine others of padding the budget with N284 billion.

    The commission aslo received a petition demanding the probe of Jibrin and the Federal Commissioner, National Commission for Refugees, Migrants and Internally Displaced Persons(NCFRIM) for  10 contracts worth N418million, allegedly awarded to firms with links to  Jibrin.

    The EFCC said it would investigate the petition.

    In the letter to Omolori, EFCC demanded a “list of all contracts awarded by the Assembly from June 2015 to date.”

    The letter said the Assembly must “provide the beneficiaries of the contracts, the account details into which payments were made, the total amount already paid for each contract as well as the outstanding balances where applicable.”

    The EFCC asked the Permanent Secretary  to provide it with a “draft copy of the 2016 budget submitted to the National Assembly by President Muhammadu Buhari and the final copy returned to the President by the National Assembly.”

    A source in the commission said: “Although no timeline was indicated in the two letters, the Clerk  and the Permanent Secretary are expected to treat it with dispatch.

    “All these documents are vital to the ongoing investigation of all the petitions with us.” Jibrin, who arrived at the EFCC headquarters at about 1pm, had a four-hour session with a team raised to probe his petition.

    It was gathered that the session was meant to “interact with Jibrin to enable him provide more flesh to his allegations.”

    The EFCC source added: “We engaged Jibrin between 1pm and 5pm on the allegations in the petition he filed before this commission including those already in the public domain and the new ones presented to us.

    “The allegations include alleged insertions of N40billion projects into the 2016 Budget by the Speaker, padding of the budget with projects worth over N284billion and padding of the budget by some committee chairmen.”

    The source listed the new allegations as follows:

    • Duplication of contracts by Speaker Yakubu Dogara
    • Renting of Guest Houses for the Speaker  at very high rate
    • Receiving of self-rent by the Speaker and others at inflated cost when they have already got accommodation allowances.
    • Abuse of office and mismanagement of funds by House leadership.

    Udoma said the budget signed by the President was well scrutinised and passed the due process of appropriation at the Assembly before it was assented to in May.

    Responding to a question at the meeting, Udoma said: “We did not assent to a padded budget. The budget followed through the various stages of preparation and scrutiny and appropriation before it was signed into law.’’

    In the petition against Jibrin, the petitioner, the Anti-Corruption Unit of National Youth Council of Nigeria (NYCN), alleged that 10 contracts, amounting to the N418million, were awarded to firms with links to Jibrin.

    The unit claimed that the contracts were awarded on September 26, 2014 to five companies with three of the firms located in Suite A47 at EFAB Mall, Area 11 in Abuja.

    It alleged that one of the contracts was given to Eleku Construction Limited for “the supply of beans and millets to Kano State.”

    The petition said: “No specification of some of the contracts, no completion date, no certification. Efforts to trace some of the projects have been unsuccessful.

    “Jibrin was copied all the letters of the award of the contracts. No other member of the House from Kano State, no Senator from Kano State and the governor of the state was not copied.

    “We call for the investigation of the culpable of Jibrin and the Federal Commissioner, National Commission for Refugees, Migrants and Internally Displaced Persons (NCFRIM).”

    When contacted, the Head of Media and Publicity of EFCC, Mr. Wilson Uwujaren, said: “We have commenced investigation into all the petitions submitted to us.”

  • House a hub of systemic corruption – Jibrin

    House a hub of systemic corruption – Jibrin

    The former Chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations, Abdulmumin Jibrin, on Tuesday described the House as hub of systemic corruption.

    In a statement he personally signed, Jubrin gave further insight into why he was removed as appropriation committee chairman.

    He said, “Since the corrupt Speaker Yakubu Dogara made the public comment that padding is not an offense, the question on the lips of Nigerians is why then did the same Speaker said he ‘sacked’ me over padding allegations?

    “I have said it repeatedly and wish to restate that I did nothing wrong and I committed no offense. I did not abuse my office nor corruptly enrich myself in the five years I have been in the House.

    “The only reason why they wanted me out is my independent-mindedness, resistance to corruption and my refusal to ‘play ball’ on the gross abuse of office they institutionalized in the House. They simply wanted to have someone that can do their corrupt bidding. Now that I have exposed the fact that Speaker Dogara and the three others are the padders, padding is no longer an offense, Shame! Shame!! and shame!!!

    “As it stands today, these corrupt elements have infiltrated the House, making the institution a hub of systemic corruption. I repeat, there is massive individual and institutional corruption in the House of Representatives. And all Nigerians have a responsibility to avail themselves of this rare opportunity to flush out corruption in the House.

    “I have pledged my continuous support and assistance to the security and anti-corruption agencies. Let me also state that contrary to some myopic opinion that it would affect the institution of the House, it will rather free the institution of the grip of these corrupt vested interests, restore its integrity and shape it to become a pride to Nigerians home and abroad.”

     

  • We are not aware of budget padding – Presidency

    We are not aware of budget padding – Presidency

    The budget padding controversy took a different turn on Tuesday as the Presidency denied knowledge of any padding in the budget presented to the President for his ascent.
    Senior Special Assistant to the President on National Assembly Matters (Senate), Senator Ita Enang and his counterpart in the House of Representatives, Hon. Ismail Kawu told newsmen in Abuja that the budget signed by the President which is being implemented was not a padded budget.
    Senator Enang, who spoke after over three hours meeting with the national leadership of the All Progressives Congress (APC) said in legislative palace, there was nothing like budget padding, pointing out that when the a budget is presented to the National Assembly, it is expected that they deliberate and pass it as they deem fit.
    The former Chairman of the House committee on Appropriation, Abdulmumini Jubrin, had accused Speaker Yakubu Dogara, his deputy and two other principal officers of being the brain behind the budget padding.
    However, while the controversy rages on, a group lawmakers which identified itself as Transparency Group had accused the executive arm of government of not free from the blame either on the issue.
    Enang however, refused to give details of their meeting with the APC leadership, pointing out that they have all been asked not to make further public comment on the issue as the party was handling it as a family affair.
    He said: “I am here on the invitation of the leadership of the APC with my colleague to bring answers to issues raised by the party on the 2016 Appropriation and we have been with the party for a little over three hours. We have given explanations to them on every issue and told them that there was nothing, to our knowledge, like padding of the budget.
    “The budget as assented to by Mr. President is the budget as passed by the National Assembly and that is the budget being executed.
    “But as of now, the party is handling it as a domestic issue, and all of us are enjoined not to make public comment on the details because the matter is still under consideration.
    “So, that is what we will want to say for now, we will not want to go into the details of it so that we will not breach the ethics of the party, the directives of the party or pre-empt anything or any outcome of the party investigation.”
    Asked whether the Presidency was giving the Leadership of the House of Representatives a clean bill over the issue, he said “I will want to say that we came here as persons who works as liaison officers on the budget because the party had questions for us and we came to make clarifications on the issues raised.
    “We have made those clarifications and would not want to draw any conclusion. Please let us not go too far by mentioning any office. Let it be that the two of us appeared before the party.
    “In all our years of legislative engagement, we are yet to find in the legislative lexicon the word ‘padding’. When the budget is presented before the legislature, the legislature is to consider the budget and pass as they deem fit. So what the legislature pass becomes the appropriation upon accent. Therefore, any word which is yet to crystallize in legislative lexicon, you cannot hear us mention it.”