Here is the full statement of defence and the addendum
presented to the Justice Ayo Salami panel by Ibrahim Magu, the suspended acting
chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
The panel submitted its report to President Muhammadu Buhari
on Friday, recommending the sack and prosecution of Magu as well as the
appointment of a new chairman from outside the police force.
There is yet no statement from the presidency on the report
or any indications of when the white paper will be made public.
In his reply to the allegations made against him by Abubakar Malami, the attorney-general of the federation , Magu maintained that he did not divert any recovered assets during his tenure as alleged.
Magu went into details of how recovered assets were managed
“in line with the EFCC (Establishment) Act, 2004”.
EFCC’s recovery modality has come under the searchlight,
with the federal government now proposing a different body to manage the
assets.
As things stand, EFCC makes recovery directly to all victims
of financial crimes — including state and local governments.
Private individuals, including foreign nationals, who were
victims of fraudsters benefited from the recoveries, according to Magu.
Federal government institutions such as the Nigerian
National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS),
the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA), the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and
Fiscal Commission (RMFAC) and the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety
Agency (NIMASA) also benefited from the recoveries, Magu added.
Because recoveries made to these entities do not pass
through the dedicated recovery account but directly to the fraud victims, Magu
maintained that any finding emerging from the content of the recovery account
cannot be conclusive.
Magu contented that these recoveries, as well as the foreign
exchange component which were paid into dedicated accounts at the Central Bank
of Nigeria (CBN), were not captured in the report of the Presidential Committee
on Audit of Recovered Assets (PCARA) that audited EFCC’s assets between 2015
and 2018.
EXCERPTS FROM MAGU’S REPLY
ALLEGATION (A)
FINAL REPORT OF THE PRESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE ON AUDIT OF
RECOVERED ASSETS (PCARA): MISMANAGEMENT AND LACK OF TRANSPARENCY IN MANAGING
RECOVERED ASSETS
RESPONSE:
2.6 I unequivocally deny this allegation as same is untrue
and merely calculated to tarnish my name, the Commission, and the giant strides
this administration has achieved in the fight against corruption and recovery
of proceeds of unlawful activities.
2.7 Gentlemen, contrary to the allegations contained in
paragraph (A-5X) of the report, I know as a fact and verily believe that:
a) Not a dime of the recovered funds was converted to my
personal use. I challenge my accuser to produce evidence of such fraudulent
conversion.
b) It is the international best practices in audit to have
an entry and exit meeting. During the exiting meeting, parties are expected to
thoroughly review and reconcile documents/data to enable the auditee present
necessary explanations to clear any grey area.
c) Contrary to the established international best practice
and the principle of fair hearing as enshrined in Section 36 of the 1999
Constitution (as amended), the Report of the PCARA and the documents analyzed
before making the purported findings contained in Paragraph 5 of the petition
were never made available to the Commission to respond and clarify.
d) That I was not invited by the Committee to defend myself
and the Commission before the purported findings were made. That fair hearing demands
that I should not be indicted without being heard.
MOVABLE AND IMMOVABLE ASSETS INCLUDING FUNDS AND CASH
RECOVERED WERE PRESERVED IN THEIR ORIGINAL VALUE AND KEPT IN SAFE MANNER
e) The existing structure in the EFCC on the recovery of
assets and the management of same will not allow any form of mismanagement of
recovered assets to be perpetrated. In the Commission under my watch, funds are
recovered vide bank drafts in favour of the Commission and lodged in the
recovery accounts domiciled with the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).
f) Sirs, even when cash is recovered during execution of
search warrant, such funds are meticulously counted, kept in the safe custody
of the Exhibit Keeper and lodged in the recovery account.
g) I am not a signatory to these accounts and the funds
therein. I have never approved a withdrawal from any of the Commission’s
recovery accounts for my personal benefit.
h) There is no where I have reported the Naira equivalent of
the foreign currency recoveries. As a matter of standard practice and
procedure, the commission under my leadership reports foreign currency
recoveries and not the Naira equivalent of same.
i) The commission under my leadership has never converted
foreign currency recoveries to Naira.
j) The allegation in paragraph 5(ii) of the Report is untrue
because I did not manipulate data of the Commission’s recoveries.
k) While I cannot confirm the source of the figures quoted
in paragraph 5(ii) where the commission was alleged to have under reported the
sum of N39,357,608,119.43, I am aware that by a letter dated the 24th March,
2017, Mr. President instructed me to forward the status of various recoveries
the Commission made from May, 2015 till the date of the letter. Attached and
marked Annexure 2 is a copy of the letter.
l) On receipt of the aforesaid letter, I promptly compiled a
comprehensive list of the recoveries and forwarded same through a letter dated
April 7, 2017. My letter of April 7, 2017 is attached and marked Annexure 3. My
report to Mr. President was supported with relevant source documents.
m) The purported under-reported sum of N39,357,608,119.43
was admitted by the Petitioner to have been lodged in the recovery account
domiciled with the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) which is not under my total
dominion and control. This demonstrates the falsity of the accusation of
diversion of forfeited assets wrongly leveled against me.
n) The Commission, in the exercise of its statutory duties,
is empowered to make recoveries for the Federal Government, State Governments,
private individuals and corporate bodies and as such not all funds in the
recovery account belong to the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN).
o) The period analyzed by the PCARA Report in paragraph 5 of
the petition is not stated.
p) The figures reported by PCARA may not have taken note of
third party recoveries that would have been transferred to the respective
beneficiaries directly. Such direct beneficiaries include:
(i) Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS),
(ii) Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC).
(iii) Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON).
(iv) Nigerian Customs Service (NCS).
(v) Commercial Banks.
(vi) Other Corporate Organizations; and
(vii) Individuals.
q) The allegation in paragraph 5(iii) of the petition is
vague and not supported by any particular instance, thus I am unable to respond
with precision. However, it is trite that the figure standing to the credit of
an account is susceptible to changes as a result of interest element and bank
charges. The amount of money at the time the Commission obtains forfeiture
order changes with time, either as a result of bank charges or inflows into the
account after the interim order was made. It can therefore not be expected that
the amount stated in the application before the order of Interim forfeiture is
made will remain static.
r) The allegations in paragraphs 5(iv), 5(v) and5 (vi) of
the petition are untrue as I did not refuse to oblige the request of the
Honourable Minister of Finance seeking
necessary clarification in respect of our various recoveries.
s) The allegations in paragraph 5(vii) of the petition are
equally false. Upon my assumption in office, I have taken various steps to prevent
wastage of physical assets including landed properties, motor vehicles,
vessels, etc just to ensure that the FGN derives the maximum economic value and
benefits from such properties.
t) On the issue of MT GOOD SUCCESS, MT DERBY and MV THAMES
referred to in the Petition, I also know as a fact and verily believe that:
a) On the 30th of October, 2015 His Lordship, Hon Justice O.
E.Abang in a well-considered judgment forfeited to the FGN the following:
i. The vessel MT Good Success.
ii. 1,459 metric tons of Premium Motor Spirit (PMS) on board
the vessel.
iii. The sum N66,069,505
and $975,694,50 in FCMB Plc
account of Hepa Global Energy Limited, the owner of MT Good success.
Annexure 4 is the enrolled order of the said Judgment
available in the records of EFCC upon request.
u) Upon the delivery of judgment, the owners of MT Good
Success appealed and also filed motion for Stay of Execution which was
dismissed by the Court of Appeal on the 13thJuly, 2016.See HEPA GLOBAL ENERGY
v. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA (2016) LPELR-41288 (CA).
v) Before the stay of execution was filed, I ensured that
the FGN took economic benefit of the funds forfeited by the trial Court from
the account of Hepa Global Energy, by following the money from FCMB up to the
confirmation of its receipt by the CBN. Attached and marked Annexure 5(a)-(f)
are relevant documents showing my effort in this regard.
w) Furthermore in a bid to ensure that the FGN took the
economic benefit of the MT Good Success and in demonstrating my total
commitment for accountability and transparency in the process of disposition of
forfeited asset, the Commission under my leadership wrote a letter to the
Honourable Attorney-General Federation (HAGF) reference number EFCC/SC/JUS/07/
101 dated 24/03/16 titled “NOTIFICATION TO DISPOSE” of MT GOOD SUCCESS,
recommending the disposal of the vessel and the processes to be adopted. The
said letter which is referred to as Annexure 6 for ease of reference is
available in EFCC records for verification.
x) The commission did not receive any response from the HAGF
to our letter dated the 24/03/16. However, through memos dated 10th and 23rd
November, 2016, the Lagos Zonal Office of the Commission informed the
Commission’s Directorate of Asset Forfeiture Recovery and Management (D-AFRM)
of the correspondence from the Nigerian Navy (NN), which is the physical
custodian of all detained and forfeited vessels, stating that MT GOOD SUCCESS
had sunk. The memos are hereby marked Annexure 7a and 7b respectively for ease
of reference and available in EFCC records upon request by the panel.
y) The letter indicated that the owners of the vessel
appealed against the judgment forfeiting the vessel and applied for stay of
execution which was rejected by the Court. The letter from the Nigerian Navy
(NN) attached to the aforesaid memos stated that when the vessel was
experiencing ingress of water, the NN made an effort to relocate the vessel
from Lagos Anchorage and made contact with the commission’s Lagos Office for
evacuation of the products but this could not be actualized before the vessel
submerged.
z) Pursuant to the above recommendation, a meeting was held
with the Flag Officer Commanding Western Naval Command wherein he explained
that the vessel had sunk but same could be salvaged, after incurring heavy
costs, as only very few companies, such as Julius Berger, have the equipment
and capacity to salvage the vessel.
aa) The report of the meeting was conveyed through a memo
dated 19th December, 2016 wherein it was recommended that all vessels in
custody of the Navy listed in the memo including MT Good Success should be
salvaged, evacuated and disposed, if possible. The said memo is hereby marked
Annexure 8 for ease of reference and available in EFCC records if requested for
by the panel.
2.8 The recommendation was accepted as indicated in the
minute on the aforesaid memo (Annexure 8) wherein I directed the then Secretary
to the Commission to expedite action on the due process of auction.
2.9 The then Secretary to the Commission, Mr. Emmanuel
Aremo, directed the then Head of Procurement, Mr. Olushina, to issue a letter
of engagement to Pinnacle Trading and Investment Nigeria Limited for the
disposal exercise.
2.10 The letter issued to Pinnacle Trading and Investment
Nigeria Limited was later discovered not to have complied with statutory
procurement procedures provided under the Public Procurement Act, 2007 and
therefore the Commission’s Management directed the revocation of the letter and
publication of a disclaimer. The action was taken when it was discovered that
the personalities behind Pinnacle were also behind another company known as
Omo-Jay Nigeria Limited being prosecuted by the Commission for illegal oil
dealings in the Niger Delta.
2.11 In respect of the vessel MT DERBY, 1 also know as a
fact and verily believe that:
i. The commission had set in motion the process of disposal
of the content of the vessel when Honourable Justice Idris of the Federal High
Court, Lagos Division gave an order that the Automated Gas Oil (AGO) onboard
the vessel PS V Derby shall be sold by the Registrar of the Court in
collaboration with the Prosecutor and Defence Counsel while the proceeds of
sale shall be dealt with as the court may direct pending the determination of
the charge. The Court order of 7thApril, 2017 is available in the record of
EFCC as Annexure 9, on request by the panel.
ii. Whilst the Commission was taking assiduous steps towards
enforcing the order of his Lordship, the HAGF commenced a fresh process for the
disposal of the vessels mentioned above. In so doing, the HAGF did not respond
to the letter written to him by the former Secretary to the Commission,
recommending the disposal of MT Good Success. Rather, the HAGF commenced his
own process of disposing not only MT GOODSUCCESS but other vessels already forfeited
by the Commission including MT ASTERI, MT DERBY, MV THAMES and many others
connected to pending court cases.
iii. The firm of DIPO OPESEYI & Co wrote a letter dated
September 12, 2017 informing the Commission of its engagement by the HAGF to
obtain forfeiture order against vessels and dispose them. The letter is hereby
attached and marked as Annexure 10.
iv. To support his disposal of the vessels, the HAGF through
a letter Ref: No: HAGF/ARMU/RMDOVSC/2017/1, dated January 23, 2018 informed the Commission that
the firm of DIPOOPESEYI &Co. had undertaken forfeitures on his behalf and
requested the Commission to work with the firm to reconcile the orders obtained
by the firm. The letter of the HAGF dated 23rd of January, 2018 is marked
Annexure 11 and available in the record of EFCC for verification.
v. The Commission further received a letter dated February 6,
2018 from the firm of DIPO OPESEYI & CO. titled FHC/ABJ/741/2017 &
FHC/ABJ/CS/742/2017- FRN v. UNKNOWN PERSONS reiterating its engagement by the
HAGF and the steps he has taken. The said letter is hereby referred to as
Annexure 12.
vi. The attachment to the above letter revealed that MT GOOD
SUCCESS, MT DERBY &MT THAMES were among the 136 (One hundred and thirty
six) forfeited vessels. These are the vessels for which I am now being accused
of mismanaging despite the engagement of a private legal firm by the HAGF to
forfeit and dispose them.
vii. I also know that by a letter reference number
HQ/011/78/98/93/A/VOL.1/21 dated 14th of February, 2020 addressed to the Acting
Chairman of the Commission, the Nigerian Navy informed the commission that the
HAGF, by virtue of FGN OFFICIAL GAZETTE No. 163 Vol. 106 of 2019, directed the
Nigerian Navy to allow Omoh-Jay Nigeria Limited to evacuate the content of MT
PEACE and MT ASTERIS. Annexure 13 is the
said letter which is available in the record of EFCC upon request.
viii. Also, by a letter reference number SH/COS/34/25/A/475
dated 22/2/18, the Chief of Staff to the President directed the Commission not
to take any step towards the sale, disposal or other dealing with the recovered
and forfeited assets unless otherwise directed. The said letter is hereby
attached and marked as Annexure 14.
ix. By a letter dated 18th May, 2018, the firm of SANI &
CO Solicitors, acting on behalf of FSS Nigeria Limited, an auctioneer engaged
by the Commission, informed the Commission that the Ministry of Defence and
HAGF had by appointments and advertisement commenced the process of engaging
other auctioneers to dispose the vessels, thereby taking away the opportunity
given to this auctioneer by the Commission to dispose the vessels through
transparent due process. The aforesaid letter is attached and marked as
Annexure 15.
x. The aforesaid law firm of SANI & CO wrote a similar
petition to the Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP) against the Commission and
the HAGF for undertaking double disposal process of the same assets. The
Commission was invited to BPP to respond to the allegation.
xi. By a Letter Ref: No:
MOD/PROC/GEN/346/1 dated 21st June, 2018 the Honourable Minister of
Defence, informed the Commission of the approval of Mr. President to the
Ministry of Defence to dispose the vessels. The letter of the Ministry of
Defence to the Commission and the letter conveying the approval of Mr.
President to the Honourable Minster of Defence are hereby attached and marked
as Annexure 16.
xii. The HAGF through the Head of Asset Recovery and
Management Unit of the Ministry of Justice, Ladidi B. Mohammed, wrote a letter to the Commission
with reference number HAGF/ARMU/RMDOVS/2017/11 dated 27th July, 2018 requesting
for access to the vessels for valuation by Omo-Jay Nigeria Limited, Federal
Ministry of Works and Housing and ‘Dipo Okpeseyi & Co. The letter is
attached and marked as Annexure17.
xiii. In demonstrating my total commitment towards ensuring
that the FGN derives the full economic benefit and in other to prevent the
dissipation of forfeited assets on the 17th of July, 2018 1 wrote a letter to
his Excellency, the Vice President Prof. Yemi Osinbajo, SAN (Chairman,
Presidential Committee on Asset Recovery) wherein I informed him of the steps
taken by the Commission to prevent economic loss as result of the depreciating
nature of the forfeited assets, the challenges we are encountering and the need
to urgently dispose of the perishable and depreciating forfeited assets. The
letter is hereby attached and marked as Annexure 18.
xiv. That in relation to the ALLEGATION contained paragraph
(5ix) of the petition, I also know as a
fact and verily believe that:
(a) The Commission did not make any conflicting submissions
or returns in respect of the non-cash assets as the PCARA never informed me or
the Commission of any difficulty it faced as a result of the information we provided.
(b) The allegation bothers on increment in the number of
forfeiture of real estate after the return made to the President. The increase
in the number of forfeiture of non-cash assets was as a result of fresh and
more forfeiture orders obtained by the Commission from the courts.
(c) That the Commission has the requisite capacity to manage
the recovered assets. The commission has a very standard directorate of Asset
Forfeiture saddled with the responsibility of managing recovered and forfeited
assets.”
ALLEGATION B: MISMANAGEMENT OF RECOVERED ASSETS AND
DIVERSION FOR PERSONAL ENRICHMENT
3.0 The allegations in Paragraph B of the petition are
contained in paragraphs B(6), B(7), B8), B(9), (B10) and (B11).
ALLEGATION IN PARAGRAPH B(6):
3.1 The allegations in B (6) are that I protested against
the efforts of the National Assembly (NASS) to address the transparency of the
management of recovered assets through the enactment of the Proceeds of Crime
Bill, 2019. It was also alleged that due to the protest of the Commission and
the false information I purportedly supplied, Mr. President declined assent to
the Proceeds of Crime Bill, 2019.
MY RESPONSE TO ALLEGATION IN PARAGRAPH B
3.2 I deny all the allegations contained in paragraph B (6)
of the petition as same are untrue and only calculated to embarrass me and
rubbish the display of my patriotism and unflinching loyalty to the President
and the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
3.3 That contrary to the allegations in paragraph B (6), I
know as a fact and verily believe that:
i. Mr. President forwarded the draft Proceeds of Crime Bill
to the Commission, as well as other Anti-Corruption Agencies, such as the
Nigerian Police Force, ICPC, NDLEA, NAPTIP and the Nigerian Customs Service.
Attached and marked as Annexure 19 is the letter from the Chief of Staff to the
President forwarding the Proceeds of Crime Bill, 2019 to the commission for
review, comments and remarks.
ii. Upon receipt of the Presidential instruction, 1promptly
constituted a team of experts in this field with requisite experience, to
review the draft Bill as directed by Mr. President.
iii. After a thorough review of the Bill, the Commission
came up with a common position and forwarded same to Mr. President. Annexure 20
is a copy of the letter through which the commission forwarded its position to
Mr. President and is available in the record of EFCC.
iv. Apart from the Commission, other Anti-Corruption
Agencies also forwarded their positions to Mr. President, disagreeing with the
substantial sections of the Bill.
v. Mr. President declined assent to the Proceeds of Crime
Bill, 2019 in the overriding interest of the nation and the need to sustain the
tempo of the achievements this administration is recording in the fight against
corruption.
vi. The recommendations of the Commission to Mr. President
on the Bill was not tainted with any falsehood, rather it was honest,
professional, courageous and a patriotic position. Other than the corporate
position of the commission which was transmitted to Mr. President, I did not
sponsor any campaign against the POCA Bill, 2019.
ALLEGATIONS IN PARAGRAPHS B (7), B(8) & B(9)
3.4 The allegations in paragraphs B7, B8 & B9 are that:
a) I neglected and refused blatantly to comply with
Regulations on the Management of Recovered Assets, 2019.
b) I do not want a proper and transparent procedure for the
Management of assets as directed by Mr. President through the Office of the
HAGF.
c) I and top officials of the commission are using the
forfeited assets to corruptly enrich ourselves.
THE ASSETS RECOVERED WERE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE EXTANT
LAWS, REGULATIONS, PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES
MY RESPONSE TO ALLEGATIONS IN PARAGRAPH B(7), B(8) &
B(9)-
3.5 I deny all the
allegations in paragraphs B(7), B(8) & B(9) of the petition in their
entirety as they are totally untrue and calculated to malign me and the
Commission.
3.6 Contrary to paragraphs B(7), B(8) & B(9) of the
petition, I know as a fact and verily believe that:
i. All steps taken by me in respect of recovered and
forfeited assets were in accordance with powers conferred on me by the Act of
the National Assembly which established the Commission.
ii. I have never disobeyed any directives and regulation of
Mr. President whether in relation to the management of the recovered and
forfeited assets or any sundry issues.
iii. In the discharge of my official functions, I am bound
to comply with the provisions of various enabling laws enacted by the NASS
which confer certain special powers on the Commission in respect of recovered
and forfeited assets which are in conflict with the Regulations of the HAGF.
iv. Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud
Related Offences Act, 2006 conferred on the Commission the responsibility of
tracing and forfeiting abandoned properties and properties reasonably suspected
to have been acquired with proceeds of unlawful activities.
v. Through the special provisions of Section 17 of the
Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006, the Commission
under my watch has forfeited numerous properties to the FGN.
vi. Rather than strengthening the institutional capacity of
the Commission and the provisions of section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and
Other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006, the Commission and its enabling
statutes have been subjected to numerous attacks and blackmails majorly aimed
at whittling down the powers of the Commission
vii. One of such attacks is the provisions of section 162
(3)of the Proceeds of Crime Bill, 2019 which seeks to delete sections 20, 21,
22, 24, 25(a), (c) &(d), 26(1)(b), 29, 33, and 34 of the Economic and
Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act,2004 which empowered the
Commission to investigate, prosecute and confiscate assets.
viii. Considering the negative impact section 162 (3) of
Proceeds of Crime Bill, 2019 will have on the tracing and recovery of proceeds
of crimes in Nigeria, Mr. President in his wisdom, declined assent to the Bill.
ix. The Asset Tracing, Recovery and Management Regulations,
2019 made by the HAGF without the intervention of the NASS seeks to divest the
Commission of its statutory power to trace, recover and institute
non-conviction based forfeiture proceedings in court. This development conflicts with the statutory
mandates and powers conferred on the Commission by the NASS.
x. I am always transparent in the exercise of my duties and
there is no official decision that I have taken as Ag. Chairman of the
Commission which was not a product of transparent process and in compliance
with statutory provisions.
xi. The Commission did not oppose the enactment of Proceeds
of Crime Bill, 2019 but was opposed to some negative and far reaching
provisions of the Bill which will impede and reverse the anti-corruption agenda
of the FGN.
ALL THE ASSETS RECOVERED ARE PROPERLY ACCOUNTED FOR
ALLEGATIONS IN PARAGRAPH (B) 10
In paragraph B (10), it was alleged that most of the
forfeited assets are sold without anyone knowing, or having proper record and
recourse to the Federal Ministry of Works and Housing that has the mandate to
undertake evaluation of such properties. It was also alleged that some of the
assets have been taken over by officials of the Commission while some are sold at
a giveaway price to my friends and cronies. It was further alleged that I
maintained different accounts including using proxies who return the benefit of
the sold assets to me and that the proceeds of the purported sales were used to
acquire properties in the name of my proxies.
MY RESPONSE TO ALLEGATIONS IN PARAGRAPH B(10)
3.7 I deny each and every allegations contained in paragraph
B(10) of the petition as they are totally false, untrue and merely targeted at
destroying my hard earned reputation as incorruptible Officer.
3.8 That contrary to the allegations contained in (10) of
the petition, I know as a fact and verily believe that:
i. Since my assumption of office as the Ag. Chairman of the
commission, not a single recovered or forfeited property has been sold and the
proceeds converted.
ii. All the finally forfeited properties are intact except
those described below:
3.9 241 Forfeited Trucks: The Federal High Court directed
the trucks to be sold by the Deputy Chief Registrar of the court in conjunction
with the Department Petroleum Resources (DPR) and the Commission.
Notwithstanding the Order of Court, I ensured that a Presidential approval was
sought and obtained before the process of sale commenced in December, 2019. The
sale by public auction was concluded and the proceeds paid to the Recovery
Account domiciled with the Central Bank of Nigeria. Attached and marked
Annexure 21 is the Presidential approval and evidence of remittance of the
proceeds of sale to the Recovery Account.
3.10 Allocation of vehicles to some Government Agencies
through Special Auction with Presidential approval. The beneficiary Agencies
are:
a) Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs and Disaster Management
of which the valued price is to be debited from their allocation.
b) State House.
c) National Commission for Refugees and Displaced Persons.
d) Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS).
e) National Directorate of Employment (NDE); motorcycles.
f) Real properties finally forfeited to the FGN and
Allocated to some Agencies for official use in line with the Presidential
approval are:
a. Voice of Nigeria (VON).
b. National Directorate of Employment (NDE).
c. Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs and Disaster Management.
d. North East Development Commission.
e. Pension Transitional Arrangement Directorate (PTAD)
g) Properties under interim forfeiture order rented by some
Government Agencies:
a) Nigerian Army
b) Federal Ministry of Finance
c) Fiscal Responsibility Commission
d) Nigerians in Diaspora Commission
e) Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria
h) Other Agencies of Government that have approached the
Commission to rent property under interim forfeiture order include:
i. National Human Rights Commission
ii. National Council for Arts and Culture.
i) The commission also temporarily handed over property in
Lagos to the Lagos State Government for use as Isolation Centre for COVID-19
patients.
j) The commission presently has Presidential approval to
dispose over 450 forfeited vehicles located in Lagos and Abuja. The vehicles
have been valued by the National Automotive Council Valuers and the Federal
Ministry of Works and Housing. But no sale/disposal has been conducted yet.
INVESTIGATION INTO PERSONAL ENRICHMENT WITH THE ASSETS
RECOVERED
8.0 ALLEGATION F (21) AND (22)
8.1 In paragraph 2, it was alleged that the HAGF was in
receipt of several petitions against me wherein allegations of personal
enrichment, abuse of office and the fact that I am occupying the office
illegally. According to the HAGF, these petitioners have gone to Court to
express their anger with this administration for failing to act in line with
the EFCC Establishment Act, 2004 in the appointment of Executive Chairman and
the Board of the EFCC.
MY RESPONSE:
8.2 Sirs, permit to state that l am not privy to any
allegations contained in the petitions purportedly received by the HAGF against
me. However, I know as a fact and verily believe that:
i. In the exercise of my official functions as Ag. Chairman
of the Commission, 1 have stepped on toes in ensuring that Corruption is fought
to a standstill in Nigeria.
ii. Some of the suspects under investigation and prosecution
are always ganging up to fight me back, publishing false, untrue, malicious and
libelous allegations against me.
iii. I have never abused the office I am occupying at the
pleasure Mr. President.
iv. I have never personally enriched myself whilst
performing my official function. I challenge my accuser to produce any evidence
of this purported personal enrichment.v. Regarding the issue of several
petitions over the legality of my continued stay as the Acting Chairman of the
EFCC without Senate’s confirmation, l wish to state that the judgment of Hon.
Justice ljeoma Ojukwu of the Federal High Court, Abuja Judicial Division has
laid to rest any issue arising from my appointment.
vi. In his landmark judgment delivered on December 4, 2019,
Hon. Justice ljeoma Ojukwu dismissed the five consolidated suits against me on
the grounds that there is no time limit within which I can act as the chairman
of the Commission and that the President Muhammadu Buharihas the proverbial
“yam and knife” to keep me in office as long as he pleases.
vii. The Court even went further to urge Mr. President to do
the needful and forward my name to the Senate for confirmation in the interest
of the Commission and the General Public.
viii. It is instructive to note that the defendants in the
consolidated suits were the Senate President, Attorney- General of the
Federation (AGF), EFCC and my humble self.
ix. I wish to state that out of 12 suits instituted to
challenge the legality of my tenure, seven of those suits were struck out for
lack of diligent prosecution.
x. On the remaining five Suits, four of them urged the Court
to declare my stay in office as illegal since my nomination by President Buhari
was twice rejected by the Senate while the fifth suit urged the court to hold
that I could validly remain as the Acting Head of the EFCC despite Senate’s
refusal to confirm my appointment.
xi. His Lordship, Hon. Justice Ijeoma dismissed the five
consolidated suits challenging the legality of my appointment. Attached and
marked Annexure 46 (a)-(e) are the Certified True Copies of the five judgments.
Speaking on the propriety of his continued stay as EFCC boss
in spite of non-confirmation by the Senate, Magu stated in his defence that:
ALLEGATION F(22).
8.4 The Petitioner in Paragraph F (22) states: “One of the
Court applications that were filed in March 2020 seeks to determine the
legality or illegality of the Acting Chairman occupying the Office without an
appointment letter. Your Excellency is also aware that the Board of EFCC has
not been constituted since 2015. This is in total breach of the EFCC Act and
the Public Service rules. Despite this, the Acting Chairman has failed or
neglected to submit approvals that are above his limit supervision or for an
external body to approve. This is in breach of financial regulations.”
MY RESPONSE
8.5 Sir, contrary to the claim of the HAGF in paragraph 22
of the petition, I know as a fact and verily believe that:
i. My letter of appointment, which was duly signed by the
appointing authority, was given to me before my assumption of office as the
Acting Chairman of the EFCC. Attached and Marked Annexure 47 is a copy of my
appointment letter available on request.
ii. The Judgments of Hon. Justice Ojukwu of the Federal High
Court which confirms the legality of my appointment are still subsisting until
set aside by the appellate court.
iii. It is inappropriate for the HAGF to state that a fresh
application has been filed in March 2020 against my tenure at the Federal High
Court when he is aware that the issue of the legality of my appointment has
been resolved and settled by a judgment of Court of competent jurisdiction as
far back as December 4, 2019.
iv. The new suit filed in March, 2020 is nothing but an
abuse of court process.
v. The only option available for the plaintiffs in the suits
against me is for them to proceed to the Court of Appeal to seek redress.
vi. Incidentally, one of the plaintiffs in the dismissed
consolidated five suits, Mr. Johnmary Jideobi, has appealed against the
judgment of the Federal High Court in Abuja which dismissed his suit, asking
for my removal.
vii. It is also imperative to state that Jideobi also listed
the Senate, the AGF, EFCC and my humble self as the respondents to the pending
appeal before the Court of Appeal in Abuja.
viii. But the HAGF deliberately refused to disclose these
facts in his allegations against me.
ix. Regarding the non- constitution of the EFCC Board since
2015, the Petitioner is aware that the appointment of the board members is at
the prerogative of Mr. President and not within my statutory powers.
x. In the exercise of my functions as the Ag. Chairman of
the Commission, I have not taken any decision without the requisite approvals.
The allegation that I have failed or neglected to obtain approvals from
external authorities in breach of financial regulations is untrue and totally
misconceived and unfounded.
8.6 Above represents my defence to the allegations read by
me on various social media platforms and traditional newspapers. I also rely on
my letters to the panel refuting some of the allegations falsely published
against me in the media, many of these allegations have been denied with apologies
by the newspapers that orchestrated the publications.
8.7 I will further make available to the panel, additional
materials to address all other allegations to which my attention may be drawn
subsequent to this presentation.
9.1 My Lord and Gentlemen, all my actions are documented and
follow the prescribed procedures with necessary approvals. I am innocent. I
have served my country to the best of my abilities with all sense of
responsibility and integrity.
9.2 The records of achievements to the glory of God and this
administration are there for all to see. I respectfully invite the panel to
note the Stellar and unprecedented achievements of the EFCC under my watch as
the Acting Chairman. A list of some of the achievements is the attached
Annexure 1.
In the context of these achievements, my plea to the panel
is to consider these achievements in strengthening my innocence.
9.3 I recall that President Muhammadu Buhari had in a letter
sent to the Senate in 2017 through the then Secretary to the Government of the
Federation (SGF) Babachir Lawal, cleared me of all allegations of corruption
and misconduct, based on the report of the current HAGF Abubakar Malami
SAN. A copy of the letter is in the
custody of the HAGF and the 8th Senate for ease of reference.
9.4 Thank you for the opportunity offered me for my defence
and to provide relevant documentary materials as requested.
9.5 I intend to furnish additional materials on what, in my
opinion precipitated these baseless allegations in spite of the stellar
achievements on anti-corruption of the President Buhari administration with my
modest contributions. This will be forwarded to this distinguished panel as an
ADDENDUM.
9.6 Gentlemen, please accept my best personal regards and
thank you for service to country.
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