Tag: Senate

  • Senate power probe gets petition 

    The Senate ad hoc committee investigating alleged sharp practices in the Power sector has received a petition accusing the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Power, Godknows Igali, of  diverting the N3.5 billion  meant for the payment of beneficiaries of the National Power Sector Apprenticeship Scheme (NAPýSAS).

    The petition was submitted to the committee’s Chairman  Abubakar Kyari.

    The petitioners claimed that the ministry recruited 7,200 youths for the apprenticeship scheme, which was expected to last six months but was stopped abruptly.

    They also claimed that each participant of the scheme was expected to be paid N20,000 monthly stipend for six months, after which they might be absorbed into the sector.

    According to the petition, this was not to be, following the failure of the permanent secretary to implement the programme to the fullest, even after N3.5 billion had been budgeted for the programme..

    The petitioners are asking the committee, among others, to investigate their allegation.

    The petition was signed by the leaders of the participants in the training scheme, Onyemelikeya Chukwuma  and Balogun  Tirimisiyu, who are the Co-Presidents Solar and Metering.

    They urged the Senate to address their prayers.

  • Nigeria power sector gulps N2.740 trillion in 16 years

    Nigeria power sector gulps N2.740 trillion in 16 years

    A total of N2.740 trillion was spent on the country’s epileptic power sector between 1999 and 2015, the Senate was told Tuesday.

    This was the submission of the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Power, Ambassador Godknows Igali, at the Senate two day investigative hearing on Power Sector.

    The investigative hearing was inaugurated by the upper chamber to unearth alleged unwholesome practices in the power sector between 1999 to 2015.

    The Senate mandated an ad-hoc committee on the Power Sector headed by Senator Abubakar Kyari (Borno North) to conduct a comprehensive hearing to expose corrupt practices and establish how much the Federal Government has spent on the sector between 1999 and 2015.

    Igali told the committee that out of a total appropriation of N1.6 trillion since 1999, the sum of N948 billion was actually released to the Ministry of Power and its agencies within the period.

    The Permanent Secretary added that sum of N155 billion was also released to the ministry to cushion the effects of the shortfalls in expenditure for the power sector within the same period.

    He noted that power sector is at the centre of the country’s development insisting that everything must be done to get the sector right.

    Igali said that at the inception of democracy in 1999, the government inherited a sector where everything was dormant with no new generating units built except the one built in the 60s.

    He stressed the need for consistent investment in the sector.

    He noted that for over 100 years when the first electric power came to Lagos, power remained in the hand of government because there was no law allowing individuals to invest in the sector.

    He said, “It is a heavy capital intensive industry but if you get it right people are ready to pay.We have not been consistent with our investment. From 1999, despite the interest of government to infuse money in the sector, government has not been able to meet what the sector requires.”

    Igali also told the committee that the country’s electricity generation had risen to about 4600 megawatts from 3500 megawatts in 2013.

    He attributed the rise in generation capacity to the reduction in the degree of vandalisation of power equipment in parts of the country.

    The permanent Secretary also said that the NIPP is currently the greatest contributor of power to the National Grid.

    He noted that post privatization era, vandalism of power equipment has gone down.

    Igali said that from his evaluation “things will be better in the sector very soon.”

    On the disengaged staff of the Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) Igali said that only 2000 had not been verified and paid their severance allowances.

    He explained that most of those involved who claimed to be former staff of PHCN have no valid document to back up their claim.

    He however said that final verification would soon be conducted to determine the veracity of the claimants.

    The Permanent Secretary told the committee that proceeds of privatisation was used to settle labour claims of over 46000 workers by the Bureau for Public Enterprises (BPE) through the office of the Accountant General of the Federation and Pension Commission.

    ‎The Managing Director of the Niger Delta Power Holding Company, Mr. James Olotu, on his part told the committee that the National Independent Power Projects (NIPP) received $8.23 billion.

    The $8.23 billion which came from the excess crude account translates to about N1.640 trillion the NIPP used for its activities.

    The committee wondered why the local government tier of government was not represented in the governing board of the NIPP even when the tier is one of the sponsors of the NIPP projects.

    Olotu explained that the framers of the NIPP law might have thought the bringing in local government chairmen as board members of the NIPP would make the board unwieldy considering the number of local governments in the country.

    He said that governors in the board are representing local governments in their geo-political zones.

    The committee also mandated Igali to submit audited accounts of the ministry of power and its agencies to it.

    Chairman of the committee said that audited account of the Ministry of Power and its agencies would enable the committee to know what was actually released to the ministry.

    The committee was also not comfortable with what a member described as notable contradictions and discrepancies in the presentations and submissions of those who appeared before the committee.

     

  • Senate begins probe of power sector

    Senate begins probe of power sector

    As probe of the power sector begins in the Senate Tuesday, Chairman of the probe panel Senator Abubakar Kyari said the probe is a fact finding mission.

    He said the investigation covers 1999 to 2015.

    Permanent Secretary Ministry of power, Godknows Igali said N1.6 trillion was appropriated for power sector from 1999 to 2015.

    But actual releases within the period is put at N948 billion.

    Details later…..

  • Forgery and the Senate

    The 8h senate is stymied in controversy, and, despite the best efforts of the beneficiaries of the leadership crisis, the issues have refused to go away. To compound the disagreements, five members of that otherwise august body, have reinstated that they are still in court, claiming that the senate standing orders, through which the present leadership emerged, is a forged document. That allegation, is in addition to the controversy arising from the intrigues and subterfuge that bedevilled the indecorous emergence of senators Bukola Saraki and Ike Ekweremadu, as senate president and deputy senate president, respectively.

    To be fair to the distinguished and undistinguished senators alike, the matter of who leads the senate, is the prerogative of the senators. Well, considering that they may not always all agree on a choice, a fortiori, the law enjoins them to set down the rules of engagement, ab initio. Going forward, once they set down any rule, then, it is sacrosanct that they follow it, unless they agree in a manner afore-agreed, to ignore it, or set it aside, also, in a manner pre-determined. Anyway, whether or not such was the case, in the emergence of the foremost principal officers, will be determined by the courts, since the matter is presently, sub-judice.

    However, just as the senators have their privileges, the nation state, made up of citizens, and institutions of the state, have their collective privileges. To that same extent, an allegation of forgery, as claimed with regards to the standing order of the 8th senate, is a crime against the state, and it is the prerogative of the criminal justice institutions of the state, on behalf of the nation-state, to vigorously pursue the allegation, and in furtherance of that, if the circumstance so demands, to properly bring before the court, any person(s) allegedly involved in the crime, to answer to the charges.

    So, it is strange that despite the national importance of this matter, no person has been charged to court for the alleged felony that has thoroughly embarrassed our country. Or is the allegation of forgery of the standing orders of the 8th senate, a ruse? Strange country. In fact, stranger than fiction, if one ponders some of the strange things happening here. Ordinarily, there are enough laws in the book, to determine, whether the criminal offence of forgery, has been committed. Also, considering that the document in question, is not one of the rag-tag obscene publications, without a copyright, that steal our attention at bus-stops; because of its obtrusive and lurid pictures and headlines; it is strange, that nobody has been held, for the alleged forgery.

    Let’s look at what the criminal code, which is substantially in pari materia with the penal code, says about the offence of forgery. Section 465, of the Criminal Code Act, provides the Definition of Forgery, thus: “A person who makes a false document or writing knowing it to be false, and with intent that it may in any way be used or acted upon as genuine, whether in the state or elsewhere, to the prejudice of any person or with intent that any person may, in the belief that it is genuine, be induced to do or refrain from doing any act, whether in the state or elsewhere is said to forge the document or writing”.

    Bearing this definition in mind, the simple question for the investigating authority would simply have been, to find out whether the senate standing order 2015, is a false document? To determine this, in the circumstance, is to find out, who made the document, and whether the maker, had the authority under the law, to make the document. Where the maker had no powers to make the document, and went ahead to make same, with the intent to represent it as genuine, then prima facie, the offence of forgery may have been committed.

    The responsibility of that investigating officer, or institution of state, which under our extant laws, is the Nigeria Police, is to bring the offender(s) before the law to answer the charge of forgery. Considering the provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015, the police should after their investigations, forward their finding to the office of the Attorney General of the Federation, for it to decide, whether and where to prosecute. Strangely, or if you prefer, stranger than fiction, there is the unbelievable tale, as to what has happened to the police report. The report in the media is that, the report has been lost in transit, albeit in its shuttles, between the two institutions of state.

    Should the report be found, and it is established that the senate standing order was forged, Nigerians hope that the maker(s) would be taken before a magistrate or judge, for a criminal trial. According to section 467, of the criminal code: “Any person who forges any document, writing, or seal, is guilty of an offence which, unless otherwise stated, is a felony, and he is liable, if no other punishment is provided, to imprisonment for three years”.

    In climes, where the law is not afraid of some of its citizens, those who allegedly forged the senate standing orders would by now, have had their day in court. If as some senators have claimed, the allegation is baseless, then the institutions of state, should say so.  Or is it possible, as reported in the media, that the police report, did not mention the maker of the allegedly forged document. Of note, in Alake vs State, Alagoa, J.C.A; held, ‘If the charge upon which an accused person is arraigned relates to forgery, it must be proved that it is the accused person that committed the forgery’.

     

  • Senate begins probe of power sector Tuesday

    Senate begins probe of power sector Tuesday

    The Senate will on Tuesday begin investigation into alleged unwholesome practices in the power sector.

    A statement by the Clerk of Senate Ad-hoc Committee on Power, Cletus A. Ojabo, said the power sector probe will be in form of investigative hearing/interactive session.

    Ojabo said the investigation will centre on funds appropriated for the power sector since 1999 and the unbundling of the Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN).

    The statement was however silent on those that had been invited to appear before the probe panel.

    It is expected that all those who played key roles in the power sector since 1999 including ministers and heads of government departments and parastatals will appear before the panel.

    Senate President, Bukola Saraki, inaugurated the ad-hoc committee to conduct a comprehensive probe of allegations of questionable practices in the power sector.

    The committee headed by Senator Abubakar Kyari, (Borno North) is charged with the task of looking into the entire power value chain including generation, transmission and distribution with a view to identifying what the problems in the sector are.

    Saraki noted at the inauguration of the committee three weeks ago that the task before the panel is huge.

    The Senate President frowned at the continued absence of regular supply of electricity despite the country’s huge investments in the sector.

    Kyari, in his remarks, detailed the nature of the investigation his committee is saddled with.

    He said: “A close look at the entire power value chain (generation, transmission and distribution) calls for review of our policies in order to obtain optimum performances across the board.

    “The abysmal performance of the generation segment is no longer news in view of the current deteriorating power supply which hovers around 4,600MW for a population of over 170million people, despite the huge resources committed into it.”

     

  • Akpabio thanks God for surviving accident

    Akpabio thanks God for surviving accident

    Senate Minority Leader, Godswill Akpabio has urged Nigerians, particularly the political class, to desist from politicizing disasters and tragedies.
    Akpabio in a statement issued from London where he is receiving treatment after surging a car crash in Abuja said the political class should work towards the unity and progress of the country without any political or ethnic coloration.
    He thanked God for his surviving the accident and said he remained grateful to Nigerians for their prayers and display of concern.
    The former governor specifically thanked President Mohamadu Buhari, Vice President Yemi Osibajo, Senate President, Bukola Saraki, Speaker of the House of Representatives, Hon Dogara, his successor, Mr Udom Emmanuel, his colleagues in the National Assembly and former president Goodluck Jonathan for their concern and expression of love when the accident occurred.
    He also expressed the appreciation of his family members to traditional and religious leaders, who he said have been calling on a daily basis to inquire about his well being.

  • Court gives Senate 30 days to respond to The Nation’s suit

    The Federal High Court in Lagos has directed the Senate and the National Assembly to respond to a suit filed by The Nation’s Editor Gbenga Omotoso and a correspondent Imam Bello within 30 days.

    Justice Mohammed Yunusa said the respondents should be given time to “enter appearance” before the plaintiffs’ motion for interlocutory injunction is determined.

    He relied on Section 99 of the Sheriffs and Civil Process Act which says: “The period within which a defendant is required to answer before the court to the writ of summons shall be not less than 30 days after service of the writ has been effected.”

    The plaintiffs’ counsel, Mr. Wahab Shittu, informed the court that the respondents have been served with the order of injunction.

    The order restrained the Senate from compelling the plaintiffs to appear before its Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions over a story.

    According to the proof of service, the processes were received by the Senate President’s Office on September 1.

    The first respondent, National Assembly, was earlier served on August 27 through its Office of the Deputy Clerk.

    The bailiff, Mr. Lambo Moshood, in an affidavit of service, stated that the Senate was served at about 12.01pm on September 1, and that it acknowledged receipt via an official stamp.

    Justice Yunusa made the order following a motion ex-parte moved by Shittu.

    The order is to subsist pending the hearing and determination of the plaintiffs’ motion ‎for interlocutory injunction.

    Should the motion for interlocutory injunction be granted, it will subsist pending hearing of the main suit, which seeks, among others, an order of perpetual injunction against the respondents.

    Vintage Press Limited (publisher of The Nation), Omotoso and Bello are the applicants.

    The Senate had, in an August 4 letter, invited Omotoso and Bello to appear before it unfailingly over the story: Motion: 22 APC Northern senators ‘working against Buhari’ published on July 30.

    The Senate wrote again on August 11, threatening to invoke Section 89 (1) (D) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) to compel the applicants’ appearance.

  • Senate, Efcc and the rule of law

    Senate, Efcc and the rule of law

    The invitation extended to Mallam Ibrahim Lamorde the EFCC Chair by the Senate committee on ethics, privileges and public petitions and the drama that played out on the first day of the sitting of the Senate Committee on the matter, understandably have generated controversy.  The invitation followed a petition against Mallam Ibrahim Lamorde  the EFCC Chairman received by Senator representing Delta North Senatorial District, alleging that the EFCC chair allegedly diverted over N1 trillion of funds recovered from officials convicted of corrupt enrichment between 2003 and 2007.  The petition was submitted by Judge Uboh to Senator Peter Uwaoboshi who in turn drew the attention of the Senate President to same.

    The Senate being on recess the President of the Senate reportedly directed the Senate Committee on ethics, privileges and public petitions to investigate the matter. The committee invited the EFCC chairman for questioning on the subject matter of the petition.The EFCC chair wrote the committee asking for more time to appear and furnish documents on the matter and also sent representatives to the committee emphasizing the same point. The committee reportedly went ahead requesting the petitioner to adopt his petition and make further clarifications even in the absence of the EFCC chair who had asked for a postponement of the proceedings. The representatives of the EFCC chair led by the commission’s Director of legal services, Mr. Chile Okoroma reportedly raised a point of order wondering why the committee proceeded to entertain the petitioner without the presence of the other party in line with the fair hearing principle. The objection was overruled and the EFCC representatives requested by the committee to be excused from the proceedings.

    The above is a brief summary of the matter and the basis for the present intervention in this analysis.

    However, before proceeding further let me disclose my interest. I admit that I am one of the private prosecutors retained by the EFCC since inception even if I am not in any way connected with the subject matter of the petition since the cases forming the subject matter of the recoveries being investigated were not cases assigned to me neither was I involved in any of the recoveries under consideration. I also admit that I have had cause to handle matters for the National Assembly in the past some of which are also pending. Nonetheless, I am making the intervention under my other platform as a public affairs commentator discussing issues of national interest as a citizen of the country.

    Fundamentally, let me also admit some preliminary points. First, I agree that the EFCC being an institution created by law is certainly not above the law and therefore its activities should be open to public scrutiny particularly having been set up as an anti-graft agency to fight the economic and financial crimes and by extension corruption in Nigeria.  Secondly, I also admit that the EFCC law demands that the commission sent a comprehensive annual report to the national assembly not later than 30th September every year and this being a statutory provision, it is obligatory on the EFCC to comply. Thirdly, I also admit that the EFCC chair representing the EFCC, an agency of the federal government is under the oversight responsibilities of the National Assembly including the senate. It is also not in dispute that it is not in consonance with the rule of law for proceedings to take place in the absence of any of the parties interested. These are elementary matters that do not call for any controversy.

    I am however not unmindful of the fact that we are under a democracy with implications including respect for constitutionalism, rule of law, due process, transparency and accountability, zero-tolerance for corruption and respect for the rights and freedom of citizens amongst other obligations. These are elements of the democratic culture and the fundamentals of the democratic tradition. Again, on this score, there is no controversy. The other point that does not require any debate is that actors under a democracy must be prepared to be democrats. If there is no argument on this, I will then prefer to proceed on whether the actions of the senate and the EFCC in this matter conform to the rule of law and due process – since we operate a democracy founded on the rule of law.

    There is no disputing the fact that the senate has oversight responsibilities on agencies of governance among its core mandate, outside law making and representation.However, the responsibility for referring petitions to oversight committees belongs to the senate as a body. The procedure stipulated in the committee webpage of the senate is unambiguous on this point. Due process in this case will require a petition to be forwarded to a senator who will in turn draw the attention of the senate as a body to same at a plenary. The senate body at a plenary will now determine the issue of referral following which the petition may then be referred to the appropriate committee for investigation by the senate at plenary. The implication of this is that the decision whether or not to investigate is that of the senate at a plenary and not one vested in the senate president as one senator who is first among equals. This fundamental rule of procedure appears to have been breached in this case since the senate been on recess could not have sat at plenary to resolve the issue of referral.

    This may be a clear breach of rule of law in the handling of this particular petition. The senate may want to revisit its own rules in addressing the merits or otherwise of this petition that is of urgent national importance.

    The other issue that can be raised is the effect or likely outcome of investigation by the Senate Committee on ethics in respect of the subject matter. The committee has a responsibility of considering “the subject matter of all petitions referred to it by the Senate and shall report from time to time to the senate, its opinion of the action to be taken thereon together with such other observations on petition and the signatures attached thereof, as the committee may think fit”-  Segun Gbadegesin, a columnist in The Nation had argued thus “what can this committee accomplish with respect to the subject matter of a petition that alleges criminal action against the EFCC chair? It will only render an opinion on what action to take. So why didn’t Senate just refer the petition to the Police or ICPC both of which are also anti-corruption agencies with power to investigate and prosecute?”

    The implication of the foregoing is that the outcome of the committee’s investigation is to make recommendations which may include requesting that persons found culpable be advised to be prosecuted. This implies that the senate must act as a body in adopting the resolutions of the committee before the referral for prosecution can be effective.

    Given this scenario in the senate as a body on the same page on the procedure adopted on referral of this particular petition?

    On the part of the EFCC being an anti-graft agency, accountability and transparency in the conduct of its operations is fundamental and very key if it is to be taken seriously by the populace. The EFCC has a duty under the law to account in respect of the subject matter of the petition and this it must do conscientiously by releasing detailed information to the National Assembly and Nigerian public on how funds recovered from public officials have been managed so far. I dare say that on this particular issue EFCC is on trial and the issue of motive is of no consequence as this border on transparency and accountability and for an anti-graft agency the onus is on it to raise the bar on probity.

    Therefore, on the part of the EFCC, what is the state of the account? The public is waiting.

    Again, on the part of the EFCC, do we have regular and comprehensive annual reportof the activities of the EFCC to the National Assembly as prescribed by law?

    This is also a matter of rule of law for which the EFCC is also obliged to comply.

    Finally, I am not concerned about motives and motivations for this face-off between the Senate and the EFCC. Whether the senate is acting in good faith or in bad faith is a matter of speculation and conjecture which is not the basis of criminal responsibility and therefore not the business of this analysis. But compliance with the rule of law by the senate is a responsibility because the senate itself is a creation of the rule of law.

    The duty to also file returns on its activities to the National Assembly by the EFCC is also a rule of law and EFCC being a creation of the rule of law is also obliged to comply with the supremacy of the rule of law.

    Finally, the answer to the present controversy between the Senate and EFCC is Rule of law! Rule of law!! Rule of law!!!

  • Senate hails withdrawal of suit by Unity Forum

    The Senate praised yesterday its members who operate under the aegis of ‘The Unity Forum’ for withdrawing the suit they filed before the Federal High Court, Abuja, in which they sought to remove the Senate President, Dr. Abubakar Bukola Saraki and his Deputy, Senator Ike Ekweremadu, over allegation of forgery of the Senate Standing Orders 2015 used for the inauguration of the eighth Senate.

    Justice Ademola Adeniyi, of the Federal High Court, Abuja on Monday struck  out the case and terminated hearing on the matter after the plaintiffs withdrew their suit.

    The five members of the Unity Forum who instituted the suit are Senators Abu Ibrahim, Kabiru Marafa, Ajayi Borofice, Olugbenga Ashafa and Suleiman Hunkuyi.

    Chairman, Senate Adhoc Committee on Media and Publicity, Senator Dino Melaye, in a statement in Abuja, hailed members of both the Unity Forum loyal to Senator Ahmad Lawan and the Like Minds Senators loyal to Saraki for their maturity and sagacity.

    Melaye said that with the discontinuation of the suit, the plaintiffs and their supporters have demonstrated that national interest is superior to individual and group interest. He added that the development has put to shame divisive elements who wanted to ridicule the eighth Senate.

    Melaye said: “On behalf of the Senate, we want to commend the maturity of the Unity Forum Group and Like Minds Group. We appreciate that by withdrawing the suit, national interest has overcome individual and group interest.

    “I salute the sagacity of the Unity Forum for withdrawing the matter from the court. This is as a result of series of underground reconciliatory moves. I salute the sense of purpose of both groups.  By this very positive development, the divisive elements who wanted to bring the eighth Senate to ridicule have been completely shamed.”

    He stated that the eighth Senate will henceforth remain focused on issues that border only on the security and welfare of the people.

    “Our primary objectives shall continue to remain about the people, the people and the people. The Senate President has promised to carry all parties along and he  shall at all times place national interest above primordial sentiments”, Melaye said.

     

  • Senate hails withdrawal of suit

    The Senate yesterday hailed its members who operate under the aegis of ‘The Unity Forum’ for withdrawing the suit they filed before the Federal High Court, Abuja, in which they sought to remove the Senate President, Dr. Abubakar Bukola Saraki and his Deputy, Senator Ike Ekweremadu, from office over allegation of forgery of the Senate Standing Orders 2015 used for the inauguration of the 8th Senate.

    Justice Ademola Adeniyi, of the Federal High Court, Abuja had on Monday struck out the case and terminated further hearing on the matter after the plaintiffs who are members of the Senate Unity Forum withdrew their suit.

    The five members of the Unity Forum who instituted the suit are Senators Abu Ibrahim, Kabiru Marafa, Ajayi Borofice, Olugbenga Ashafa and Suleiman Hunkuyi.

    Chairman, Senate Adhoc Committee on Media and Publicity, Senator Dino Melaye, in a statement in Abuja, commended members of both the Unity Forum loyal to Senator Ahmad Lawan and the Like Minds Senators loyal to Saraki for their maturity and sagacity.

    Melaye said that with the discontinuation of the suit the plaintiffs and their supporters have demonstrated that national interest is superior to individual and group interest. He added that the development has put to shame divisive elements who wanted to ridicule the 8th Senate.

    Melaye said: “On behalf of the Senate, we want to commend the maturity of the Unity Group and Like Minds Group. We appreciate that by withdrawing the suit, national interest has overcome individual and group interest.”