The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Padding

  • ‘N284b budget padding’: EFCC uncovers Rep’s Bureau De change

    ‘N284b budget padding’: EFCC uncovers Rep’s Bureau De change

    As part of the ongoing probe of about N284billion injected into the 2016 budget, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has traced a Bureau De Change (BDC) to a principal officer of the House of Representatives.

    The BDC has been placed under surveillance following the suspicion that it was being used for slush funds.

    The EFCC has shortlisted four principal officers, the former Chairman of the House Committee on Appropriations, Hon. Abdulmumin Jibrin, and 45 others for investigation.

    Thirteen members, including four principal officers, have been listed as the first set of people to be quizzed.

    The anti-graft agency has written the Code of Conduct Bureau on some issues in the Asset Declaration Forms of some of the 13 lawmakers in the first batch.

    It was learnt that the EFCC had concluded preliminary investigation on the 2016 budget padding which has set the stage for interaction with those implicated.

    The probe followed a petition against the House by Jibrin who detectives have discovered also has a case to answer.

    Jibrin’s petition to EFCC, dated July 29, 2016 was sent through Hammart and Company, Doka Chambers, and Law Bond Solicitors.

    The signatories  are Mohammed Abdulhamid( Hammart and Company); A.B. Bako

    ( Doka Chambers)  and C. Nwachukwu (Law Bond Solicitors).

    A source, who spoke in confidence with our correspondent, said: “In the course of preliminary investigation of the padding of 2016 budget and constituency projects, we  traced a Bureau De Change to a principal officer of the House. The company is named Libra Bureau De Change.

    “We are suspecting that the BDC might have been used for slush funds. Our detectives have placed this BDC on surveillance.

    “We will not release the name of the Representative linked with the BDC until a prima facie case has been established.”

    Giving an update on the probe, the source said: “So far, 50 members of the House have been shortlisted for interrogation in connection with 2016 Budget padding.

    “But we will only accommodate 13 representatives in the first batch to avoid any act capable of affecting the activities of the House because we are only looking into allegations.

    “The EFCC has also written the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) on the Asset Declaration Forms of some of the affected 13 members. We have specifically requested from CCB on whether these lawmakers declared some accounts in their names.

    “We are only investigating the allegations in Jibrin’s petition; it is too early to pronounce any of the lawmakers guilty.

    “ To ensure fairness, the EFCC is also probing some issues against Jibrin. While the petitioner might not like it, we cannot gloss over counter allegations against Jibrin.”

  • Padding: Jibrin, Hembe trade words over return of senator

    Padding: Jibrin, Hembe trade words over return of senator

    Former Chairman of House of Representatives Committee on Appropriation Abdulmumin Jibrin (APC, Kano) has said his return to Nigeria a few days ago was to prove his determination to stand as state witness against some members of the House in court.
    Jibrin petitioned Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Departments of State Services (DSS) and other anti-graft agencies, accusing the Speaker, Yakubu Dogara; Deputy Speaker Yusuf Lasun; Minority Leader Leo Ogor; Whip Alhassan Doguwa; and nine committee chairmen, of padding the 2016 budget with fictitious projects, totalling over N280 billion.
    He alleged some members diverted N10 millon monthly running cost allowance to personal use.
    Following an investigation by Nicholas Ossai-led Ethics and Privileges Committee, Jibrin was suspended for 180 legislative days.
    Jibrin, while responding to allegations of being on the run by Herman Hembe (APC, Benue), yesterday in a statement said one anti-corruption agency invited him to provide more evidence and stand as state withness.
    Hembe, in a statement yesterday said Jibrin fled back to Nigeria after report of his ownership of five foreign accounts in Backlays Bank and property at No. 81, Cotswold Gardens, London, NW2, 1PE in London was published.
    “I wish to remind Jibrin that there is no longer hiding place for criminals. He fled to United Kingdom after getting hint that anti-graft agencies in Nigeria were investigating him in order to avoid arrest and prosecution.
    “Now, having realised that even in the UK, the National Crime Agency and the Financial Intelligence Unit have already profiled him and may soon open a case against him; he quietly sneaked back to Nigeria,” Hembe said.
    However, Jibrin said: “I returned to the country on the invitation of one of the anti graft agencies, which need additional information from me as they are finalising investigation and ready to arraign Hembe and a few others.
    “I visited the agency and provided what they required and sign to stand witness.
    “Hembe is obviously aware of this fact and has been panicking and running helter-skelter, including trying to get the Speaker to intervene and save him.
    “I travelled peacefully from the Nnamdi Azikwe Airport, Abuja and landed at Heathrow Airport and same on my way back. I also enjoyed my stay in London and other parts of Europe, catching up with my vast international network, delivering lectures and granting interviews.
    “I have responded to the lame allegations and my response are in the public glare,” Jibrin said.

  • Budget 2017 and padding

    The year 2016, which is about to expire in a few weeks, will go down in history as one that recorded one of the highest controversies surrounding budget padding.

    While there is no clear definition of ‘budget padding’, it is referred, in some quarters, to a situation where principal officers in the National Assembly, with the help of civil servants, disproportionately appropriate large sums of money to their constituencies or introduce new or fictitious projects to the proposal presented by the President.

    Political watchers believe that they hide under the legislative powers they have to amend the President’s proposal the way they deem fit and to introduce controversial and selfish projects in the budget.

    In line with their power to amend the budget anyway they desire, some of the lawmakers have even claimed that budget padding was not a crime and was as old as the institution itself.

    Budget padding controversies in the 2016 Budget became a very big issue between the Executive and Legislative arms of government as it was claimed that lawmakers removed some key projects proposed by the executive, drastically reduced their costs and introduced many other projects not contemplated by the Presidency.

    It also resulted in open accusations and counter-accusations between the House of Representatives leadership and past Chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Appropriation, Abdulmumini Jibrin.

    He accused the leadership of padding the budget through introduction of billions of naira projects in the 2016 Budget, which they planned to benefit from indirectly.

    The 2016 Budget was said to have been padded with more than N481 billion by the leadership in the N6.08 trillion budget presented to National Assembly by President Muhammadu Buhari.

    While constituency projects were said to be increased from N60 billion to N100 billion in the budget, Abdulmumini Jibrin had accused the Speaker of allowing 10 committee chairmen to insert projects worth N284 billion in the 2016 Budget.

    Among the allegations was the insertion of 82 new projects, mainly roads, at a cost of N50.63 billion under the Ministry of Works, Power and Housing budget.

    While the House of Representatives leadership had defended itself and accused Jibrin of single handedly changing the budget estimates presented by President Buhari and adding N250 billion, Jubrin had denied the claim.

    Before the accusations and counter-accusations among the lawmakers, some ministers were stunned during the 2016 Budget Defence of their ministries as they raised alarm that the budget they were defending was different from what President Buhari presented to the National Assembly for their ministries.

    They noted that many alien projects were smuggled into the 2016 budget proposal.

    To prevent re-occurrence, President Buhari, a fortnight ago, vowed to block any padding from being introduced to the 2017 Budget proposal he plans to lay soon before the National Assembly.

    In line with his determination, ministers, during the Federal Executive Council (FEC) meeting last Wednesday spent almost nine hours in the Council Chamber, mainly considering and familiarizing themselves with the 2017 Budget proposal before it is forwarded to the National Assembly.

    At the end of the meeting, the Minister of Budget and National Planning, Udoma Udo Udoma, expressed confidence that new measures have been put in place to stop padding in the new proposal.

    He said: “The computerized system that we are using can trace every item and who puts any item into the budget as everybody have access code to the system.

    “We have a new and experienced Director General of Budget office. He was Commissioner for Budget in Lagos State for about eight years. He set up a system that is rigorous and you can trace every item that is input to the budget.

    “So there will be no possibility of that in the 2017 budget.” He added

    It is hoped that all these will really help to check padding and reduce heat up of the polity in 2017.

     

    Rewarding excellence

     

    History was made last Thursday when a female scientist was for the first time named among the two laureates that got the 2016 Nigerian National Order of Merit (NNOM) Award.

    While the female, Prof. Omowunmi Amoke Sadik got the award in Science, Prof. Tanure Ojaide, got the award in Humanities.

    Each of them went home with N10 million prize money for winning the award.

    Prof. Sadik, who is a leading international authority in biosensors and bioanalytical Chemistry, an educator, and researcher, received her B.Sc. (Hons.) and M.Sc. degrees in Chemistry from the University of Lagos in 1985 and 1987 respectively, and a PhD (also in Chemistry) from the University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia in 1994.

    She won the prestigious Australian scholarship to pursue the PhD degree in chemistry, which she completed in 1994.

    She was awarded National Research Council (NRC) Postdoctoral Fellowship at the United States-Environmental Protection Agency (US-EPA) in Las Vegas. In September 1996, she joined the faculty at the State University of New York at Binghamton (SUNY-Binghamton).

    Prof. Sadik is currently the Director of the Center for Advanced Sensors and Environmental Systems (CASE) at State University of New York at Binghamton (SUNY-Binghamton).

    She is the President and Co-founder of the Sustainable Nanotechnology Organization.

    Ojaide is a highly distinguished, immensely prolific and talented creative writer and scholar whose works combine social relevance, humanistic vision, quality, elegance, and accessibility.

    He attended University of Ibadan where he received his BA in English and Syracuse University in New York State where he obtained both the MA in Creative Writing and Ph.D. in English.

    As poet, he has published twenty poetry collections, most of which received prizes, including the Commonwealth Poetry Prize for the Africa Region (1987), twice the All-Africa Okigbo Prize for Poetry (1988 and 1997), the BBC Arts and Africa Poetry Award (1988), and four times the Association of Nigerian Authors Poetry Award (1988, 1994, 2003, and 2011).

    Noting that the two awardees were chosen based on merit, Vice President Yemi Osinbajo, at the occasion said Nigeria can always get the best from making appointments on merit rather than on federal character or quota system.

    On his part, the Chairman of the Nigerian National Merit Award (NNMA) Governing Board, Prof. Etim Moses Essien, said the awardees are among the best brains in the world and are competing well with their contemporaries around the globe.

     

  • The fear of padding

    Never before was a budget so embroiled in controversy like that of 2016. For sure, what happened during the processing of the budget must have happened before. The only difference is that whatever it was, it was kept away from us. Unknown to us, a cabal had always been at work in the preparation of the budget. In the days of the military, those in the Ministry of Finance, the Budget Office and the National Planning Commission (NPC) just gave us figures which we lapped up.

    The bureaucrats in the civil service know how to doctor (read as pad) a budget. Ministers who do not know their onions do not stand a chance with them. The more they looked the less they saw whenever these bureaucrats came with their abracadabra when computing the figures. Any minister of finance must be a step ahead of them in order to beat them in their own game. But they know how to win those ministers to their side.

    They tell them stories of how things were done in the past with everybody smiling home at the end of the day. ’’Oga, abi you come count bridge for here’’, they will tell a gullible minister. In no time, he will join them and become a pawn in their hands. They will commit all sorts of atrocities in his name and he will not be able to call them to order. The preparation of the budget was and may still be a means of stealing public funds. If we did not know in the past, we now know that budgets were never prepared with the best of intentions, at least going by the 2016 standard

    All those involved in the process had their own agenda and that was what is in it for them. What happened during the preparation of this year’s budget during this time last year was an eye opener. Being the first budget of the Buhari administration, the government did all it could to come out with a budget that will pass the integrity test, but the cabal still had its way. Even before the estimates were sent to the National Assembly, we had started hearing about padding here and there. The various ministries which were to forward their proposals to the Ministry of Budget, which is the clearing house, had doctored the figures to suit their own  needs.

    They put in irrelevances and allocated money to them, which they expected to cash once the National Assembly approved the budget. The assembly too has since become wiser to the ways of civil servants. Its members know how to handle such matters and can even beat the civil servants at their own game. They know what the civil servants had done in compiling the budget. So, they wait for them at the budget defence stage. By the time they ask one or two questions, the ministers and their coterie of aides will be looking askance. Then, they will be told to go back and take another look at the estimates, which is euphemism for them to go and add the lawmakers’ cut, if they have not done so. This thing has been on for ages and those involved have been doing it to the detriment of our collective will, while they have been smiling to the banks.

    The harm done to the budget by these padders is enormous because the money allegedly allocated to some projects is not eventually seen. The projects just appear on paper while the money ends up in the pockets of individuals. The most painful is that of the lawmakers, who are expected to protect the people’s interest. They too are on the take having been brought on the groovy train by unscrupulous bureaucrats. The lawmakers have perfected the act of making money with the budget. Since, according to them, they did not come to Abuja to look at the Eagle Square, they have found it profitable to pad the budget than to make appropriate funds for the people’s needs.

    We have heard from former House of Representatives Appropriations Committee Chairman Abdulmumin Jibrin how the lawmakers padded this year’s budget for their own gain. Jibrin was not saying anything new. It had for long been in the public domain that our lawmakers are corrupt. Former President Olusegun Obasanjo said so many times while in office, but we did not listen to him. Unfortunately, we were not allowed to see the end of Jibrin’s allegations as his colleagues hurriedly suspended him before he could release more details about budget padding and corruption generally in the House. But the nation has learnt a big lesson from it all. Once beaten, they say, twice shy. With the benefit of hindsight, President Muhammadu Buhari has warned that he would not allow next year’s budget to be padded. Apparently still smarting from what happened to this year’s budget, he said in Abuja last weekend that he would prevent the padding of the 2017 Budget.

    ‘’I am waiting for the 2017 Budget to be brought to us in Council. Any sign of padding anywhere, I will remove it. I have been in government since 1975, variously as governor, oil minister, head of state and chairman of the Petroleum Trust Fund (PTF). Never did I hear the word ‘padding’ till the 2016 Budget’’, he said, adding that such would never happen again under his watch. Well said sir, but what did we do to those who padded this year’s budget beyond relieving them of their jobs? They should be brought to book to deter others who may wish to toe the same path.  If we do not do that, it will amount to paying lip service to the anti-corruption crusade.

     

    Cuba after Castro

    Cuba’s strongman, the irrepressible Fidel Castro, died last weekend at the age of 90. His death marked the end of an era in that island nation. Castro was a communist to the core. Even when communism was dying worldwide, he remained committed. He ruled his country with iron hand and called the bluff of many world powers, including the United States (US), which he railed against for years.   The Bay of Pigs episode will forever define his sour relations with the US. Cuba gave the US a bloody nose in that bitter enterprise following the failure of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to topple him between April 17 and 19, 1961. Since then, Cuba and the US have been fighting a cold war. There is no doubt that Castro loved his country, but he loved power more. This is why he did not allow democracy to thrive. He ran a one-man government and when he became ill few years ago, he handed the reins to his younger brother, Raul. The younger Castro, who was his elder brother’s defence minister and head of the armed forces, has been running the show for eight years now. At 85, age is not on his side. With his brother gone, he should be thinking of what Cuba will look like when he too eventually goes the way of every mortal.  The Castros have done their best for Cuba, but their best legacy for their country will be to leave it in the hands of capable people after they are gone. This is now the task of Raul Castro. Will he let go and allow the country to rediscover itself and chart a new course before the end comes?

  • Paden’s puzzling padding of history

    Paden’s puzzling padding of history

    This is obviously the season of padding. First, there was the padding of the 2016 budget – illicit insertions and consequent distortions that not only resulted in a costly delay in the passage of the budget but is still causing distracting ripples in the House of Representatives. Then we had the padding from the National Headquarters of the All Progressives Congress (APC) of the delegates list for the party’s contentious Ondo State primaries aimed at achieving a predetermined outcome. The party is still reeling in crisis.

    It has taken nearly two weeks for the APC national chairman, Chief Odigie Oyegun, to come up with an utterly laughable attempt to justify the tainted exercise. In Kogi State, a resort to curious extra-constitutional interpretative padding on the part of electoral, ruling party and judicial authorities has foisted a status quo of arrogant and insulting impunity on a helpless people. But the most amazing of all is the historical padding of President Muhammadu Buhari’s authorized biography by an ordinarily highly distinguished scholar, Professor John Paden.

    Paden insinuates in his book that Vice-President Yemi Osinbajo (SAN) was not really the nominee of Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, a national leader of the APC, for the job. Three names – Tinubu, Babatunde Raji Fashola (SAN) and Osinbajo – he says were actually presented to Buhari. By Paden’s account, Buhari insisted on Osinbajo,a Christian pastor, as his choice because the other two were Muslims. And this was allegedly despite immense pressure from Tinubu who wanted the job. History must be fuming at this bizarre attempt to shave its head in assumed absentia (apologies to the late MKO Abiola).

    Osinbajo was Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice in Tinubu’s Cabinet in Lagos State for eight years. He was one of Tinubu’s closest and most trusted aides. Tinubu had three major reasons for opting for Osinbajo. He is a pastor of the largest Pentecostal church in Nigeria and a close spiritual associate of the highly revered Pastor Enoch Adeboye. He is married to a granddaughter of the great sage, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, which would greatly enhance the ticket’s acceptability in the South West. He is a man of impeccable integrity like Buhari. As a key member of Tinubu’s inner caucus and Secretary to the Lagos State Government, Mr Tunji Bello, in a detailed and widely published eye witness account said yesterday, these were the reasons why Osinbajo was Tinubu’s choice. The prime concern was that the South West should not lose the position to other regions also angling for it and that the party ticket be strong enough to defeat the PDP. The luxury of sending three names to Buhari was out of the question. This position has been publicly corroborated by a distinguished retired General who in a published statement wrote: “I was there at the Lagos Lodge Annex in Asokoro, Abuja at Tinubu’s place. On the night in reference, Asiwaju insisted that three names would not be sent for the VP slot. He maintained that only one name would be sent. Eventually, the name of Osinbajo was sent to Buhari. There was no pressure”.

    Flashback to December 17th, 2014. Osinbajo’s sole name had been forwarded to and accepted by Buhari. Tinubu issued a public statement widely published in the print, electronic and social media rallying support for the ticket. It is an irrefutable and indestructible document that history will readily and eagerly tender before the Supreme Court of the Universe on the day of political judgement. Tinubu stated among others: “There came a time during the course of the events when our presidential candidate, General Muhammadu Buhari, offered the Vice Presidential ticket to me. Being a normal human being, I was deeply moved and honored that he would consider me for the position. Being a patriot, I had to weigh my potential candidacy in all of its dimensions.  I have concluded that the interest of the party, our campaign and of the nation are better served if I retain my position as the National Leader of the APC, allowing me to be a bridge builder across all divides. Although, I declined the position, I want to thank General Buhari for extending the honor to me. Despite all the noise and opposition around my possible selection, he stood firm and steadfast…I have removed myself from consideration so what I now say cannot be seen as self-serving”. It is two years since. These facts have not been disputed, refuted or contradicted.

    Professor Paden wrote the monumental biography of the first Premier of Northern Nigeria, Sir Ahmadu Bello. It has been estimated that the book runs into over 1 million words. According to a perceptive reviewer of Paden’s Ahmadu Bello book, “Forgetting any pained surprise at so many typos; leaving aside the discomfort of a text written in an irritating, clumsy, and at times historically misleading present tense, and one frequently carrying more footnotes than text to the page…one reaches the end of the marathon breathlessly wondering how totally one can endorse the claim that this is the definitive life of the putatively definitive Premier of Northern Nigeria…I find myself, for all my admiration of John Paden the scholar…slow to accept that here is the be-all and end-all biography of Ahmadu Bello. For many, a highly revealing source remains the book written (however gracefully ghosted) by Sardauna, ‘My Life’ (Rayuwata in the Hausa version) twenty-five years ago. Paden has written ten times as more; but has he told us five times as much about Ahmadu Bello?” On page 4 of his book, ‘The Politics of Mallam Aminu Kano: Documents from the Independence Struggle (1950-1960)’, Dr Alkasum Abba, accuses Paden of making assertions in his Ahmadu Bello biography that misrepresent Aminu Kano as a “Northerner” first and foremost. According to Abba “These assertions lend credence to the NPN line which actually misrepresents Mallam Aminu Kano’s role and real significance in the politics of Nigeria”.

    Can it be, then, that Paden’s scholarship generates more heat than light? What could be responsible for a highly respected scholar’s distortion of history as regards the emergence of Vice President Osinbajo on such a monumental scale? Could it be carelessness? That is unexpected of a scholar of Paden’s stature. Could it be deliberate mischief and falsehood to achieve predetermined objectives on behalf of shadowy vested interests? In that case, Paden violates one of the key tenets of the intellectual vocation, which is the relentless and uncompromising pursuit of truth. According to the radical economist and revolutionary thinker, Paul Baran, the intellectual’s “primary, if not exclusive loyalty must be the quest for truth”. The late eminent political scientist, Professor Aaron Gana, reinforces this view when he asserts that “Since his primary responsibility is the pursuit of truth, the desire to tell the truth becomes one condition for being an intellectual”.

    Dr Emmanuel Ojo of the Department of History, Ado Ekiti University, identifies a major error in Professor Richard Sklar’s otherwise magisterial work, ‘Nigerian Political Parties”, where the political scientist claims that the motion for self government moved in the federal house by Chief Anthony Enahoro in 1956 “was filed without the knowledge of the Leader or Deputy Leader and without prior submission for the AG’s Parliamentary Council for discussion”. Yet, Chief Enahoro in an interview on August 22, 2009, said “…although the self government motion was moved by me, it was actually a motion of the Action Group…I could not have moved a motion of such magnitude without the consent and approval of my party”.  How then did Sklar arrive at his conclusion? How many generations of students and readers has he misled even if not deliberately?

    Let me end with the admonition of Dr Ojo: “It is often said that water is as pure as its source. The same is true of history. While no source of history is fool proof, historical accounts based on large-scale fallacies will not only misinform others, misrepresent people and confuse issues, it will ultimately replace authentic history with propaganda and falsehood. Since the importance of secondary sources in the reconstruction of Nigerian history cannot be overemphasized, it is expedient that they are not subjected to deliberate or calculated misinterpretation or misrepresentation. Since sources are the foundations upon which the reconstruction of past human actions rest, it is imperative that historical sources are presented and preserved without monumental alterations and in a manner that guarantee the presentation and preservation of fair and useful historical accounts for posterity”.

  • Padding: ‘Why Dogara, others are after me, by Jibrin

    Padding: ‘Why Dogara, others are after me, by Jibrin

    Ex-Chairman, House of Representatives’ Appropriation Committee  Abdulmumin Jibrin yesterday explained why the Speaker, Yakubu Dogara, and other principal officers sought his expulsion.

    Jibrin said he attracted the wrath of the leadership when, as chair of the Appropriation Committee, he rejected alleged proposals by Dogara and others to corner about N90 billion to themselves from the 2016 budget.

    He made the claim in a fresh document at the Federal High Court, Abuja, in furtherance of his suit, seeking to, among others, restrain the House from suspending him.

    Defendants are the House of Representatives; Clerk of the House; Dogara; Yusuf Lasun, Dogara’s deputy; Alhassan Ado Doguwa; Leo Ogor; Herman Hembe; Umar Mohammed Bago; Zakari Mohammed; Chike Okafor; Dan Asuquo; Jagaba Adams; Haliru Jika and Uzoma Abonta.

    In the document filed yesterday, Jibrin, an All Progressives Congress (APC) legislator, representing Kiru/Bebeji in Kano State, said he had conflicts with the House leadership because he rejected their unlawful directives.

    He said in the document – a counter-affidavit – deposed to on his behalf by his lawyer, Nura Abdulrrahman, that one of such instances was his “refusal to admit into the budget about N30 billion.

    “His refusal to cover up the decision of the third to fourteenth defendants’ (Dogara and others’) unilateral decision to allocate to themselves N40 billion of the N100 billion allocated to the National Assembly, in addition to what he (Jibrin) considered as wasteful projects of over N20 billion to the third to fourteenth defendants’ constituencies.

    “Even when he (Jibrin) had given the defendants/respondents, especially the third (Dogara) statistics of 2,000 new projects introduced into the Appropriation Bill by less than 10 committee members, the third defendant took no decision or corrective.

    “When the inflation of the budget became a matter of public interest and controversy, the defendant, especially the third to fourteenth, started taking measures to avoid responsibility and to place the issue on the shoulders of the plaintiff to use him (Jibrin) as a scapegoat,” Abdulrrahman said.

    Jibrin denied claims by Dogara that he (the plaintiff) was removed as chair of the Appropriation Committee, saying he resigned, and informed Dogara on July 20, 2016.

    Against the defendants’ claim that they were not planning to suspend Jibrin, and that the House did not intend to reconvene before the end of its vacation, Jibrin said Dogara and others were plotting to reopen the House and suspend him.

    He urged the court to proceed to determine his case and grant his reliefs, including a declaration that the defendants’ decision at a meeting of August 3, 2016, to suspend the plaintiff without a fair hearing is unlawful.

    Jibrin also seeks a declaration that the defendants should  comply with sections 49, 54, 56 and 60 of the 199 Constitution and the Standing Orders of the House, regulating its sitting, procedure and other matters.

    Dogara and others have, in the notice of preliminary objection filed on Tuesday, urged the court to decline jurisdiction to hear the case and strike it out on the grounds that the suit showed “no reasonable cause of action.”

    Clerk of the Appropriation Committee Dr. Abel Ochigbo faulted Jibrin’s claims, saying  there was no plan to suspend him and that no meeting was held to that effect.

    Ochigbo, who deposed to the affidavit supporting the defendants’ objection, said all that was done in the process leading to passage of the budget was within the law.

    He added that since the budget has become law, nobody could query steps taken by the lawmakers.

    “The 2016 Appropriation Act was duly passed by the National Assembly and assented to by the President. The issue of any officer of the House taking any decisive action against any particular member or members does not arise as the Appropriation Bill has now become the Appropriation Act’’.

    “The issue of inflation of the 2016 budget does not arise as the Appropriation Bill was passed by the House of Representatives pursuant to powers vested in the House by the Constitution and in line with the Standing Orders of the House.

    “The Bill was duly certified pursuant to the provisions of the Acts Authentication Act before it was duly assented to by the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and it is now being executed as an Act of the National Assembly.”

  • Budget padding and its challenges

    Until disloyalty to the nation and the conspiracy against their constituencies which brought them together ripped them apart two weeks back, Speaker Dogara, and his estranged friend, Hon. Abdulmumin Jibrin, the former chairman, Appropriation Committee and the majority of the house members justified ‘budget padding’ by appealing to the provision of Sections 3, 24 and 30 of the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act.  But that for many could only have been self-serving because the law on the public budgetary process is very clear. The motive of their framers is unmistakable and their logic, sound and unassailable. To the extent that a government budget is the political tool with which government in power fulfils its electoral promises to the electorate, the major actor in budget preparation is the executive. Other actors in the budgetary process have their specific roles clearly spelt out. The legislature debates, examines and authorizes spending of public revenue and to avoid any ambiguity, areas of joint cooperation between it and the executive are clearly listed to include implementation, monitoring, evaluation and reporting. To protect the interest of their constituencies, the legislature like all other actors such as NGOs, pressure groups and international donors are expected to lobby the executive at the budget preparatory stage.

    Padding of the budget especially after the second reading is therefore a criminal act. Unfortunately, that seems to be what has been going on since the beginning of the fourth republic. When last May, the bubble first burst following the alarm raised by the ministers in charge of health and transport about the padding of the budget they submitted, the President refused   to append his signature. He was however blackmailed by the lawmakers and their apologists who accused him of insensitivity to the plight of the public that will suffer from his refusal to play politics and accommodate the excesses of the lawmakers.

    But as it is often said, ‘there is no perfect crime’. Two weeks ago, Jibrin’s swift reaction to his removal as chairman of the Appropriation Committee following a claim he ‘unilaterally padded the 2016 budget to the tune of N4.1 billion to his Kiru/Bebeji federal constituency in Kano State’,  was to attribute his travails to his ‘inability to admit into the budget almost N30 billion personal requests from Mr. Speaker and the three other principal officers’. He went on  to add that that the Speaker did not only divert a federal government water project to his farm but that he blackmailed an unnamed construction company to work on his Asokoro new mansion.

    Last week, a civil society group, SERAP lodged a petition against Dogara and his men at the UN claiming ‘removal of critical projects and replacement of such projects with constituency projects, not only undermined the fight against corruption in the country, but also exacerbated extreme poverty’ of the same people on whose behalf Dogara and his House members pretended to fight. We have also now  learnt that about N350b appropriated by the National Assembly in respect of about 2,516 projects spread across the country in the last five years never took off even after full payment had been made. On July 17, this newspaper in a piece titled “Constituency Projects – a ritual of monumental waste”, listed on pages 9, 10 and 11, 211 abandoned budgets. It was the result of a survey of 436 projects spread across 16 states of the federation by a Civic Technology Organisation-BudgIT. Some of these projects include water bore-holes, rural electricity and roads projects and primary health centres designed to alleviate the suffering of the poor.

    This monumental fraud at the National Assembly is replicated in all the 36 states in the country where governors in most cases operate like sole administrators with state assemblies serving as rubber stamps. The 774 LGAs are not different. The local council chairmen who collect free allocation from Abuja are answerable to no one. The councilors many of who have been known to build houses within a year in office cornered the available road and culvert contracts that get washed away if and when implemented after one rainy season because of usage of substandard materials.

    Budget padding like some of our other crises of nationhood as many well informed Nigerians have told us is closely tied to our unwieldy and unworkable structure. This however is a fact those who are benefitting from the current anarchy including our over 400 highly paid lawmakers currently engaged in budget padding in Abuja and other parasitic politicians at the state and local council levels are ready to deny.

    Close  to a century after  the warning by the colonial masters that  we must as a multi-ethnic society with diverse cultures ‘allow groups to develop at their own pace without interference from others’, we have continued to play the ostrich. Sixty years after the collapse of the structure we inherited from our founding fathers, no Nigeria leader has been able to properly articulate our crisis of nationhood. But if we don’t know where we are going, we at least know where we are coming from. And this was exactly what Professor Banji Akintoye, a world celebrated historian tried to do in a recent lecture he delivered in Ibadan to celebrate the past peaceful co-existence of our various nationalities.

    In terms of world view, the Yoruba according to him has as its core value, ‘welfarism’. In most Yoruba towns, age groups engage in communal cooperative endeavours known locally as aaro whereby they jointly help their members to construct houses in turns. Women according to Prof Akintoye had their equivalent of aaro.

    What Awo and his group of Yoruba educated elite did, we now know, was to build on this core values. Free education was anything but free. Adult Yoruba who used to escape to the forest at the approach of tax collectors were heavily taxed whether they had children or not. Cocoa farmers were equally taxed through the marketing boards. The proceeds were used to prosecute free education and send brilliant western Nigeria youths to the best universities in the world. They built shoe, tyre, beverages and vegetable industries to add value to the farm produce of their farmers. They modernized the aaro concept with the establishment to housing estates and to cater for the taste of an emergent middle class. Of course, Ahmadu Bellow built on the values of his own people to establish the NNDC as the biggest business conglomerate in Africa, ABU and ‘one north one people’ where Christians, Muslims and various ethnic groups in the north coexisted peacefully.

    Sine no one deliberately sets out to destroy his father’s house, budget padding by elected legislators can only signify lack of faith in Nigeria. Unfortunately self-serving opponents of restructuring are not even prepared to appreciate that the whole essence of a federal arrangement is to make individuals and groups remain proud members of their small group within the greater nation.

    If I were an adviser to President Buhari who is currently seeking extra emergency powers, to tackle the nation’s economic problems, I will suggest he  ‘seeks first the of kingdom of politics’ as Nkrumah once admonished by leveraging on the trust he enjoys among Nigerians and use the unique opportunity he today has to undo what his colleagues – the ill-informed military adventurers did by restoring our beautiful country back to a workable, productive, and competitive federal arrangement that once made Nigeria a reference point as world greatest exporter of groundnut and palm oil, the country with the best bureaucracy in Africa, with the first television in Africa and with UCH Ibadan, as one of the best three teaching hospitals in the Commonwealth of Nations.

  • Padding: Dogara, others must face panel – Police

    Padding: Dogara, others must face panel – Police

    •Grills Gabajabiamila for over one hour
    •NASS Clerk has one-week deadline to submit draft and final copies of 2016 budget

    THE Police are on course to interact with Speaker Yakubu Dogara of the House of Representatives on the alleged padding of the 2016 budget after resumption of the National Assembly from its current recess, The Nation can now reveal.

    Also lined up for the proposed interaction are Deputy Speaker Yusuff Lasun, Chief Whip Ado Doguwa, and Minority Leader Leo Ogor.

    Saddled with the assignment is the Police Special Investigative Panel which, according to sources has had a session with House Leader Femi Gbajabiamila.

    Gbajabiamila who had been out of the country said on Friday that he was offering himself to the law enforcement agencies for probe over the budget padding allegation.

    Although his name has not featured among those listed by the sacked chairman of the House Committee of Appropriation, Abdulmumini Jibrin, who spilled the beans, sources said the police panel had a “comprehensive session with the House Leader, Femi Gbajabiamila on Friday for over one hour.”

    The panel has asked the Clerk to the National Assembly, Mohammed Sani Omolori, to submit the draft and final copies of the 2016 Budget to it within one week.

    A highly placed source familiar with the development said: “We are going to interrogate the Speaker and the three principal officers implicated in the main petition of the erstwhile Chairman of the House Committee on Appropriations, Abdulmumin Jibrin.

    “Once they return from recess, we will ask them to report. Already, a letter of invitation has been served on them. It is still subsisting.

    “The initial argument is that the Speaker is the nation’s number four citizen and the modalities of summoning him ought to be different. But we have checked the statute books, neither Dogara nor any of the principal officers has immunity from investigation and prosecution.

    “We have not foreclosed investigation into the alleged budget padding. Whoever is talking of any other solution than this ongoing probe might be referring to another platform.”

    The source said the commitment attached to the investigation accounts for non-reopening of the office of the Appropriation Committee in the House which was locked following the budget padding allegations and the counter allegations.

    “Until we have conducted substantial investigation, the office will still be firmly locked by security agencies. That is a strong room of exhibits,” the source said.

    Asked of the extent of investigation, the source added: “We have got sufficient documents for preliminary investigation which is already in progress.

    “The Clerk of the National Assembly has up till next week to submit the draft and final copies of the 2016 Budget to the panel.

    “All we need now is to interact with the four principal officers immediately they return from recess. If they fail to report, the law has a provision for taking card of such.”

    The source confirmed that 10 chairmen of committees in the House will take their turn after the four principal officers.”

    On the appearance of House Leader Gbajabiamila before the SIP, the source said: “Although Jibrin did not mention his name in his petition and addendum, he had audience with us on Friday for over one hour.

    “It was a comprehensive session which provided more insights into the workings of the House. We hope other leaders in the chamber will emulate him.

    “Gbajabiamila came in voluntarily and we took his statement, which is a loaded document on oath.”

    Dogara said last week that he was not above the law following the barrage of criticisms that followed his initial statement that no one could probe what he does on the floor of the House as a member and Speaker.

    He denied reports that suggested that he could not be investigated or prosecuted over the scandal.

    He also said reports credited to him as saying padding was no offence under the law were untrue.

    He said his comments on the alleged budget padding were a misrepresentation with and Nigerians now seeing him as insensitive to their feelings.

    His Special Adviser on Media and Public Affairs, Turaki Hassan said: “while responding to questions at the Civil Society Dialogue at the Transcorp Hilton Hotel Abuja on Thursday 12th August, Dogara made reference to Sections 3, 24 and 30 of the Legislative Houses ( Powers and Privileges ) Act to buttress the point that the legislature while carrying out its constitutional responsibilities is protected by law.

    “He did not say or mean that he is above the laws of the land or that he is shielded by the law or has immunity for any infractions of the law.

    “This clear restatement of the law has been twisted by sections of the media to mean that neither security agencies nor the courts could investigate or prosecute or try him!

    “This is most uncharitable and a deliberate and calculated attempt to pitch the Speaker against the Nigerian public and paint him as lawless.

    “As an Officer in the Temple of Justice, Dogara not only owes unalloyed allegiance to the Judiciary but also to the institutions of law enforcement. He indeed swore to an Oath of allegiance to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

    “Dogara should not be portrayed as insensitive or arrogant as this is contrary to his true nature of humility and humaneness that has endeared him to his colleagues and Nigerians.”

     

  • Padding: Falana’s misrepresentations of facts and law

    Mr Femi Falana SAN has enjoyed unequalled public attention over the years because of his activism and principled stand on issues. When I saw his contribution on this padding subject which I have followed closely since its arrival in the public domain, I naturally picked interest. I was however shocked to read his latest piece, entitled “The criminality of budget padding”. I am constrained to lament that he has done himself a great disservice by manufacturing facts on the budget issue and making comments solely on facts cooked up suo moto. Based on these concocted stories dressed up as facts, he posited legal comments on them rather like a layman on the street.

    He claimed that it has emerged that about 20 people sat down after the Budget had been passed and inserted projects including Constituency Projects into it fraudulently. The truth, from my independent findings, is that Constituency Projects subhead or head of expenditure was included in the President’s budget proposals to the National Assembly as has been the practice in the last three years. It was not originated by the National Assembly even though it has undoubted right to do so.

    I am sure that if the learned Silk had adverted his legal mind to the Acts Authentication Act , 2004, he would have discovered that the only authority who can say authoritatively what the Senate and House of Representatives passed is the Clerk to the National Assembly who authenticated the copy of the Bill as correct and a true reflection of what was passed. We know that Falana, who lives in Lagos is aware of “Oluwole Market” where fake documents are manufactured but that doesn’t give him the right to presume that a solemn document authenticated by the signature of the Clerk to the National Assembly is fake. The 2016 Appropriation Act has five signatories to it, Hon Abdulmumin Jibrin, Chairman House Committee on Appropriations, Senator Danjuma Goje, Chairman Senate Committee on Appropriations, Rt Hon Lasun Yusuf, the Deputy Speaker who was brought in by the National Assembly leadership to work the executive to achieve harmony on the details of the Budget, Alh Maikasuwa, the then Clerk to the National Assembly, and finally, President Muhammadu Buhari, who assented to the Bill. Is Falana seriously contending that these people endorsed a fake budget?

    It should be noted that even Abdulmumin has never claimed, in any of his statements, that the insertions into the budget were done outside the legitimate appropriation framework and process. His major claim is that some people padded more than others! You see, he cannot say otherwise because since he, rather than even the Speaker signed the details of the budget, after due insertions and processing as allowed by law. If there is anything wrong with the signed budget, he will be the first culprit. The Speaker’s signature is not contained in the budget; rather it is Abdulmumin’s signature that is there! Indeed of the four functionaries he is accusing, only the Deputy Speaker is a signatory.

    It bears repeating for the umpteenth time that the 2016 Appropriation Act is a law of the Federation duly assented to by the President and Falana insults the President when he claims that he didn’t know what he was doing when in fact he meticulously scrutinized the Budget before assenting to it. In any case, if he did not assent to the Bill, the National Assembly has power to override his veto. Undoubtedly, the National Assembly has primacy in the budget process as provided in Section 59(4) of the Constitution.

    Falana further feigned ignorance of the provisions of Sections 3, 30 and even 24 and other enabling portions of the LEGISLATIVE HOUSES (POWERS AND PRIVILEGES) ACT. Even though there are divergent decisions of the Courts on the constitutionality of Section 30 of the Act, it is clear that it applies in this context.

    Permit me to set out the provisions of these sections as follows:

    Section 3. “Immunity from proceedings:

    No civil or criminal proceedings may be instituted against any member of a Legislative House—

    (a) in respect of words spoken before that House or a committee thereof; or

    (b) in respect of words written in a report to that House or to any committee thereof or in any petition, bill, resolution, motion or question brought or introduced by him therein”.

    Section 30. “Courts not to exercise jurisdiction over acts of President, Speaker or officer: Neither the President or Speaker, as the case may be, of a Legislative House nor any officer of a Legislative House shall be subject to the jurisdiction of any court in respect of the exercise of any power conferred on or vested in him by or under this Act or the standing orders of the Legislative House, or by the Constitution”.

    1. “Publication of certain statements and writings an offence

    (1) Any person who—

    (a) publishes any statement, whether in writing or otherwise, which falsely or scandalously defames a Legislative House or any committee thereof; or

    (b) publishes any writing reflecting on the character of the President or Speaker, as the case may be, of a Legislative House or the chairman of a Committee of a Legislative House in the conduct of his duty as such President, Speaker or chairman; or

    (c) publishes any writing containing a gross, wilful or scandalous misrepresentation of the proceedings of a Legislative House or of the speech of any member in the proceedings of a Legislative House, shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine of two hundred Naira or to imprisonment for twelve months, or to both such fine and imprisonment.

    (2) In this section “publish”, in relation to any writing, means exhibiting in public, or causing to be read or seen, or showing or delivering, or causing to be shown or delivered, with the intent that the writing may be read or seen by any person”.

    It is important to also highlight the fact that Falana’s charge of arrogant refusal by Speaker Dogara to submit himself to security agencies for investigation is not only faulty on point of law as analyzed above, but indeed faulty on facts because my inquiries reveal that, contrary to public impressions, no such agency has laid any charges or require him to submit himself for investigation. I should like to caution that while the general public may be forgiven for riding with the wind of every allegation it is incumbent that a legal practitioner enjoys no such liberty; he is bound to adopt a judicial mind in analyzing such situations so as not to submit himself to public misinformation and miseducation.

    There is no doubt that the National Assembly did not go outside its legitimate lawmaking powers in the processing of 2016 Budget in spite of mischievous, ignorant and unwarranted assertions to the contrary by some loud mouthed pundits and, unfortunately, even gullible lawyers, with an agenda to derail the democratic gains achieved since 1999 by a very active and assertive legislature that has withstood the autocracy of a rampaging executive. Attempts to weaken the legislature and render it impotent in the face of daily struggle to curb the excesses of the executive on behalf of the Nigerian people will be regretted in due course especially by  people like Femi Falana who, having committed so much in the promotion of democracy, now appear to be  aiding and abetting this course of action.

    Hon Abdulmumin Jibrin’s tirades is clearly not an anti – corruption struggle but the tirades of a man who lost his job and is on a mission to destroy the National Assembly and destroy Nigeria’s image in the international community. He has become a clear and present danger to the security and stability of the country.

     

    • Barrister Okonkwo wrote in from Abuja.
  • Legitimate padding?

    Legitimate padding?

    By the time we are finally done with theYakubu Dogara/Abdulmumuni Jibrinroforofo, we ought to be well on the way to removing the last veil on ourso-called Appropriation Act as anything but a hybrid of farce and fraud.Aside the ostentatious play on semantics and legalese that has charmed many as much as it has left a good number equally bewildered in the wake of the animosities, one of the more  interesting asides is the current pretense about the annual exercise of rolling out appropriation figures as anything but an elaborateruse. So, whileNigerians may not have been better educated on the concept as has been bandied in the wake of the storm in Dogara’s House, the same cannot be said of their awareness of the element offiscal accommodation described as padding which continues to make nonsense of the country’s projects and plans – the same way that Nigerians are only too aware of the shoddiness that has become the defining character appropriation process since the fourth republic berthed.

    So much for its “sail into definitional labyrinth”(to borrow the words of The Nation’s ever perspicuous columnist, Idowu Akinlotan), Nigerians know better than to expect anything more than a perfect storm in a teacup at the end of the current animus – beyond of course its entertainment value – thanks to the ruling All Progressives Congress.

    Such as been the massive play on words – a swing from the semantics to legalese – in what has become a futile effort to explain a practice rooted in avarice.  Imagine being seduced into thinking that the whole business was about some finer points of constitutionalism, the most cherished principles of separation of powers between the executive and the legislature, or some pretense to fiscal rectitude? Those are obviously far from the contemplation of Dogara’s House. Rather, we are talking essentially of pork –projects packaged and delivered as constituency items in the budget; projects of extremely dubious utilities whose chance of execution often tended to zero.

    Dogara is right though. There can be no argument about the constitutional provision that “to 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…. And that 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”. But then, he is damned wrong to imagine that he and his coterie of principal officers can do as they please with our commonwealth. Moreover,  the allegations by Jibrin, to the extent that they strike at the heart of the integrity of the appropriation process as indeed the integrity of the House over which he presides would seem to be deserving of full attention of the full plenary than the principal officers of the House are willing to undertake. That is why Nigerians are involved.

    Let’s us be clear in this. No one is as yet pronounced guilty. Indeed, as far as I can see, the whole notion about padding being either a crime or whether it is a justiciable matter is particularly contestable.

    As for definition, I have checked not a few dictionaries. One of them, Dictionary.com defines padding as “to expand or add to unnecessarily or dishonestly”. Although the definition, as pejorative as can be, would suit Jubrin and Company poised to do Dogara in, it seems doubtful that it would help their cause in any significant way beyond of course the moral issues already in the public domain.

    Nigerians however need to know whether indeed the principal officers acted in good faith; whether the clean copy of the document presented to President Muhammadu Buhari was the one the House actually endorsed, or as is being alleged, the principal officers introduced some new elements before its transmission to the president.

    Is‘padding’necessarily unlawful? Maybe not; it is however not necessarily right. Depending on how it is carried out, it could in fact be wrong. I guess that was the point that Lagos Lawyer, Wahab Shittu sought to make last week. Writing on the subject in The Nation August 9, he agreed that “the National Assembly is entitled to reduce or increase expenditure for projects earmarked for execution by the president in the budget preparation”, the caveat being that the National Assembly is NOT entitled to add its own projects to the budgetary estimate presented by the President. In his opinion, “if the National Assembly is interested in any project, it may consult with the executive who may then add such projects to the budgetary estimate prepared by the president as part of the president’s developmental agenda for the country”.

    Hopefully, Nigerians would yet see a more definitive pronouncement on the matter by the courts in the nearest future. The debate continues.

    For now, the point which no one should be in denial is that padding – legal or not –has become a cancer that must be rooted out of the budgetary process. To the extent that it has constituted the perfect– albeit illegitimate – mechanism through which privileged officials –elected or appointed – secure unearned privileges at the expense of the rest of us, it simply has no place under a regime sworn to transparency.

    Restoring integrity to the budgetary process is therefore way to go. It is a tough job no doubt. Of course, the National Assembly is not the only sinning party. How do you deal with the hordes of bureaucrats, those anonymous  fellows sworn to juggling up the figures from year to year? What about the administration’s appointees, the men who, although have their fingers in the pie, and yet can’t be seen to do any wrong?

    Where do we begin? Any ideas?