A witness of the Economic and Financial Commission EFCC,
Aminu Muhammed, Tuesday absolved former Secretary to the Government of the
Federation, SGF, Engineer Babachir Lawal of any wrong doings in the
controversial N544m contract that led to his trial.
At the resumed trial, the witness, a Principal Procurement
Officer in the SGF office told an Abuja high court that neither Babachir Lawal
nor any of the defendants in the trial participated in the bidding process or
award of the contract in dispute
Muhammed, who is a member of the Presidential Initiative on
North East (PINE ) testified that the body was solely responsible for the award
of the contract without Babachir Lawal who was then in office as SGF.
On cross examination by Chief Akin Olujimi SAN, counsel for
the ex-SGF, the witness stated that non of defendants on trial played any role
in the procurement process conducted by the Presidential Initiative.
The former SGF, his brother, Hamidu Lawal, who is a director
of Rholavision Engineering Limited; an employee of the company, Sulaiman
Abubakar and the Managing Director of Josmon Technologies Limited, Apeh John
Monday, are being prosecuted by the EFCC before Justice Jude Okeke, sitting at
Maitama, Abuja.
They are facing a10-count charge bordering on conspiracy and
fraud.
All the defendants pleaded not guilty to the charge
preferred against them
The EFCC witness added that none of the seven defendants was
a member of any PINE committees or Ministerial Tenders Board (MTB) and did not
play any role whatsoever in the award of contracts to both Josmon and
Rholavision.
The witness told the court that the letters of award of
contracts were signed after the tenders board had given approval for the award
of the contracts to both Josmon and Rholavision.
He added that PINE did nothing wrong in awarding contracts
to both Josmon and Rholavision.
Testifying further, the witness told Justice Jude Okeke that
he was a member of the evaluation committee of the Presidential Initiative on
North-East (PINE).
According to him, after evaluating the bids submitted by
companies bidding for projects by PINE, including Rholavision Engineering
Limited and Josmon Technologies Limited, his committee sent reports to the
Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP) and the Ministerial Tenders Board in the
OSGF.
He stated that the technical reports sent by his committee
was for approval by the MTB, adding that where any irregularities occurred, the
reports would be sent back to PINE for correction.
“They are to check the report and approve or send it back to
PINE. When the report is approved, the company gets the contracts,” he stated.
The contracts, the witness said, were awarded by PINE.
Members of the MTB, according to the witness, were Permanent
Secretaries or their representatives, Directors of Legal, Finance, Procurement,
Internal Audit and Press in the OSGF.
Muhammed stated that he was the person who signed the
letters of award of contracts to both Rholavision Engineering Limited and
Josmon Technologies Limited.
He added that it was not the MTB in the OSGF that allowed
him or the PINE secretary to issue letters of award of contract.
Muhammed who is the prosecution witness number four (PW4)
further stated that about 108 companies including the fifth and sixth
defendants, bidded for different projects from PINE.
However, in a drama that followed, counsel representing EFCC
in the trial Mr Ofem Uket expressed frustration by witnesses coming to testify
from the office of the SGF.
He opened up on his alleged frustration after leading Aminu
Muhammed who testified as the fourth prosecution witness (PW4) in the case.
According to him, 80 per cent of the witnesses called by the
anti-corruption commission so far were from the OSGF, adding that he knew what
he was facing from them.
“The witnesses I bring to court, about 80 per cent of them
are all coming from OSGF,” Uket stated.
He told the court that the case was adjourned at the last
sitting in January but had to be rescheduled at the instance of the fourth
witness.
“I called him last week, he said he was in his village. I
called him in the presence of the Investigating Police Officer (IPO) and he
said he was in Bauchi.
“The IPO told him that he (IPO) had a tracker which showed
that he (witness) was in Abuja. It was then he admitted that he was in Abuja. I
only saw him today,” Ufem told the court.
Justice Okeke however, said that the court had nothing to
say to the complaints raised by the prosecutor against his own witnesses
Meanwhile, Justice Okeke has adjourned the case till April
8, for continuation of trial.
Click to signup for FREE news updates, latest information and hottest gists everyday
Advertise on NigerianEye.com to reach thousands of our daily users
No comments
Post a Comment
Kindly drop a comment below.
(Comments are moderated. Clean comments will be approved immediately)
Advert Enquires - Reach out to us at NigerianEye@gmail.com