The stage may be set for the arrest of immediate past Chairman, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mr. Ibrahim Lamorde over alleged financial crime and corruption.
The Senate Thursday asked its Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions to comply with relevant Sections of the Constitution that empowered it to issue a warrant of arrest on Lamorde for refusing to appear before it when invited.
The 11-man committee investigated allegations of financial crimes and corruption brought against Lamorde by Dr. George Uboh, a human rights activist.
Chairman of the investigative Committee, Senator Samuel Anyanwu, presented the report of his committee to Senate in plenary Thursday.
Anyanwu told the Senate that after a series inviting Lamorde to appear before the committee to tell his own side of the story on allegations of financial crime and corruption leveled against him by Dr. Uboh, the former EFCC boss failed to honour the invitation.
The committee chairman specifically referred to three letters of invitation written to invite Lamorde to appear before the committee dated 19th August 2015, 3rd November 2015 and 11 November, 2015 which he said did not convince Lamorde to appear before the Ethics and Privileges Committee.
He noted that on receiving the letter of invitation dated 19th August, 2015 from the Committee, Lamorde wrote the Committee through his Special Assistant to claim (1) “That due to time constraint and the nature of their operations, the EFCC Chairman was unable to appear before the Committee, and suggested 31st September, 2015 as a more convenient date he would appear before the Committee;
(2) That if what the Committee wanted was comprehensive information of all recoveries forfeited and/or restituted funds and property in defence of the said allegations, then the Committee must wait until September, 2015 when it (EFCC) would submit its annual report to the National Assembly.
(3) That the petitioner, Dr. George Uboh was an accused person in a case instituted against him by EFCC (FRNV George Uboh, CR/21/09) before Hon. Justice A.J. Aledetoyinbo of High Court 3 of the Federal Capital Territory Judicial Division on charges bordering criminal breach of trust;
(4) That the petitioner was once convicted by a US Court for engaging in credit card fraud.”
Anyanwu told the Senate that after his committee digested the contents of Mr. Lamorde’s response, it again invited Mr. Lamorde to appear before it, advising him not to confuse the invitation of an investigative committee to appear before it to say his own side of the story as a public servant over a serious allegation against his person, with EFCC’s routine annual report responsibility to the National Assembly, or the Senate President’s previous invitation to a briefing.
The Committee chairman said that Lamorde further responded through his Special Assistant “That he was at St. Petersbury, Russia, attending the 8th Annual Conference and General Meeting of the International Association of Anti-Corruption Authorities (IAACA) and that he had been there since 29th October, 2015.”
Anyanwu said that Lamorde again requested for a new date and time to enable him to honour the invitation.
He noted that when the committee received Mr. Lamorde’s second letter of excuse, it decided to write a third letter of invitation dated 11 November, 2015; this time, threatening that it would no longer accept flimsy excuses for his non appearance.
He said that after going through the facts available, the Committee observed “that having waited in vain for the appearance of Mr. Ibrahim Lamorde since 24th November, 2015 and not seeing or hearing from him, it was forced to conclude that Mr. Ibrahim Lamorde wants to evade investigation by the Committee.”
Anyanwu noted that “Consequently, the Committee reasoned that the only way to get the former EFCC Chairman, Mr. Ibrahim Lamorde, to appear before it was to invoke the powers of the Senate in Section 89(1c&d) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 and compel his appearance.”
He said that the Committee was “convinced that unless this line of action was taken, the National Assembly might be drawn into consequential disrepute in the future.”
The Committee therefore recommended in its submission (1)“That to save the National Assembly, as the highest law-making body of the nation, from irreparable damage to its reputation and capacity to summon, the former EFCC Chairman, Mr. Ibrahim Lamorde, be compelled to appear before the Committee to answer for activities of his tenure.
(2)That to effect recommendation ‘1’ above, a warrant of arrest be issued by the Senate for his arrest.”
Anyanwu said the Senate may wish to consider and adopt the recommendations of the Committee as proposed.
Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu intervened by raising a Point of Order.
Ekweremadu referred the Senate to Sections 88(1) and 89 (1c&d) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended.
He said; “Subject to the provisions of this constitution, each house of the National Assembly shall have power by resolution, published in a journal or the official gazette of the federal government to direct or cause to be directed, an investigation into (a) any matter with respect to which it has powers to make laws. (b) the conduct of affairs of any person, authority ministry of government, department, charged with the responsibility of executing or administering laws enacted by National Assembly and disbursing or administering money appropriated or to be appropriated by the National Assembly.
“So on the basis of this section that this enquiry is being conducted.
Now the subject under investigation has refused to come; what do we do?
“That is what is now covered by section 89 which says;”
“For the purposes of any investigation under Section 88 of this Constitution and subject to the provisions thereof, the Senate or the House of Representatives or a committee appointed in accordance with section 62 of this constitution shall have powers to:
(1) Procure all evidence written or oral, direct or ask as it may deem necessary and examine all persons as witnesses whose evidence (2)may be relevant to the investigation
(2) Require all evidence to be given on oath
(3) Summon any person in Nigeria to give evidence at any place or produce evidence in his possession.
(4) Issue a warrant to compel the attendance of any person who after having been summoned, fails, refuses or neglects to do so and does not excuse such failure, refusal or neglect to the satisfaction of the House or the Committee in question and order him to pay all cost due to have been occasioned in compelling his attendance by reason of his failure, refusal or neglect to obey the summons and also impose such fines that may be prescribed for any such failure shall be recoverable in the same manner as a fine imposed by a court of law.
(5) The warrant issued under this section may be served or executed by any member of the Nigerian Police Force or by any person authorized by the President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House of Representatives as the case may be.”
Ekweremadu said that “what is required here is for the committee to issue a warrant of arrest and then the President of the Senate will direct the Police to effect the arrest.”
He added, “It is not the business of the Senate in plenary to do so otherwise we will be offending this part of the constitution.
“So the issue of warrant of arrest is not something that we will take a resolution on, the resolution has already been taken by the committee.
“If there is any consequential order that needs to be made, the committee can deal with that and direct it through the Office of the President of the Senate who will direct the Police to effect the warrant.”
Senate President, Abubakar Bukola Saraki sustained Ekweremadu’s Point of Order
Saraki said; “The issue has been well spelt out by the Deputy Senate President, he has clearly referred to the constitution.
“Based on the Constitution this matter does not need to come to us at plenary.
“It should be left at the level of the committee and in accordance with section 89 of the Constitution. So I will sustain the point of order of the DSP.”
Anyanwu had, reeled out Uboh’s allegations against Lamorde to include:
That EFCC operates accounts in banks to warehouse recovered funds which do not reflect in EFCC’s audited account;
That EFCC doctors and manipulates bank accounts to conceal diversion of funds
That EFCC releases recovered funds to unidentified persons and EFCC officials
That EFCC moves fund from its recovery accounts to EFCC operations account from where it diverts same.
That over 95 percent of EFCC recoveries in foreign currencies, other than those from multi-national companies, has been diverted.
That EFCC trades with recovered funds through bank deposits and placements.
That EFCC colludes with real estate companies in order to grossly under value seized assets before they are sold to their cronies.
That EFCC has not accounted for offshore recoveries
That over half of the assets seized from suspects were not reflected in EFCC exhibit records.
Anyanwu said that Uboh prayed the Senate to stop from receiving further allocations from the Federal Government until it accounts for the huge remittable funds recovered which the Commission is still holding back, contrary to the EFCC Act, 2006 and financial regulations
Ten out of 11 members of the committee endorsed the report presented by Anyanwu except Senate Deputy Leader, Senator Bala Ibn Na’Allah (Kebbi South.)
Post a Comment
Post a Comment