Barely three hours after the Israeli Ambassador to Nigeria, Mr. Moshe Ram, said the crime wave in River State was blown out of proportion by the Nigerian media, another Israeli, Mr. Ehud Arny, who works for Gilmore Engineering Limited, a construction company, was Tuesday night kidnapped in Port Harcourt.
Ram had at a dinner organised in his honour by Rivers State Governor Rotimi Chibuike Amaechi in Government House, Tuesday night said: “I think Rivers State is taking good care of itself. Just like I said at the dinner, the picture that is being depicted in newspapers about what is happening in Rivers State is different from what I, in the two days I have been here, have experienced.”
The kidnapped Israeli was said to have been abducted at his residence in Austin Opara Avenue off Abacha Road in Government Reserved Area (GRA) by four armed men.
Meanwhile, the state government has reacted to the abduction, saying it was planned to embarrass the government.
A statement signed by the Media Consultant to the governor, Mr. David Oyofo, read: “The kidnapping of an Israeli Tuesday night in Port Harcourt is a calculated attempt to embarrass the government and people of Rivers State.
“The kidnapping done at a time the Israeli Ambassador was visiting Rivers State is a failed attempt to make Rivers State look unsafe to the Israeli envoy and the potential Israeli investors he came with.
“However, the government and people of Rivers State cannot be cowed by this act of criminality. The government and security forces are on top of the situation.”
Police spokesperson in the state, Mrs. Rita Abbey, confirmed the kidnap, but said the driver to the Israeli had been picked for questioning.
She said every agency had been mobilised to ensure the early and safe release of the victim.
At the dinner, Ram advised Israelis in the country to invest in the state where he said there were very attractive opportunities for investment.
He commended Amaechi for his efforts at rebuilding the economy of the state, assuring would-be investors that the situation in the state could be likened to the impression created that the state of Israel was unsafe, while those inside it do not see it as such.
Ram, who also commended the security management style of Amaechi, pledged collaboration in the area, adding that his government would partner the state in any area of possible mutual benefits.
“We have come on a fact-finding mission, myself and some Israeli businessmen on various aspects like agriculture, security, education and telecommunications. We met with the government and the private sector too.
“Our interest is to identify possible areas of cooperation and build on it and ensure that our people with requisite expertise invest and contribute to the well being and growth of the state.
“So, I think they are taking care of themselves. Of course, there is a possibility of exchanging of views and sharing know-how and since we have someone who is in the security business in our mission, he will make his own contact and see what and how we can help in the security network,
Thursday, August 28, 2008
An Israeli kidnapped
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Former Nigerian President's Daughter In N300 Million Scam
An Abuja high court yesterday refused bail to the former Health Minister, Prof Adenike Grange, Minister of State for Health, Dr Yakubu Aduku and ten others.
All the accused persons are standing trial before the high court for alleged conspiracy, stealing and fraudulent sharing of a total N300 million belonging to the Federal Government.
Justice Salisu Garba who turned down their oral request for bail yesterday however renewed his order remanding them in EFCC's custody pending when a formal bail application would be brought and argued on their behalf.
But the daughter of former President Olusegun Obasanjo and Chairperson, Senate Committee for Health, Senator Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello who was scheduled to be arraigned yesterday alongside the eleven accused persons was physically absent in court.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) alleged afresh yesterday that in spite her claim that she was not at large and was ready for her interrogation and trial, two separate invitations had been made to Iyabo to appear before it but that rather than complying, she had refused.
The EFCC however gave indication yesterday that arrangements had been concluded to amend the existing charge against Prof Grange and others in order to accommodate the name of Iyabo on the charge sheet.
But Iyabo yesterday vowed never to physically appear before the court until her application challenging the jurisdiction of the trial high court was heard and that it has the jurisdiction, she would not come.
"The EFCC know where they would find her, she is there in her office at the National Assembly performing her duties.
"We challenge the Commission to produce a copy of the said letter of invitation," he added.
In a notice of preliminary objection, Obasanjo-Bello is asking the court to strike out the count charges against her on the grounds that the court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain the charges against her.
In the alternative she is praying for an order striking out her name from the two of the 56-count charges involving her.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission [EFCC] had on Tuesday arraigned Grange, Aduku, and nine others on a 56 counts charge of conspiracy, stealing and fraudulent sharing of over N300 million.
But the name of the daughter of former President Olusegun Obasanjo, Iyabo, which was mentioned as having partaken in the graft was missing on the list of the accused persons charged to court .
The EFCC had told the court that Iyabo was presently at large and could not be arrested for prosecution but that anywhere and anytime she is found, she would be arrested and promptly brought to justice.
Iyabo, according to count 56 of the bulky charge read to the accused persons yesterday, was alleged to have, between December 2007 and March 2008 in Abuja while serving as the chairperson of the Senate Committee on Health dishonestly received the sum of N10million belonging to the Federal Government having reason to believe that same was stolen.
Her action is said to have constituted an offence punishable under section 317 of the Penal Code Act Cap 352, Laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria) Abuja.
Other accused persons arraigned over the offence by the anti-graft agency were the Permanent Secretary in the Federal Ministry of Health, Prof. Simon Ogamdi, the Director of Administration, Dr. H.B. Oyedepo and the Director of Finance, Hanafi Muhammed.
Also arraigned yesterday were a Principal Administrative Officer, Mr. Donald Ekanem and a Principal Transport Officer, Mr. Donatus Iyang.
Others include Olomo J A, Obanla Emmanuel Olatunbosun, Henry Onyeagwalam and Edem Augustine Bassey.
Of the total 57-count charge, Prof Grange's name appeared in fifteen. Her deputy's name also appeared in 15 counts while the name of the Permanent Secretary in the Federal Ministry of Health, Prof Ogamdi featured in 40 of the 56-count charge.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Nigerian Authority Deny Plans To Increase Electricity Tariff
The Federal Government has no plans to increase electricity tariff as President Umaru Musa Yar'Adua has not authorised such.
A presidential source disclosed yesterday that the President was also worried about the perception that the Federal Government is not respecting agreements reached over the privatisation processes.
According to the source, the President at a meeting with the Minister of Information and Communications, Mr. John Odey, and the Minister of State for Energy (Power), Hajia Fatimah Ibrahim, yesterday morning expressed displeasure over the announcement of the increase in the electricity tariff and the “distortion” in the purported revocation of the sale of Nigerian Telecommunications Limited (NITEL) to Transnational Corporation (Transcorp).
“The President also asked Mr. Odey to hold a meeting and a joint press conference with Transcorp Chairman and Director General of the Nigerian Stock Exchange (NSE), Dr. Ndi Okereke-Onyiuke, to tidy up the truth about the approval he gave from the disengagement of Transcorp from the sale NITEL/MTEL,” the source said.
THISDAY gathered that President Yar’Adua had to delay his trip to Maiduguri, Borno State by a few hours in order to meet the ministers.
“President Yar'Adua, at the meeting, expressed displeasure with the way the two ministers handled the issues,” the source said.
The Minister of Information and Communications had in a statement last weekend announced the revocation of the sale of the telecommunications firm to Transcorp.
A letter by Odey addressed to the Group Managing Director of Transcorp reads: “Following the failure of Transnational Corporation in the post-sale transaction of NITEL/M-TEL as contained in the Share Purchase Agreement signed between your organisation and the Federal Government through the Bureau of Public Enterprises; the Federal Government has taken a decision to reverse the sale in consonance with the relevant sections of the Agreement.
“This is also in addition to the withdrawal of your Technical Partners – British Telecoms – the act of which negates the Share Purchase Agreement.
“But in consideration of the fact that you are a Nigerian company and taking into cognisance your antecedents, the Federal Government has magnanimously approved your retention of ten per cent (10%) of the company’s share (NITEL/M-TEL).
“In the circumstance, I am to request you to keep in abeyance all actions pertaining to the operations of NITEL/M-TEL forthwith.
“By copy of this letter, the CEO’s of NITEL, M-TEL and BPE are hereby informed of this development and directed to note the above and ensure strict compliance.”
The Minister of State for Energy (Power) on her part had on Wednesday at the just concluded Nigerian Oil and Gas Conference in Abuja announced the increase in electricity tariff.
She had hinged the increase on attracting investment into the power sector, adding that the tariff, which currently stands at N6.00 per kilowatt per hour, had to be increased because potential private investors considered it very low.
She, however, did not state by how much the tariff would be increased but argued that for the country to develop the partnership with the private sector, there was the need to develop a competitive model to attract private investors.
The Presidency source said President Yar'Adua, at the meeting held at the Presidential Villa, Abuja directed Hajia Ibrahim to retract the statement.
The President, at the meeting, had said his government would not increase any tariff on electricity until there is stable power supply in the country.
According to the source, "the President invited the two ministers to explain their roles in the two issues. There is no plan to increase tariff on electricity and no such thing would be done until Nigerians can get stable power supply; that is the position of the President. He was very angry after reading the report on the increase and has asked the minister to retract her statement. Nigerians can be rest assured that no kobo will be added until they begin to enjoy stable electricity. And the President is working round the clock to ensure that.
“On the controversy over the revocation of the sale of NITEL to Transcorp, the President said he could not understand how what he approved was distorted in the media and directed Mr. Odey to hold a meeting and joint press conference with the Transcorp chairman, Dr. Okereke-Onyiuke.
“The President's approval tallied with what Transcorp had agreed with the Federal Government. The President does not understand where ‘revocation’ came from.
"This President believes that the best way to properly address the nation's economic challenges is through the Private Public Partnership (PPP). So, how can he take a decision that injures private investment? What the President approved on NITEL/MTEL was a decision already agreed between the Federal Government and Transcorp to rescue the telecommunications company that is very strategic for the nation.”
He said the President would soon address the nation on his efforts to redirect the economy.
Nigerians, he said, would appreciate what the President had spent the last eight months doing, adding that he had clear a direction on the power sector and would come out clearly with targets and timelines that would be met on power generation, transmission and distribution.
The emergency in the sector would also be declared soon and it would be far-reaching, not the type of thing most Nigerians envisage, the source said.
"What the President is coming out with is tied to the future of the country and not just the cosmetic approach or mere pronouncement. Yes, it is true the President promised he would declare emergency within three months of his administration. But having looked at the global picture in the sector when he came in, he realised he would be doing a disservice to the nation if he didn't take longer time to examine all the contending issues on ground and find lasting solutions to them," the source added.
The Special Adviser to the President on Communications, Mr. Olusegun Adeniyi, had told THISDAY on Wednesday that the revocation of the sale of NITEL to Transcorp had not been reversed, contrary to the impression created by the statement issued by Odey.
Adeniyi had said that the minister claimed that the media misquoted him on the issue.
According to Adeniyi, “I fail to understand where the story of the so-called reversal of NITEL/Mtel sales came from because I have spoken to the minister and he said he was misrepresented…I am aware of the issues concerning NITEL/Mtel and Transcorp and the various meetings that were held between the management and the government to address these problems which have been killing the company.
He had said the intervention “of the President on the issue followed petitions and appeals from several stakeholders, including the union and current management of Transcorp, who have shown very clearly that they need help. The approval of the President is not, and should therefore not be construed to mean reversal of the sale of Transcorp”.
Adeniyi had also said the two presidential approvals are: “One, that the Federal Government shares be diluted by 24 per cent and Transcorp Plc shares by 41 per cent to enable the new strategic investor secure 65 per cent controlling share holding. Two, that the Bureau of Public Enterprise, BPE, should undertake a transparent, public and sincere bidding for these divested shares.
“I am aware that Transcorp management has no problem with these decisions that were taken to protect the investors and help resolve some of the problems associated with the privatisation of the sales. Yes, it is true the President also directed that all allegations bordering on underhand dealings in the process leading to the privatisation be investigated by the relevant authorities. That is the correct position with regards to Transcorp so it is not accurate to use the word reversal because nothing has been reversed.”
A presidential source disclosed yesterday that the President was also worried about the perception that the Federal Government is not respecting agreements reached over the privatisation processes.
According to the source, the President at a meeting with the Minister of Information and Communications, Mr. John Odey, and the Minister of State for Energy (Power), Hajia Fatimah Ibrahim, yesterday morning expressed displeasure over the announcement of the increase in the electricity tariff and the “distortion” in the purported revocation of the sale of Nigerian Telecommunications Limited (NITEL) to Transnational Corporation (Transcorp).
“The President also asked Mr. Odey to hold a meeting and a joint press conference with Transcorp Chairman and Director General of the Nigerian Stock Exchange (NSE), Dr. Ndi Okereke-Onyiuke, to tidy up the truth about the approval he gave from the disengagement of Transcorp from the sale NITEL/MTEL,” the source said.
THISDAY gathered that President Yar’Adua had to delay his trip to Maiduguri, Borno State by a few hours in order to meet the ministers.
“President Yar'Adua, at the meeting, expressed displeasure with the way the two ministers handled the issues,” the source said.
The Minister of Information and Communications had in a statement last weekend announced the revocation of the sale of the telecommunications firm to Transcorp.
A letter by Odey addressed to the Group Managing Director of Transcorp reads: “Following the failure of Transnational Corporation in the post-sale transaction of NITEL/M-TEL as contained in the Share Purchase Agreement signed between your organisation and the Federal Government through the Bureau of Public Enterprises; the Federal Government has taken a decision to reverse the sale in consonance with the relevant sections of the Agreement.
“This is also in addition to the withdrawal of your Technical Partners – British Telecoms – the act of which negates the Share Purchase Agreement.
“But in consideration of the fact that you are a Nigerian company and taking into cognisance your antecedents, the Federal Government has magnanimously approved your retention of ten per cent (10%) of the company’s share (NITEL/M-TEL).
“In the circumstance, I am to request you to keep in abeyance all actions pertaining to the operations of NITEL/M-TEL forthwith.
“By copy of this letter, the CEO’s of NITEL, M-TEL and BPE are hereby informed of this development and directed to note the above and ensure strict compliance.”
The Minister of State for Energy (Power) on her part had on Wednesday at the just concluded Nigerian Oil and Gas Conference in Abuja announced the increase in electricity tariff.
She had hinged the increase on attracting investment into the power sector, adding that the tariff, which currently stands at N6.00 per kilowatt per hour, had to be increased because potential private investors considered it very low.
She, however, did not state by how much the tariff would be increased but argued that for the country to develop the partnership with the private sector, there was the need to develop a competitive model to attract private investors.
The Presidency source said President Yar'Adua, at the meeting held at the Presidential Villa, Abuja directed Hajia Ibrahim to retract the statement.
The President, at the meeting, had said his government would not increase any tariff on electricity until there is stable power supply in the country.
According to the source, "the President invited the two ministers to explain their roles in the two issues. There is no plan to increase tariff on electricity and no such thing would be done until Nigerians can get stable power supply; that is the position of the President. He was very angry after reading the report on the increase and has asked the minister to retract her statement. Nigerians can be rest assured that no kobo will be added until they begin to enjoy stable electricity. And the President is working round the clock to ensure that.
“On the controversy over the revocation of the sale of NITEL to Transcorp, the President said he could not understand how what he approved was distorted in the media and directed Mr. Odey to hold a meeting and joint press conference with the Transcorp chairman, Dr. Okereke-Onyiuke.
“The President's approval tallied with what Transcorp had agreed with the Federal Government. The President does not understand where ‘revocation’ came from.
"This President believes that the best way to properly address the nation's economic challenges is through the Private Public Partnership (PPP). So, how can he take a decision that injures private investment? What the President approved on NITEL/MTEL was a decision already agreed between the Federal Government and Transcorp to rescue the telecommunications company that is very strategic for the nation.”
He said the President would soon address the nation on his efforts to redirect the economy.
Nigerians, he said, would appreciate what the President had spent the last eight months doing, adding that he had clear a direction on the power sector and would come out clearly with targets and timelines that would be met on power generation, transmission and distribution.
The emergency in the sector would also be declared soon and it would be far-reaching, not the type of thing most Nigerians envisage, the source said.
"What the President is coming out with is tied to the future of the country and not just the cosmetic approach or mere pronouncement. Yes, it is true the President promised he would declare emergency within three months of his administration. But having looked at the global picture in the sector when he came in, he realised he would be doing a disservice to the nation if he didn't take longer time to examine all the contending issues on ground and find lasting solutions to them," the source added.
The Special Adviser to the President on Communications, Mr. Olusegun Adeniyi, had told THISDAY on Wednesday that the revocation of the sale of NITEL to Transcorp had not been reversed, contrary to the impression created by the statement issued by Odey.
Adeniyi had said that the minister claimed that the media misquoted him on the issue.
According to Adeniyi, “I fail to understand where the story of the so-called reversal of NITEL/Mtel sales came from because I have spoken to the minister and he said he was misrepresented…I am aware of the issues concerning NITEL/Mtel and Transcorp and the various meetings that were held between the management and the government to address these problems which have been killing the company.
He had said the intervention “of the President on the issue followed petitions and appeals from several stakeholders, including the union and current management of Transcorp, who have shown very clearly that they need help. The approval of the President is not, and should therefore not be construed to mean reversal of the sale of Transcorp”.
Adeniyi had also said the two presidential approvals are: “One, that the Federal Government shares be diluted by 24 per cent and Transcorp Plc shares by 41 per cent to enable the new strategic investor secure 65 per cent controlling share holding. Two, that the Bureau of Public Enterprise, BPE, should undertake a transparent, public and sincere bidding for these divested shares.
“I am aware that Transcorp management has no problem with these decisions that were taken to protect the investors and help resolve some of the problems associated with the privatisation of the sales. Yes, it is true the President also directed that all allegations bordering on underhand dealings in the process leading to the privatisation be investigated by the relevant authorities. That is the correct position with regards to Transcorp so it is not accurate to use the word reversal because nothing has been reversed.”
President Yar’Adua Knows His Faith On Tuesday
Finally, the D-day is here. The Court of Appeal hearing the consolidated petition of the presidential candidate of All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP), Major-Gen. Muhammadu Buhari (rtd), and his Action Congress (AC) counterpart, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, against the election of President Umaru Yar’Adua will on Tuesday deliver judgment in the case.
Also, the Benue State Election Tribunal will deliver its verdict tomorrow in the petition against the Senate President, Senator David Mark, in the April 21 senatorial poll in the state.
The petition was filed by the ANPP candidate in the election, Alhaji Usman Abubakar.
When news filtered in yesterday that the presidential election tribunal had concluded plans to deliver judgment, the premises of the tribunal at the Court of Appeal, Abuja was besieged by supporters of parties to the suit.
Counsel to Buhari, Chief Mike Ahamba (SAN); his Atiku counterpart, Mr. Emeka Ngige (SAN); and Yar’Adua’s counsel, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), all expressed satisfaction with the development, saying they were keeping their fingers crossed.
They had all adopted their written addresses last week in the midst of the strike embarked upon by judicial workers in the country which had initially affected the case and crippled activities in other courts.
Atiku and Buhari are contesting the result of the April 21 presidential election, which had produced President Yar’Adua of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as winner.
They are insisting the election was not conducted in substantial compliance with the Electoral Act 2006.
The tribunal had last week reserved judgment in the consolidated petitions.
In his final address, Buhari said the voters’ register used for the election was so irregular “that even photos of children featured in many documents”.
He claimed that he had established beyond reasonable doubts that results in form EC8D(A)s and EC8E were arbitrarily assigned without any election at the base.
Buhari said he had shown through different documents that results were written on different days before the election and after the results had been announced.
“It is submitted that where the so-called final results contain figures that were said to have arisen before the date of election and even after the so-called final result had been announced, then it would take minimal objectivity to come to a conclusion that the final result was arbitrarily put together,” he said.
Before closing his case, the AC candidate had applied to tender the official report of the election by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
But the court upheld the objection of President Yar’Adua, saying the application was out of time and that if the petitioner knew it was vital to his case he would have tendered it earlier.
Atiku’s counsel, Prof. Babatunde Kasumu SAN, had complained that his answers, to the interrogatories served on him contradicted his account in the said report and accused him of perjury.
He said it was wrong for Iwu to insinuate that the contract for the printing of ballot papers was awarded to the Nigerian Security Printing and Minting Plc which contradicted what he said in the official report of the election he presented in October last year that the ballot papers were printed by a South African company.
Atiku also insisted he was wrongfully excluded from the April 21, 2007 election.
The President’s counsel, Olanipekun, had objected to the application on several grounds, including that the INEC report was neither pleaded nor was any witness statement attached to the petition.
President Yar’Adua also told the court that Buhari had not proved any case against him because the criminal allegations made were not proved beyond reasonable doubt.
In the same vein, INEC, represented by Mr. Kanu Agabi (SAN), held that Buhari’s petition was like a tripod now resting on a single but very weak leg because both the party and Buhari’s running mate, Chief Edwin Ume-Ezeoke, had since withdrawn from the suit.
He argued that the petition indicated that Ume-Ezeoke enjoyed joint ticket and without him in the suit, nothing can be made out of all issues raised in the petition, stressing that the petition ought not to have been filed in the first place and consequently must suffer a dismissal.
The arguments of both Agabi and President Yar’Adua’s counsel, Olanipekun, with respect to Buhari’s petition were similar in that they submitted that the depositions made against the election were only from five out of 36 states of the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory, FCT Abuja.
Agabi argued that all the irregularities, alleged by the petitioner and which must affect the outcome of the election, were not attributed to INEC and that the court should not act on account of the allegation.
According to him, “The law insists on substantial compliance with the law and not total or absolute compliance. Election is not perfect anywhere. Our submission is that INEC properly documented the election. Therefore the allegation that there were malpractices in five states cannot stand because if the ballots are valid for 25 states, then they are valid for 36 states. It is a presidential election we are talking about and this petition must be dismissed.”
Olanipekun told the court that all allegations bordered on crimes and that the onus was on Buhari to prove beyond reasonable doubt notwithstanding that it was an election matter, adding that it was just too late for the petitioner to abandon the criminal aspect at this stage of trial.
Responding, Ahamba (SAN), Buhari’s lawyer, clarified that the petition did not abandon any state and that the insinuation that evidence was led only in respect of five states was a ploy to distract the tribunal from the main issue of whether the results of the election were actually assigned or whether they arose from the election conducted in compliance with the Electoral Act.
He said INEC refused to further explanation on various discrepancies and urged the court to take cognizance of the European Union’s report on the election, saying if the law of the country allows monitors to observe its election, then reports emanating from such observation should be deemed relevant in the determination of the petition.
Ahamba submitted that there were results before and after the election and one contradicted the other and that coming from the same source, INEC, had only shown that it did not conduct a credible and acceptable election.
He said he never asked the court to set aside the practice direction and urged the court to allow the petition “because the election was badly conducted.”
With respect to Atiku’s arm of the consolidated petition, Olanipekun said the issue of exclusion is a life issue which the court must resolve within the narrow perspective of section 145 (1) (d) of the Electoral Act.
He said the petitioner had not demonstrated how ballot papers were stuffed nor tendered the smashed ballot boxes in his evidence.
Olanipekun submitted that Atiku was not excluded because the name of his party, AC, and the symbol were on the specimen of the ballot and appeared as No 1 on the list.
He argued that election was conducted and AC won in Lagos beating PDP mercilessly, saying having contested the election and results declared for the party in Oyo and other states, the petitioner could not ask the court to decide on the basis of media and European report.
The laws of the country, he said, specified how election should be conducted and such laws did not include foreign reports.
Also, the Benue State Election Tribunal will deliver its verdict tomorrow in the petition against the Senate President, Senator David Mark, in the April 21 senatorial poll in the state.
The petition was filed by the ANPP candidate in the election, Alhaji Usman Abubakar.
When news filtered in yesterday that the presidential election tribunal had concluded plans to deliver judgment, the premises of the tribunal at the Court of Appeal, Abuja was besieged by supporters of parties to the suit.
Counsel to Buhari, Chief Mike Ahamba (SAN); his Atiku counterpart, Mr. Emeka Ngige (SAN); and Yar’Adua’s counsel, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), all expressed satisfaction with the development, saying they were keeping their fingers crossed.
They had all adopted their written addresses last week in the midst of the strike embarked upon by judicial workers in the country which had initially affected the case and crippled activities in other courts.
Atiku and Buhari are contesting the result of the April 21 presidential election, which had produced President Yar’Adua of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as winner.
They are insisting the election was not conducted in substantial compliance with the Electoral Act 2006.
The tribunal had last week reserved judgment in the consolidated petitions.
In his final address, Buhari said the voters’ register used for the election was so irregular “that even photos of children featured in many documents”.
He claimed that he had established beyond reasonable doubts that results in form EC8D(A)s and EC8E were arbitrarily assigned without any election at the base.
Buhari said he had shown through different documents that results were written on different days before the election and after the results had been announced.
“It is submitted that where the so-called final results contain figures that were said to have arisen before the date of election and even after the so-called final result had been announced, then it would take minimal objectivity to come to a conclusion that the final result was arbitrarily put together,” he said.
Before closing his case, the AC candidate had applied to tender the official report of the election by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
But the court upheld the objection of President Yar’Adua, saying the application was out of time and that if the petitioner knew it was vital to his case he would have tendered it earlier.
Atiku’s counsel, Prof. Babatunde Kasumu SAN, had complained that his answers, to the interrogatories served on him contradicted his account in the said report and accused him of perjury.
He said it was wrong for Iwu to insinuate that the contract for the printing of ballot papers was awarded to the Nigerian Security Printing and Minting Plc which contradicted what he said in the official report of the election he presented in October last year that the ballot papers were printed by a South African company.
Atiku also insisted he was wrongfully excluded from the April 21, 2007 election.
The President’s counsel, Olanipekun, had objected to the application on several grounds, including that the INEC report was neither pleaded nor was any witness statement attached to the petition.
President Yar’Adua also told the court that Buhari had not proved any case against him because the criminal allegations made were not proved beyond reasonable doubt.
In the same vein, INEC, represented by Mr. Kanu Agabi (SAN), held that Buhari’s petition was like a tripod now resting on a single but very weak leg because both the party and Buhari’s running mate, Chief Edwin Ume-Ezeoke, had since withdrawn from the suit.
He argued that the petition indicated that Ume-Ezeoke enjoyed joint ticket and without him in the suit, nothing can be made out of all issues raised in the petition, stressing that the petition ought not to have been filed in the first place and consequently must suffer a dismissal.
The arguments of both Agabi and President Yar’Adua’s counsel, Olanipekun, with respect to Buhari’s petition were similar in that they submitted that the depositions made against the election were only from five out of 36 states of the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory, FCT Abuja.
Agabi argued that all the irregularities, alleged by the petitioner and which must affect the outcome of the election, were not attributed to INEC and that the court should not act on account of the allegation.
According to him, “The law insists on substantial compliance with the law and not total or absolute compliance. Election is not perfect anywhere. Our submission is that INEC properly documented the election. Therefore the allegation that there were malpractices in five states cannot stand because if the ballots are valid for 25 states, then they are valid for 36 states. It is a presidential election we are talking about and this petition must be dismissed.”
Olanipekun told the court that all allegations bordered on crimes and that the onus was on Buhari to prove beyond reasonable doubt notwithstanding that it was an election matter, adding that it was just too late for the petitioner to abandon the criminal aspect at this stage of trial.
Responding, Ahamba (SAN), Buhari’s lawyer, clarified that the petition did not abandon any state and that the insinuation that evidence was led only in respect of five states was a ploy to distract the tribunal from the main issue of whether the results of the election were actually assigned or whether they arose from the election conducted in compliance with the Electoral Act.
He said INEC refused to further explanation on various discrepancies and urged the court to take cognizance of the European Union’s report on the election, saying if the law of the country allows monitors to observe its election, then reports emanating from such observation should be deemed relevant in the determination of the petition.
Ahamba submitted that there were results before and after the election and one contradicted the other and that coming from the same source, INEC, had only shown that it did not conduct a credible and acceptable election.
He said he never asked the court to set aside the practice direction and urged the court to allow the petition “because the election was badly conducted.”
With respect to Atiku’s arm of the consolidated petition, Olanipekun said the issue of exclusion is a life issue which the court must resolve within the narrow perspective of section 145 (1) (d) of the Electoral Act.
He said the petitioner had not demonstrated how ballot papers were stuffed nor tendered the smashed ballot boxes in his evidence.
Olanipekun submitted that Atiku was not excluded because the name of his party, AC, and the symbol were on the specimen of the ballot and appeared as No 1 on the list.
He argued that election was conducted and AC won in Lagos beating PDP mercilessly, saying having contested the election and results declared for the party in Oyo and other states, the petitioner could not ask the court to decide on the basis of media and European report.
The laws of the country, he said, specified how election should be conducted and such laws did not include foreign reports.
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
Nigerian Government Maintains Stand On Anti-Corruption
The Federal Government has no plan to drop charges against anybody facing prosecution in court or stop the ongoing prosecution of ex-governors, the Attorney General of the Federation and Justice Minister, Chief Mike Aondoakaa (SAN), has said.
Aondoakaa said the law must take its course in respect of the ongoing prosecution of some of the ex-governors.
Addressing journalists yesterday in his office in Abuja, the Justice Minister said: "We've never contemplated withdrawal of any charges preferred against any governor. The policy of the government is not to interfere with judicial process. We've never said that we are going to drop charges against anybody being prosecuted by the government.”
To him, all prosecutions are valid and government has no intention to discontinue any of them.
Aondoakaa’s declaration is thought to be a response to insinuations that the move to send the Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mallam Nuhu Ribadu, to the National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPSS) in Kuru, Plateau State, is to pave the ground for the discontinuation of the cases against some of the ex-governors particularly the former Delta State governor, Chief James Ibori.
The arraignment of the ex-Delta State governor had brought to six the number of former governors being prosecuted by EFCC for alleged corruption while in office.
Others include Alhaji Saminu Turaki (Jigawa), Chief Orji Kalu (Abia), Rev. Jolly Nyame (Taraba), Alhaji Buka Abba Ibrahim (Yobe) and Senator Chimaroke Nnamani (Enugu).
Yesterday, Aondoakaa also reiterated that government could not be pressurised into probing the former president, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, unless it had concrete facts to commence action against him or there is a petition to that effect.
He said President Yar ‘Adua believes in facts and not rumour and that whoever has any proof on the former leader should come forward since government is not ready to base its action on rumour or speculation.
The Justice Minister also denied that he said the judgments for which the Federal Government incurred debts were fake.
He described media reports to that effect as fake.
The AGF said in making his statement he only reacted to a question which had sought to know details of the budget proposed by his ministry before the House of Representatives Committee on Judicial Matters.
Aondoakaa said he had requested additional documents to assist his office get presidential approval and possibly make recommendations for the payment of additional balance of N12 million judgment debts.
Aondoakaa had been reported in some newspapers to have told the House Committee on Judicial Matters that the Federal Government paid $6 million to a foreign oil firm for a non-existent court judgment.
The amount was said to be part of the $18 million judgment debt awarded against the Federal Government by a United States court in favour of Marsh Oil.
Aondoakaa said the law must take its course in respect of the ongoing prosecution of some of the ex-governors.
Addressing journalists yesterday in his office in Abuja, the Justice Minister said: "We've never contemplated withdrawal of any charges preferred against any governor. The policy of the government is not to interfere with judicial process. We've never said that we are going to drop charges against anybody being prosecuted by the government.”
To him, all prosecutions are valid and government has no intention to discontinue any of them.
Aondoakaa’s declaration is thought to be a response to insinuations that the move to send the Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mallam Nuhu Ribadu, to the National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPSS) in Kuru, Plateau State, is to pave the ground for the discontinuation of the cases against some of the ex-governors particularly the former Delta State governor, Chief James Ibori.
The arraignment of the ex-Delta State governor had brought to six the number of former governors being prosecuted by EFCC for alleged corruption while in office.
Others include Alhaji Saminu Turaki (Jigawa), Chief Orji Kalu (Abia), Rev. Jolly Nyame (Taraba), Alhaji Buka Abba Ibrahim (Yobe) and Senator Chimaroke Nnamani (Enugu).
Yesterday, Aondoakaa also reiterated that government could not be pressurised into probing the former president, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, unless it had concrete facts to commence action against him or there is a petition to that effect.
He said President Yar ‘Adua believes in facts and not rumour and that whoever has any proof on the former leader should come forward since government is not ready to base its action on rumour or speculation.
The Justice Minister also denied that he said the judgments for which the Federal Government incurred debts were fake.
He described media reports to that effect as fake.
The AGF said in making his statement he only reacted to a question which had sought to know details of the budget proposed by his ministry before the House of Representatives Committee on Judicial Matters.
Aondoakaa said he had requested additional documents to assist his office get presidential approval and possibly make recommendations for the payment of additional balance of N12 million judgment debts.
Aondoakaa had been reported in some newspapers to have told the House Committee on Judicial Matters that the Federal Government paid $6 million to a foreign oil firm for a non-existent court judgment.
The amount was said to be part of the $18 million judgment debt awarded against the Federal Government by a United States court in favour of Marsh Oil.
EFCC: Lucky Igbinedion to be arrainged in court soon
The Economic and Fina-ncial Crimes Commis-sion (EFCC) yesterday filed a 142- count charge against former Edo State governor, Chief Lucky Igbinedion, before a Federal High Court in Kaduna.
This is coming on the heels of a warrant of arrest against the former governor by a Federal High Court in Abuja to answer charges on money laundering and illegal diversion of public funds preferred against him by the EFCC.
The order was issued at the instance of the EFCC, who, THISDAY learnt, will also arraign two former governors in the next one week.
The anti-graft agency had approached the court for a warrant to apprehend Igbinedion, who is presently at large.
By the order dated January 8, 2008 and entitled "Bench Warrant", any police officer who sets his or her eyes on the former governor is mandated to arrest him.
The order is expected to be executed in conjunction with Interpol, following reports that the former governor had been sighted in some European countries and North Africa in the last six months.
The former governor had been at large since May 29, 2007 when he handed over power to the incumbent governor, Prof Oserheimen Osunbor.
Igbinedion is to stand trial alongside Gava Corporation Limited, a company in which he and his father, Chief Gabriel Igbinedion and other members of his family had substantial interest; Ekpen & Sons Company, a company solely owned by his Senior Special Adviser, Patrick Eboigbodin (now at large); and Kiva Corporation Limited.
They are being charged with fraud, conspiracy, concealment and money laundering, an offence punishable under the Money Laundering (Prohibition ) Act 2003.
They were accused of concealing the origin of billions of naira that formed part of the statutory allocation to the state local governments’ funds. They were also accused of collaborating to perpetrate money laundering. The offence was contrary to Section 14(1) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2003.
The charge sheet dated January 2008 was signed by one Isa Bature Gafai, for the EFCC.
In some of the charges, the former governor was also accused of collaborating with his younger brother, Mike Igbinedion, to retain in his account, huge sums of money running in billions of naira. Most of the transactions were said to have taken place at Intercontinental Bank Plc.
Some of the 29 count charges are as follows: "That you Lucky Igbinedion on or about 22nd July, 2003 within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court did procure Gava Corporation Limited (a company owned by your father Chief Gabriel Igbinedion and other members of your family and in which you had substantial interest) to retain in its account, the sum of N34,800,000.00 (Thirty Four Million, Eight Hundred Thousand Naira) which sum formed part of the funds illegally withdrawn from the account of the Edo State Government and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 17 and punishable under Section 16 of Money Laundering (Prohibition ) Act 2003.
"That you Lucky Igbinedion and Kiva Corporation Limited on or about 23rd May , 2007 within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court did collaborate with each other to conceal the genuine origin of the sum of N18,000,000.00 (Eighteen Million, Naira) which sum formed part of the funds illegally withdrawn from the account of the Edo State Government by lodging same into the account of Kiva Corporation Limited with Intercontinental Bank Plc and which sum you knew represented the proceed of crime and you thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 14(1) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition ) Act 2004.
“That you Lucky Igbinedion on or about 4th March, 2005 within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court did procure one Mike Igbinedion (your brother) to retain in his account, the sum of N6,000,000.00 (six million naira) which sum formed part of the funds illegally withdrawn from the account of the Edo State Government and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 17 and punishable under Section 16 of Money Laundering (Prohibition ) Act 2004.
“That you Lucky Igbinedion on or about 29th September, 2005 within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court did procure Ekpen & Sons Company (a company solely owned by Patrick Eboigbodin, your Senior Special Adviser) to retain in its account, the sum of N10,000,000.00 (Ten Million Naira) which sum formed part of the funds illegally withdrawn from the account of the Edo State Government and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 17 and punishable under Section 16 of Money Laundering (Prohibition ) Act 2004.”
This is coming on the heels of a warrant of arrest against the former governor by a Federal High Court in Abuja to answer charges on money laundering and illegal diversion of public funds preferred against him by the EFCC.
The order was issued at the instance of the EFCC, who, THISDAY learnt, will also arraign two former governors in the next one week.
The anti-graft agency had approached the court for a warrant to apprehend Igbinedion, who is presently at large.
By the order dated January 8, 2008 and entitled "Bench Warrant", any police officer who sets his or her eyes on the former governor is mandated to arrest him.
The order is expected to be executed in conjunction with Interpol, following reports that the former governor had been sighted in some European countries and North Africa in the last six months.
The former governor had been at large since May 29, 2007 when he handed over power to the incumbent governor, Prof Oserheimen Osunbor.
Igbinedion is to stand trial alongside Gava Corporation Limited, a company in which he and his father, Chief Gabriel Igbinedion and other members of his family had substantial interest; Ekpen & Sons Company, a company solely owned by his Senior Special Adviser, Patrick Eboigbodin (now at large); and Kiva Corporation Limited.
They are being charged with fraud, conspiracy, concealment and money laundering, an offence punishable under the Money Laundering (Prohibition ) Act 2003.
They were accused of concealing the origin of billions of naira that formed part of the statutory allocation to the state local governments’ funds. They were also accused of collaborating to perpetrate money laundering. The offence was contrary to Section 14(1) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2003.
The charge sheet dated January 2008 was signed by one Isa Bature Gafai, for the EFCC.
In some of the charges, the former governor was also accused of collaborating with his younger brother, Mike Igbinedion, to retain in his account, huge sums of money running in billions of naira. Most of the transactions were said to have taken place at Intercontinental Bank Plc.
Some of the 29 count charges are as follows: "That you Lucky Igbinedion on or about 22nd July, 2003 within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court did procure Gava Corporation Limited (a company owned by your father Chief Gabriel Igbinedion and other members of your family and in which you had substantial interest) to retain in its account, the sum of N34,800,000.00 (Thirty Four Million, Eight Hundred Thousand Naira) which sum formed part of the funds illegally withdrawn from the account of the Edo State Government and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 17 and punishable under Section 16 of Money Laundering (Prohibition ) Act 2003.
"That you Lucky Igbinedion and Kiva Corporation Limited on or about 23rd May , 2007 within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court did collaborate with each other to conceal the genuine origin of the sum of N18,000,000.00 (Eighteen Million, Naira) which sum formed part of the funds illegally withdrawn from the account of the Edo State Government by lodging same into the account of Kiva Corporation Limited with Intercontinental Bank Plc and which sum you knew represented the proceed of crime and you thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 14(1) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition ) Act 2004.
“That you Lucky Igbinedion on or about 4th March, 2005 within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court did procure one Mike Igbinedion (your brother) to retain in his account, the sum of N6,000,000.00 (six million naira) which sum formed part of the funds illegally withdrawn from the account of the Edo State Government and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 17 and punishable under Section 16 of Money Laundering (Prohibition ) Act 2004.
“That you Lucky Igbinedion on or about 29th September, 2005 within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court did procure Ekpen & Sons Company (a company solely owned by Patrick Eboigbodin, your Senior Special Adviser) to retain in its account, the sum of N10,000,000.00 (Ten Million Naira) which sum formed part of the funds illegally withdrawn from the account of the Edo State Government and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 17 and punishable under Section 16 of Money Laundering (Prohibition ) Act 2004.”
Nigeria Constitutional amendment: NBA View
The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) yesterday said it supported the current effort by the National Assembly to review of the 1999 constitution, adding that more than anything else, the country needed amendment of some important aspects of the constitution in order to consolidate democracy.
The association, however, canvassed for "a piece-meal amendment", instead of what it called "a wholesale amendment" in which an existing constitution is totally jettisoned for a new one by successive regimes in the past.
Speaking with newsmen in Lagos, NBA President, Mr. Olisa Agbakoba, SAN who compared Nigeria with some of the world's renowned federations, said while colonial disengagement and military interruptions may be our excuses for having had six constituions ( 1960, 1963, 1979, 1989 (stillborn), 1995 (stillborn) and 1999) in just 47 years as a nation, the 1999 Constitution was a good framework for administration and consolidation of democracy, adding that what is needed was not to jettison it but continue to add to it in pursuit of federal and democratic objectives.
"The oldest federation, the United States, has had the same constitution for over 200 years and has made only 27 amendments to it. India has made 94 amendments to its constitution in 60 years.
However, Brazil has had seven constitutions since independence, Mexico six and Venezuela 26". "While some federations have maintained constitutional continuity, others have had breaks because of revolutions or military regimes. Colonial disengagement and military interruptions may be our excuses for having had 1960, 1963, 1979, 1989 (stillborn), 1995 (stillborn) and 1999 Constitutions"
"The existing Constitution is a good framework for administration and consolidation of democracy. What we need is not to throw it into a wastepaper basket but to continue to add to it in pursuit of our federal and democracy objectives," he said.
Agbakoba, who identified two crucial principles of constitutional amendment to include timing and approach, said, "under timing, we suggest that constitutional amendment in Nigeria should be an ongoing exercise. As soon as an issue identified as germane for constitutional amendment arises, the process of a new Amendment ought to be initiated at the National Assembly through a Bill. We feel that since the 1979 Constitution, it has become unnecessary to time constitutional reviews to a special resource and time unfriendly 'Constitutional Conference' of "Constituent Assembly".
"A constitutional foundation has been laid. We call for a legislative practice of 'Amend-As- You-Go' to constitutional amendment. On Approach, which has great linkage with Timing, NBA believes that piecemeal amendment is preferable to wholesale amendment in which an existing Constitution is totally jettisoned for a new one. The latter has been our practice".
The NBA president, however, proposed five key areas for immediate amendment which according to him are needed to be taken into consideration as part of the agenda for the proposed constitutional review of the 1999 Constitution in the interest of democracy consolidation
Agbakoba, who listed the five key areas to include sovereignty, supremacy, institutions consolidating democracy, institutions administering federalism and electoral reform, added that thought there may be other areas but these areas can be a good start in order to preserve democracy.
He said: "As rigid as it may be, the Constitution is evolutionary and dynamic to a great degree. Constitutional amendment, as the need arises, is part of the typical dynamism of constitutional order to meet the aspirations of a federation. Nigeria is presently at this crucial trajectory. NBA is of the view that the 1999 Constitution, as it is, cannot sustain our present democracy". "While we welcome the commitment of President Umaru Yar'Adua to Electoral Reform, we believe Constitutional Reform takes priority. The 1999 Constitution contains good provisions. It also contains both weak and obnoxious provisions and equally admits several lacunae. Above all the Constitution has legitimacy burden. But the big issue is whether all the aspirations of a people must be reflected in one feel swoop in their Constitution. We think not The standard practice in older and most contemporary democracies is that constitutional perfection is evolutionary."
The association, however, canvassed for "a piece-meal amendment", instead of what it called "a wholesale amendment" in which an existing constitution is totally jettisoned for a new one by successive regimes in the past.
Speaking with newsmen in Lagos, NBA President, Mr. Olisa Agbakoba, SAN who compared Nigeria with some of the world's renowned federations, said while colonial disengagement and military interruptions may be our excuses for having had six constituions ( 1960, 1963, 1979, 1989 (stillborn), 1995 (stillborn) and 1999) in just 47 years as a nation, the 1999 Constitution was a good framework for administration and consolidation of democracy, adding that what is needed was not to jettison it but continue to add to it in pursuit of federal and democratic objectives.
"The oldest federation, the United States, has had the same constitution for over 200 years and has made only 27 amendments to it. India has made 94 amendments to its constitution in 60 years.
However, Brazil has had seven constitutions since independence, Mexico six and Venezuela 26". "While some federations have maintained constitutional continuity, others have had breaks because of revolutions or military regimes. Colonial disengagement and military interruptions may be our excuses for having had 1960, 1963, 1979, 1989 (stillborn), 1995 (stillborn) and 1999 Constitutions"
"The existing Constitution is a good framework for administration and consolidation of democracy. What we need is not to throw it into a wastepaper basket but to continue to add to it in pursuit of our federal and democracy objectives," he said.
Agbakoba, who identified two crucial principles of constitutional amendment to include timing and approach, said, "under timing, we suggest that constitutional amendment in Nigeria should be an ongoing exercise. As soon as an issue identified as germane for constitutional amendment arises, the process of a new Amendment ought to be initiated at the National Assembly through a Bill. We feel that since the 1979 Constitution, it has become unnecessary to time constitutional reviews to a special resource and time unfriendly 'Constitutional Conference' of "Constituent Assembly".
"A constitutional foundation has been laid. We call for a legislative practice of 'Amend-As- You-Go' to constitutional amendment. On Approach, which has great linkage with Timing, NBA believes that piecemeal amendment is preferable to wholesale amendment in which an existing Constitution is totally jettisoned for a new one. The latter has been our practice".
The NBA president, however, proposed five key areas for immediate amendment which according to him are needed to be taken into consideration as part of the agenda for the proposed constitutional review of the 1999 Constitution in the interest of democracy consolidation
Agbakoba, who listed the five key areas to include sovereignty, supremacy, institutions consolidating democracy, institutions administering federalism and electoral reform, added that thought there may be other areas but these areas can be a good start in order to preserve democracy.
He said: "As rigid as it may be, the Constitution is evolutionary and dynamic to a great degree. Constitutional amendment, as the need arises, is part of the typical dynamism of constitutional order to meet the aspirations of a federation. Nigeria is presently at this crucial trajectory. NBA is of the view that the 1999 Constitution, as it is, cannot sustain our present democracy". "While we welcome the commitment of President Umaru Yar'Adua to Electoral Reform, we believe Constitutional Reform takes priority. The 1999 Constitution contains good provisions. It also contains both weak and obnoxious provisions and equally admits several lacunae. Above all the Constitution has legitimacy burden. But the big issue is whether all the aspirations of a people must be reflected in one feel swoop in their Constitution. We think not The standard practice in older and most contemporary democracies is that constitutional perfection is evolutionary."
Sunday, January 6, 2008
NIGERIA DEMOCRACY:THE SAME STORIES
International fiction/faction writer Jeffrey Archer paints a horrific picture of corruption in Nigeria and Brazil, especially, in his A Quiver Full of Arrows. However, he seemed to have missed the point that he was doing his western world a disfavour by the way he failed to discern that it was his people who, in the main, corrupted the least-developed countries’ (LDCs) operatives whom his people dealt with. Let us return to how Europe underdeveloped Africa, shortly, a story succinctly told by late Walter Rogers.
Let us instead dwell on how Europe, generally, seems to be misadjusting the thinking of Nigerians as to what is wrong and right about how we conduct our affairs – especially our electioneering. Let us do this in relation to Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) chair Prof. Maurice Iwu’s latest international altercation with the European Union (EU), assuming that recent media reports are to be believed.
What do we hear? “Iwu is a liar; he is insincere; unreliable; compromised, et cetera.” But,how come? Nigeria’s April 2007 general elections which Iwu’s INEC administered were grossly rigged, marred by irregularities and compromised to benefit the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). That is the charge, as stated by international and local observers alike and especially orchestrated by the EU according to media reports of recent.
It may be necessary for us Nigerians to take these matters in perspective. We may begin by asking these questions: does INEC “snatch” ballot boxes and bags; get its officials to “disrupt” voting; recruit “thugs” to beat up party agents; “hijack” election returns forms en route collation centres; or scare wary “eligible” voters from polling stations? Wait for it; it is political parties and the Nigerian population who do these and more, to undermine the integrity of elections in our country. Wait again.
Especially, ahead of elections 2007, Nigeria enjoyed unprecedented political enlightenment of the voting suffrage. This was orchestrated by unparalleled hype and mobilisation of the electorate by the national electoral commission, and a clear zeal to pursue the path of honour including introducing the first-time “data image capture” equipment, et cetera.
It bears commenting upon, the myriad of deliberate problems which the Nigerian system created for the electoral process, including late passage of the electoral act by even the National Assembly, late release of funds for approved projects by the government, deliberate failure of contracted agencies to supply INEC with needed materials for the elections, and indeed, a clear preference of political parties for rigging of the elections rather transparency.
Recall also that, just days to the start of polling last April, the Supreme Court of Nigeria determined that INEC had no powers under the law to screen off or exclude candidates presented by bona fide parties for the elections, contrary to popular opinion as popularly held hitherto. This meant that some elections were about to be won or lost on technical grounds, as has been the case in most election petitions tribunals lately.
Meanwhile, it bears no pedagogies to state that elections in Nigeria are a “do-or-die” matter, such that those who do not win ultimately accuse the umpire of malfeasance whereas nobody desired transparency in the first place. Whether it was Abel Guobadia’s commission, Humphrey Nwosu’s, Eme Awa’s or Victor Ovie-Whiskey’s national electoral agencies – as far as the memory could go – the combatants always never know how to be humble in defeat or magnanimous in victory.
Whereas no discerning person would dare claim that these elections are often perfect or even fair, it is not difficult to see that it is political parties and the Nigerian system which set the stage for irregularities. We know that political parties and their candidates ab initio plan not how to convince the electorate in their favour but how to outwit the opponent by whatever means possible – even if diabolical. Nothing is said about fairness, civility or legality!
So, whereas we are complacent to blame the electoral umpire for all the irregularities in the system wholesale, it ought to prick our consciences that no Nigerian politician wishes for “free and fair” elections. Consider for instance that, when in 1999 compromise presidential candidate of All-Nigeria Peoples Party and Afenifere (or Alliance for Democracy) James Olu Falae went to court to challenge the “victory” of PDP’s Olusegun Obasanjo, Falae was merely advised by his people that, Obasanjo was omo wa ni (our own son) hence Falae should jettison any grouses over his loss.
But, without sentiments as we seem to wallow in, where do we look for an evenhanded umpire to aspire to? Try, for instance, the Americans who beat their own chests as the impeccable example of evenhanded democracy. But, while you do that, do close your eyes to the recent debacle where an interested Governor Jeb Bush’s home state seemed obliged to help a wobbling blood brother, George Bush to secure a win for the presidency, despite the illegality. Or a beleaguered premier, Tony Blair manipulating security reports to secure legislative approval for war with Iraq over non-existent weapons of mass destruction.
Perhaps, one did not even need to have bordered about the so-called EU response to Prof. Iwu’s poignant insistence that INEC had singularly succeeded in breaking a Nigerian jinx: it has led the country to transit from one elected government to another – it never happened before in our history. Indeed, what an honest Nigerian would be worrying about should be how to exploit President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua’s promised electoral reform programme for a better electioneering next.
But, to be sure, nobody should allow us to continue to have the wool pulled over our eyes by the Western world with any hypocritical posturing as the EU seems to be doing currently in its altercation with Iwu over righteousness. If we take note of recent shenanigans of EU nation companies like Siemens and Wilbros willfully corrupting Africans, especially Nigerians in other forms of corruption (other than electoral), then it becomes clear to all us that the EU is merely gerrymandering in its posturing of INEC’s feat in leading Nigeria through a minefield replete with self-set obstacles.
As for Prof. Iwu, it is instructive that he is a political product of the Western world and has succeeded so far in literally giving it back to them as they come. No other electoral authority in Nigeria, in history, has ever done better than this INEC even with noticed deficiencies as we see them, except anybody is ready with contrary data. With the April polls behind us, another mileage has been covered in the route leading to the deepening and consolidation of the roots of democracy on the Nigerian socio-political milieu. We will get there definitely
Let us instead dwell on how Europe, generally, seems to be misadjusting the thinking of Nigerians as to what is wrong and right about how we conduct our affairs – especially our electioneering. Let us do this in relation to Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) chair Prof. Maurice Iwu’s latest international altercation with the European Union (EU), assuming that recent media reports are to be believed.
What do we hear? “Iwu is a liar; he is insincere; unreliable; compromised, et cetera.” But,how come? Nigeria’s April 2007 general elections which Iwu’s INEC administered were grossly rigged, marred by irregularities and compromised to benefit the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). That is the charge, as stated by international and local observers alike and especially orchestrated by the EU according to media reports of recent.
It may be necessary for us Nigerians to take these matters in perspective. We may begin by asking these questions: does INEC “snatch” ballot boxes and bags; get its officials to “disrupt” voting; recruit “thugs” to beat up party agents; “hijack” election returns forms en route collation centres; or scare wary “eligible” voters from polling stations? Wait for it; it is political parties and the Nigerian population who do these and more, to undermine the integrity of elections in our country. Wait again.
Especially, ahead of elections 2007, Nigeria enjoyed unprecedented political enlightenment of the voting suffrage. This was orchestrated by unparalleled hype and mobilisation of the electorate by the national electoral commission, and a clear zeal to pursue the path of honour including introducing the first-time “data image capture” equipment, et cetera.
It bears commenting upon, the myriad of deliberate problems which the Nigerian system created for the electoral process, including late passage of the electoral act by even the National Assembly, late release of funds for approved projects by the government, deliberate failure of contracted agencies to supply INEC with needed materials for the elections, and indeed, a clear preference of political parties for rigging of the elections rather transparency.
Recall also that, just days to the start of polling last April, the Supreme Court of Nigeria determined that INEC had no powers under the law to screen off or exclude candidates presented by bona fide parties for the elections, contrary to popular opinion as popularly held hitherto. This meant that some elections were about to be won or lost on technical grounds, as has been the case in most election petitions tribunals lately.
Meanwhile, it bears no pedagogies to state that elections in Nigeria are a “do-or-die” matter, such that those who do not win ultimately accuse the umpire of malfeasance whereas nobody desired transparency in the first place. Whether it was Abel Guobadia’s commission, Humphrey Nwosu’s, Eme Awa’s or Victor Ovie-Whiskey’s national electoral agencies – as far as the memory could go – the combatants always never know how to be humble in defeat or magnanimous in victory.
Whereas no discerning person would dare claim that these elections are often perfect or even fair, it is not difficult to see that it is political parties and the Nigerian system which set the stage for irregularities. We know that political parties and their candidates ab initio plan not how to convince the electorate in their favour but how to outwit the opponent by whatever means possible – even if diabolical. Nothing is said about fairness, civility or legality!
So, whereas we are complacent to blame the electoral umpire for all the irregularities in the system wholesale, it ought to prick our consciences that no Nigerian politician wishes for “free and fair” elections. Consider for instance that, when in 1999 compromise presidential candidate of All-Nigeria Peoples Party and Afenifere (or Alliance for Democracy) James Olu Falae went to court to challenge the “victory” of PDP’s Olusegun Obasanjo, Falae was merely advised by his people that, Obasanjo was omo wa ni (our own son) hence Falae should jettison any grouses over his loss.
But, without sentiments as we seem to wallow in, where do we look for an evenhanded umpire to aspire to? Try, for instance, the Americans who beat their own chests as the impeccable example of evenhanded democracy. But, while you do that, do close your eyes to the recent debacle where an interested Governor Jeb Bush’s home state seemed obliged to help a wobbling blood brother, George Bush to secure a win for the presidency, despite the illegality. Or a beleaguered premier, Tony Blair manipulating security reports to secure legislative approval for war with Iraq over non-existent weapons of mass destruction.
Perhaps, one did not even need to have bordered about the so-called EU response to Prof. Iwu’s poignant insistence that INEC had singularly succeeded in breaking a Nigerian jinx: it has led the country to transit from one elected government to another – it never happened before in our history. Indeed, what an honest Nigerian would be worrying about should be how to exploit President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua’s promised electoral reform programme for a better electioneering next.
But, to be sure, nobody should allow us to continue to have the wool pulled over our eyes by the Western world with any hypocritical posturing as the EU seems to be doing currently in its altercation with Iwu over righteousness. If we take note of recent shenanigans of EU nation companies like Siemens and Wilbros willfully corrupting Africans, especially Nigerians in other forms of corruption (other than electoral), then it becomes clear to all us that the EU is merely gerrymandering in its posturing of INEC’s feat in leading Nigeria through a minefield replete with self-set obstacles.
As for Prof. Iwu, it is instructive that he is a political product of the Western world and has succeeded so far in literally giving it back to them as they come. No other electoral authority in Nigeria, in history, has ever done better than this INEC even with noticed deficiencies as we see them, except anybody is ready with contrary data. With the April polls behind us, another mileage has been covered in the route leading to the deepening and consolidation of the roots of democracy on the Nigerian socio-political milieu. We will get there definitely
"NIGER DELTA PROBLEMS NEEDS URGENT ATTENTION"Ekweremadu
Deputy Senate President, Senator Ike Ekweremadu, yesterday said the Upper Legislative House will declare the Niger Delta region a disaster area, as part of Federal Government efforts at finding lasting solution to the problems of the zone.
Expressing disappointment that the Federal Government has made several efforts to address problems of the Niger Delta to no avail, Ekweremadu said by declaring the area a disaster zone, government will then pay “undiluted attention to its development.”
In doing this, he said government will be seeking the support of the international or development partners to work with it to develop strategies for the Niger Delta question, adding that whatever government plans would be in addition to plans contained in the Niger Delta Development Master Plan, which would be an improvement to the plan.
“I have looked at the Niger Delta Development Master Plan, and I think we can improve on that. But what is important is the determination and zeal in dealing with this issue once and for all," he said.
Ekweremadu, who spoke in Enugu during a cash award of N25,000 each to 200 students from his constituency, Enugu West Senatorial District, said what the people of the Niger Delta need was infrastructural development that will touch their individual lives.He said it was regrettable that government's efforts have not been felt when compared to the amount of money that has gone to the area for development.“We need to show transparency, because a lot of money has been spent by the Federal Government in terms of the Niger Delta, but I don’t think that has translated meaningfully to the well-being of the people. If you look at the amount of money they received state by state and see what is on the ground, you begin to wonder where the money went to. So we need to bring in people whom we can trust, including development partners," he said.
Expressing disappointment that the Federal Government has made several efforts to address problems of the Niger Delta to no avail, Ekweremadu said by declaring the area a disaster zone, government will then pay “undiluted attention to its development.”
In doing this, he said government will be seeking the support of the international or development partners to work with it to develop strategies for the Niger Delta question, adding that whatever government plans would be in addition to plans contained in the Niger Delta Development Master Plan, which would be an improvement to the plan.
“I have looked at the Niger Delta Development Master Plan, and I think we can improve on that. But what is important is the determination and zeal in dealing with this issue once and for all," he said.
Ekweremadu, who spoke in Enugu during a cash award of N25,000 each to 200 students from his constituency, Enugu West Senatorial District, said what the people of the Niger Delta need was infrastructural development that will touch their individual lives.He said it was regrettable that government's efforts have not been felt when compared to the amount of money that has gone to the area for development.“We need to show transparency, because a lot of money has been spent by the Federal Government in terms of the Niger Delta, but I don’t think that has translated meaningfully to the well-being of the people. If you look at the amount of money they received state by state and see what is on the ground, you begin to wonder where the money went to. So we need to bring in people whom we can trust, including development partners," he said.
Significance of Hijra Calendar
The Islamic calendar (Hijra calendar) is a purely lunar calendar. It contains 12 months that are based on the motion of the moon, and because 12 synodic months is only 12 x 29.53=354.36 days, the Islamic calendar is consistently shorter than a tropical year, and therefore it shifts with respect to the Christian calendar. The calendar is based on the Qur'an (Sura IX, 36-37) and its proper observance is a sacred duty for Muslims.
Unfortunately some Muslim astronomers have suggested that lunar date lines should be marked on the world map for the Muslims to begin their fasting and celebrating their Eid. This would be according to the first visibility of the crescent. The so-called curved lunar date lines always keep on changing and they pass through cities, towns and even houses! They do not abide the rules of the date line. So the Lunar date lines are impracticable and meaningless. They are neither scientific nor Islamic.
Hijra Calendar is the same astronomical Lunar Calendar and the month begins and ends on conjunction (Astronomical new moon), means conjunction is last day of the month. Some time it is on 29th day and some times 30th day. The calendar contains 12 months that are based on the Qur'an (Sura IX, 36-37). It is based on the motion of the Moon and its proper observance is a sacred duty for Muslims. Each phase of moon and its angular distance is indicate each Date as shown a natural calendar hung in the sky. Some times we cannot see the moon because of the changes in weather. but it does not make any difference in calendar dates because it is related to the motion of the moon. Not its physical visibility. The astronomical new moon time and date already computed exactly for thousands of years backward and forward.
Unfortunately some Muslim astronomers have suggested that lunar date lines should be marked on the world map for the Muslims to begin their fasting and celebrating their Eid. This would be according to the first visibility of the crescent. The so-called curved lunar date lines always keep on changing and they pass through cities, towns and even houses! They do not abide the rules of the date line. So the Lunar date lines are impracticable and meaningless. They are neither scientific nor Islamic.
Hijra Calendar is the same astronomical Lunar Calendar and the month begins and ends on conjunction (Astronomical new moon), means conjunction is last day of the month. Some time it is on 29th day and some times 30th day. The calendar contains 12 months that are based on the Qur'an (Sura IX, 36-37). It is based on the motion of the Moon and its proper observance is a sacred duty for Muslims. Each phase of moon and its angular distance is indicate each Date as shown a natural calendar hung in the sky. Some times we cannot see the moon because of the changes in weather. but it does not make any difference in calendar dates because it is related to the motion of the moon. Not its physical visibility. The astronomical new moon time and date already computed exactly for thousands of years backward and forward.
YAR ADUA APPROVED RIBADU STUDY LEAVE
President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua may have been reluctant to approve the study leave for Mallam Nuhu Ribadu, chairman of Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), THISDAY checks have revealed.
The reluctance may have been because the president needed wider consultation but was forced to approve the course in the face of relentless media accusation that the study leave was a ploy to shield former governors from prosecution, official sources said.
Indeed, the president had only just received the request from Mr Mike Okiro, the Inspector General of Police (IGP), to send Ribadu on a senior management course at the National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPSS) in Kuru, Plateau State, when news got round that Ribadu had been removed, whereas the approval for the course was only given Friday last week, four days after it broke in the media.
According to officials conversant with the development, when Okiro informed Ribadu of the course, the EFCC chairman reportedly asked Okiro if the President had been informed about the decision.
The IGP was said to have replied in the negative, asking: “Do you think the president needs to know about this? It’s a routine course for senior officers in the force.”
“Ribadu told Okiro that with his position as chairman of EFCC, he was reporting directly to the President and only the President could send him on a course of this nature,” the source said.
The IGP then decided to take the matter directly to Yar’Adua.
On meeting with Yar’Adua on Christmas eve, Okiro was said to have presented the file containing the names of those to be sent on the course.
Presidency sources said the view of the Villa was that approving courses was not the job of the president. However, with the name of Ribadu on the list, the president knew the import and decided to think through it, the source added.
It is believed that if the President wanted to approve the course, he would have done it there and then but chose to be reticent on the matter.
By the next day, the media attention began and speculations were rife as many imputed political motives. Coming during a holiday period when the file was still at the presidency and the issue had not been addressed, the President was said to have wondered what the hot air was all about.
With the widespread criticism, culminating in Prof. Wole Soyinka's statement over the issue, the President came to the conclusion that only one decision could be taken on the matter: to approve the course and protect the Police high command.
The President's opinion was that Ribadu had not been removed since he was only going on a course in February. When Ribadu completes the course, official sources told THISDAY, the next line of action would be taken.
Ribadu, who was promoted to the rank of an Assistant Inspector General of Police (AIG) by former president Olusegun Obasanjo, had not gone on any senior officers’ courses for the rank of a commissioner of police and that of an AIG.
This development, the source said, did not conform to the rules and procedures for promotion and appointments.
Sources at the Police headquarters confirmed that of the serving 17 AIGs in the police today, only Muazu Hadejia and Ribadu are yet to attend a senior officers’ course.
The others are either fellows of the National Defence College (FWC) or alumni of the NIPSS.
More than 17 Commissioners of Police (CPs) and Deputy Commissioners of Police (DCPs) have gone to NIPSS and the National Defence College while five serving Deputy Commissioners and one CP are currently attending the National Defence College course in Abuja.
Meanwhile, in a statement issued by the EFCC yesterday, the commission has dismissed claims that there is a conflict between the president and its chairman over the NIPSS course.
The statement, signed by Mr. Osita Nwajah, Head, Media & Publicity, read: “In the past few days, the EFCC as well as its Executive Chairman, Nuhu Ribadu, have been the subject of intense media debate generated by the decision to send the EFCC Chairman on a course at the National Institute of Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPSS), Kuru, Plateau State.
“The Commission has however refused to be drawn into the public debate.
“EFCC now wishes to clarify that it is the position of the Commission that government can send any public officer on training to enhance his or her performance and continued service to the nation. And, as a loyal citizen and public servant, the opinion of Ribadu is not any different from the expressed position of the Commission.
“It is however worrying that the NIPSS debate has opened a window of blackmail and calumny for many of those who disagree with the Commission. This group has routinely planted stories in the media, which they make-believe as being sponsored by the Executive Chairman, in an attempt at discrediting the authorities, especially Mr. President. The stories which have explored all sorts of high wire politics scenarios and power tussle permutations are calculated at presenting the Executive Chairman as being in conflict with Mr. President and the leadership of the Nigeria Police. Nothing can be farther from the truth.
“Further, the Commission wishes to deal with the insinuation being peddled in certain quarters that the President is interfering in the work of the Commission.
The Commission hereby puts on record that President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua has never interfered in the work of EFCC and has supported the Commission’s resolve to bring to book, all who have committed any of the crimes identified in the EFCC Establishment Act (2004) and all other laws that the Commission is mandated to enforce.
“The Executive Chairman, EFCC, wishes to seize this opportunity to assure Mr. President, the leadership of the Nigeria Police and indeed, all patriotic Nigerians, of his absolute loyalty and dedication to the service of our fatherland.
“It bears restating here that as a loyal public servant, Nuhu Ribadu has no problem with the decision of Mr. President on the recommendation of the Inspector General of Police, to send him on a self-improvement course of study at the NIPSS, Kuru. Any story that suggests otherwise is only meant to cast him in the bad light of an unnecessary antagonism against government and the Police high command and should be discounted.
“The Commission wishes to thank the general public for the tremendous support it has received in the discharge of its duties.”
The reluctance may have been because the president needed wider consultation but was forced to approve the course in the face of relentless media accusation that the study leave was a ploy to shield former governors from prosecution, official sources said.
Indeed, the president had only just received the request from Mr Mike Okiro, the Inspector General of Police (IGP), to send Ribadu on a senior management course at the National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPSS) in Kuru, Plateau State, when news got round that Ribadu had been removed, whereas the approval for the course was only given Friday last week, four days after it broke in the media.
According to officials conversant with the development, when Okiro informed Ribadu of the course, the EFCC chairman reportedly asked Okiro if the President had been informed about the decision.
The IGP was said to have replied in the negative, asking: “Do you think the president needs to know about this? It’s a routine course for senior officers in the force.”
“Ribadu told Okiro that with his position as chairman of EFCC, he was reporting directly to the President and only the President could send him on a course of this nature,” the source said.
The IGP then decided to take the matter directly to Yar’Adua.
On meeting with Yar’Adua on Christmas eve, Okiro was said to have presented the file containing the names of those to be sent on the course.
Presidency sources said the view of the Villa was that approving courses was not the job of the president. However, with the name of Ribadu on the list, the president knew the import and decided to think through it, the source added.
It is believed that if the President wanted to approve the course, he would have done it there and then but chose to be reticent on the matter.
By the next day, the media attention began and speculations were rife as many imputed political motives. Coming during a holiday period when the file was still at the presidency and the issue had not been addressed, the President was said to have wondered what the hot air was all about.
With the widespread criticism, culminating in Prof. Wole Soyinka's statement over the issue, the President came to the conclusion that only one decision could be taken on the matter: to approve the course and protect the Police high command.
The President's opinion was that Ribadu had not been removed since he was only going on a course in February. When Ribadu completes the course, official sources told THISDAY, the next line of action would be taken.
Ribadu, who was promoted to the rank of an Assistant Inspector General of Police (AIG) by former president Olusegun Obasanjo, had not gone on any senior officers’ courses for the rank of a commissioner of police and that of an AIG.
This development, the source said, did not conform to the rules and procedures for promotion and appointments.
Sources at the Police headquarters confirmed that of the serving 17 AIGs in the police today, only Muazu Hadejia and Ribadu are yet to attend a senior officers’ course.
The others are either fellows of the National Defence College (FWC) or alumni of the NIPSS.
More than 17 Commissioners of Police (CPs) and Deputy Commissioners of Police (DCPs) have gone to NIPSS and the National Defence College while five serving Deputy Commissioners and one CP are currently attending the National Defence College course in Abuja.
Meanwhile, in a statement issued by the EFCC yesterday, the commission has dismissed claims that there is a conflict between the president and its chairman over the NIPSS course.
The statement, signed by Mr. Osita Nwajah, Head, Media & Publicity, read: “In the past few days, the EFCC as well as its Executive Chairman, Nuhu Ribadu, have been the subject of intense media debate generated by the decision to send the EFCC Chairman on a course at the National Institute of Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPSS), Kuru, Plateau State.
“The Commission has however refused to be drawn into the public debate.
“EFCC now wishes to clarify that it is the position of the Commission that government can send any public officer on training to enhance his or her performance and continued service to the nation. And, as a loyal citizen and public servant, the opinion of Ribadu is not any different from the expressed position of the Commission.
“It is however worrying that the NIPSS debate has opened a window of blackmail and calumny for many of those who disagree with the Commission. This group has routinely planted stories in the media, which they make-believe as being sponsored by the Executive Chairman, in an attempt at discrediting the authorities, especially Mr. President. The stories which have explored all sorts of high wire politics scenarios and power tussle permutations are calculated at presenting the Executive Chairman as being in conflict with Mr. President and the leadership of the Nigeria Police. Nothing can be farther from the truth.
“Further, the Commission wishes to deal with the insinuation being peddled in certain quarters that the President is interfering in the work of the Commission.
The Commission hereby puts on record that President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua has never interfered in the work of EFCC and has supported the Commission’s resolve to bring to book, all who have committed any of the crimes identified in the EFCC Establishment Act (2004) and all other laws that the Commission is mandated to enforce.
“The Executive Chairman, EFCC, wishes to seize this opportunity to assure Mr. President, the leadership of the Nigeria Police and indeed, all patriotic Nigerians, of his absolute loyalty and dedication to the service of our fatherland.
“It bears restating here that as a loyal public servant, Nuhu Ribadu has no problem with the decision of Mr. President on the recommendation of the Inspector General of Police, to send him on a self-improvement course of study at the NIPSS, Kuru. Any story that suggests otherwise is only meant to cast him in the bad light of an unnecessary antagonism against government and the Police high command and should be discounted.
“The Commission wishes to thank the general public for the tremendous support it has received in the discharge of its duties.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
