666e is $500 million recovered from the late Gen. Sani Abacha’s family?This is the question the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is battling to answer.
The cash was recovered from the family of the late Head of State during ex-President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration.
It was repatriated from slush accounts in foreign jurisdictions.
EFCC detectives tracking the $500million have discovered that it was diverted.
Of the $500million, about $250million was released to the Office of National Security Adviser (ONSA)during the tenure of Col. Sambo Dasuki without appropriation. The balance of $250million cannot be traced yet.
The Nation learnt that detectives discovered that the $250million was illegally withdrawn barely two months to the end of Jonathan’s administration.
Investigators are said to be working on clues that part of the cash was spent on “extraneous matters, including media services, opinion polls and personal matters”.
According to a fact-sheet on the investigation, the $250million was withdrawn between March 2, 2015 and April 21, 2015.
Detectives have retrieved documents relating to the alleged “re-looting” of the Abacha loot.
In the fact-sheet, the ONSA in a memo of January 12, 2015, asked the former Coordinating Minister for the Economy and Minister of Finance, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, to transfer $300million .
The memo said: “Please refer to our meeting on recovered funds. You are pleased requested to remit the sum of $300m and £5.5m to the following account being ONSA share as agreed. Account name: CBN (NSA Foreign Operation; Account number: -100367-USD-CABANK30
Bank; Address: 28, Finsbury Circus, London. Please accept the assurances of my highest esteem.”
Mrs. Okonjo-Iweala, in a memo to Dr. Goodluck Jonathan, requested for $300m from the Abacha loot.
Only $250million was released to the ex-NSA.
The January 20, 2015 memo said: “Attached, please find a request by the NSA for the transfer of $300m and British pounds (£5.5m) of the recovered Abacha funds to ONSA operations account. The NSA has explained that this is to enable purchase of ammunition, security and other intelligence equipment for the security agencies in order to enable them confront the ongoing Boko Haram threat.
“His request is sequel to the meeting you chaired with the committee on use of recovered funds where decision was made that recovered Abacha funds would be split 50-50 between urgent security needs to confront Boko Haram and development needs (including a portion for the Future Generations window of Sovereign Wealth Fund).
“This letter is to seek your approval to borrow these funds, for now, to disburse to the NSA. These funds form part of projected FG Independent Revenue to be appropriated.
“In light of this and for accountability, given the peculiar nature of security and intelligence transactions, we would expect the NSA to account to your Excellency for the utilisation of the funds.”
On January 29, 2015, the ex-President responded to the ex-Minister as follows: “CME/HMF, approved.”
To back his approval, Dr. Jonathan through his Senior Special Assistant (Admin) Matt Aikhionbare, in a memo of January 30, 2015 said: “RE: Request by NSA for transfer of funds.” I am directed to forward Ref A to you and convey to you Mr. President’s approval. Humbly submitted for your further action, Ma’am.”
Detectives have discovered that only $250million out of the $300million requested was paid to ONSA.
16/2/15
In a letter of February 16, 2015, the then Director of Funds of the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation, Mr. M.K. Dikwa, in a memo to the CBN Governor, conveyed the mandate to transfer the $250million.
The memo said: “. You are hereby requested to immediately effect fund transfer as below($250m) being amount disbursed to enable for the purchase of ammunition, security and other intelligence equipment for the security agencies in order to enable them fully confront the ongoing Boko Haram threat.
“As per Mr. President’s approval on CME-HMF/FMF/2015/18 dated 20th January 2015 conveyed via State Houses letter No PRES/87/MF /-2/520 dated 30th January 2015. NSA’s letter Ref. No. NSA/362/5 dated 5th March 2015 also refers.”
A source said: “The $250million was duly approved by ex-President Goodluck Jonathan; the ex-NSA did not commit any infractions. He acted in the interest of the country.
It is incorrect for EFCC to assume that the $250million was diverted because it was used to purchase vital equipment.”
A table of how the $250million was spent was obtained by our correspondent last night.
An EFCC source, who spoke in confidence, said: “We will need to interact with the former Minister of Finance, Okonjo-Iweala, to guide us on the contents of her letter, especially on the legality of the withdrawal of the $250million.
“We will find out what she meant by to ‘borrow these funds’ and these ‘funds form part of projected FG Independent Revenue to be appropriated.’ She should assist investigators on whether or not the ex-NSA accounted to Jonathan for the ‘utilization of the funds.’
A former Chairman of the EFCC, Mallam Nuhu Ribadu, had claimed that Abacha “took over $6 billion from Nigeria”. He also said $2 billion was recovered when he was in charge of the anti-graft agency.
The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project(SERAP) had through its Executive Director, Adetokunbo Mumuni, on 21 September 2015 sent an access to information request to the President, World Bank Group, asking him to “exercise the bank’s prerogative to release documents relating to spending of recovered assets stolen by late Gen. Sani Abacha”.
SERAP asked the World Bank President to “disclose information about the Bank’s role in the implementation of any projects funded by the recovered assets and any other on-going repatriation initiatives on Nigeria with which the bank is engaged.”
It said: “The request is pursuant to the World Bank’s Access to Information Policy (The Policy), approved by the Board on June 30 2015. SERAP notes that one of the policy’s guiding principles is to maximise access to information. There is also clear public interest in Nigerians knowing about the Bank’s supervisory role and specifically its involvement in the implementation of projects on which repatriated funds were spent.”
But Okonjo-Iweala in 2015 insisted that she had no case to answer.
She said: “Former President Jonathan set up a Committee comprising the former Minister of Justice, former NSA and the former Minister of Finance to determine how best to use both the returned and expected funds for development.
“The NSA made a case for using the returned funds for urgent security operations since, he noted, there cannot be any development without peace and security. Based on this, a decision was taken to deploy about $322m for the military operations, while the expected $700m would be applied for development programmes as originally conceived.
“Following the discussions and based on the urgency of the NSA’s memo, Dr Okonjo-Iweala requested the President to approve the transfer of the requested amount to the NSA’s Office for the specified purposes.
“But, as captured in the memo, she insisted on three conditions: a. only a part, not the entire Abacha funds would be spent on the arms; the rest would be invested in developmental projects as originally conceived b. the money was to be treated as borrowed funds which would be paid back as soon as possible c. the NSA’s office was to account for the spending to the President who was the Commander in Chief, given the fact that the Minister of Finance is not part of the security architecture and does not participate in the Security Council.
By Chidi Nkwopara,
Ikechukwu Nnochiri & Dennis Agbo
ABUJA—The Abuja Division of the Federal High Court, yesterday, declined
to set-aside the order that designated the Indigeniuos People of
Biafra, IPOB, as a terrorist organisation.
IPOB members
The court, in a ruling that was delivered by the Acting Chief Judge of
the Federal High Court, Justice Abdul Abdu-Kafarati, dismissed the
application IPOB filed to challenge the September 20, 2017, order that
outlawed its activities in Nigeria.
Justice Kafarati said he was persuaded by an affidavit evidence and
exhibits the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice,
Mr. Abubakar Malami, SAN, adduced before the court, which he said
showed that existence of the IPOB constituted a threat to national
security.
Though he acknowledged that every Nigerian citizen has the right to
assemble freely and to form or belong to any association for the
protection of his interests, Justice Kafarati however stressed that
under section 45 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, such right could
be curtailed “in the interest of defence, public safety, public order,
public morality or public health”, as well as “for the purpose of
protecting the rights and freedom of other persons”.
He further dismissed the argument of counsel to the IPOB, Mr. Ifeanyi
Ejiofor, that the group, not being a registered entity in Nigeria, could
not be validly sued by the Federal Government.
The court maintained that the fact that IPOB claimed that it was
registered in so many countries outside Nigeria, did not exculpate it
from legal liabilities if it was found to have by its activities,
violated any law in Nigeria
“The question is whether a foreigner in Nigeria is subject to Nigerian
law? Can that foreigner be arrested and prosecuted in Nigeria? The
answer is yes.
“It is therefore my considered view that the argument of Ejiofor has no
basis. I hold that the applicant is subject to Nigerian law and courts”,
the Judge added.
More so, he held that the proscription order he issued against IPOB in
chambers was proper in law since it was based on an ex-parte motion that
was anchored on provisions of the Terrorism Prevention Act, adding that
the motion was backed with “Presidential approval.”
Consequently, it resolved all three issues that were formulated against
the proscription order against the IPOB, and also awarded a cost of
N500, 000 against the outlawed group.
Meanwhile, shortly after the judgment, IPOB’s lawyer, Ejiofor, vowed to
take the case before the Court of Appeal.
Ejiofor decried that the Judge failed to consider fundamental issues
that IPOB raised in its application.
IPOB had asked the court to vacate the proscription order which it said
was surreptitiously obtained by the AGF.
The court had in the ruling last year, declared as illegal, all
activities of the IPOB, particularly in the South-east and South-South
regions of the country.
It specifically restrained “any person or group of persons from
participating in any of the group’s activities”.
However, the IPOB, in a motion it filed pursuant to Section 6(6) (1) of
the 1999 constitution, as amended, maintained that the proscription
order “was made without jurisdiction”, adding that it was “granted
against an entity unknown to law.”
IPOB queried the legal validity of the order, saying there was “clear
suppression and misrepresentation of facts,” in the affidavit evidence
the AGF submitted, upon which the order was granted.
It argued that the proscription order was tantamount to declaring over
30 million Nigerians of Igbo extraction as terrorists.
Ruling, denigration of judiciary—Ohanaeze
In a related develpoment, President General of Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Chief
Nnia Nwodo in his reaction said: “It is unfortunate that our courts are
allowing themselves to be used for unlawful and political ends. IPOB
has done nothing to qualify, as defined by international standards, to
be called a terrorist organisation.
“Sadly, the Federal Attorney General in his parochialism, unmitigated
bias and calumny has not found it necessary to classify Fulani herdsmen
as terrorists inspite of their classification by the Global Terrorist
Index as the fourth deadliest terrorist organization in the world.
“Ohanaeze frowns at this nepotism, this denigration of our judiciary and
this stigmatization of our children.”
Similarly, another Igbo group, Aligbo Development Foundation, ADF, said
the court decision sounded like a political statement.
President of ADF, Prof. Timothy Nwala said: “the declaration sounds like
a political statement. Legal declarations are born out of sound logic. I
doubt if there is any rational thought in this case.
“There was no rational basis for the court verdict. The world knows what
they are doing. If Fulani Marauders are not terrorists, I wonder what
the world would say.”
IPOB not terorist group—Survey
However, an air of disbelief and shock enveloped parts of Imo State
yesterday, following the court judgment that confirmed Federal
Government’s position that the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, is a
terrorist group.
People were seen in groups, discussing the development in hushed tones,
as soon as the outcome of the judgment filtered into Owerri
municipality.
Efforts made to get some government officials to speak on the issue
failed, as they reasoned that “it is a very delicate national issue”.
However, some people who claimed to be IPOB loyalists said they were not
surprised by the judgment of the court.
“What did you expect from the court controlled by the same government
that called us a terrorist group? It is sheer irony that those who don’t
carry firearms and don’t believe in wasting precious human lives are
branded terrorists. This is Nigeria for you”, Ikechukwu Okam said.
According to Ikechukwu, “everything about Ndigbo must be treated like
our views and aspirations don’t count”.
In her own opinion, Florence, a mother of three queried why the
rampaging herdsmen that have killed several people, are still treated
with kid gloves, while IPOB loyalists are branded terrorists.
“Go and tell government that they can kill the flesh but definitely not
the spirit. Many souls may still be killed by the security agencies, but
generations after us will continue from where we stopped”, Florence
said.
Read more at: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2018/01/ipob-remains-terrorist-organisation-court/
Read more at: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2018/01/ipob-remains-terrorist-organisation-court/
ABUJA—The Abuja
Division of the Federal High Court, yesterday, declined to set-aside
the order that designated the Indigeniuos People of Biafra, IPOB, as a
terrorist organisation.
IPOB members
The court, in a ruling that was delivered by the Acting Chief Judge of
the Federal High Court, Justice Abdul Abdu-Kafarati, dismissed the
application IPOB filed to challenge the September 20, 2017, order that
outlawed its activities in Nigeria.
Justice Kafarati said he was persuaded by an affidavit evidence and
exhibits the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice,
Mr. Abubakar Malami, SAN, adduced before the court, which he said
showed that existence of the IPOB constituted a threat to national
security.
Though he acknowledged that every Nigerian citizen has the right to
assemble freely and to form or belong to any association for the
protection of his interests, Justice Kafarati however stressed that
under section 45 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, such right could
be curtailed “in the interest of defence, public safety, public order,
public morality or public health”, as well as “for the purpose of
protecting the rights and freedom of other persons”.
He further dismissed the argument of counsel to the IPOB, Mr. Ifeanyi
Ejiofor, that the group, not being a registered entity in Nigeria, could
not be validly sued by the Federal Government.
The court maintained that the fact that IPOB claimed that it was
registered in so many countries outside Nigeria, did not exculpate it
from legal liabilities if it was found to have by its activities,
violated any law in Nigeria
“The question is whether a foreigner in Nigeria is subject to Nigerian
law? Can that foreigner be arrested and prosecuted in Nigeria? The
answer is yes.
“It is therefore my considered view that the argument of Ejiofor has no
basis. I hold that the applicant is subject to Nigerian law and courts”,
the Judge added.
More so, he held that the proscription order he issued against IPOB in
chambers was proper in law since it was based on an ex-parte motion that
was anchored on provisions of the Terrorism Prevention Act, adding that
the motion was backed with “Presidential approval.”
Consequently, it resolved all three issues that were formulated against
the proscription order against the IPOB, and also awarded a cost of
N500, 000 against the outlawed group.
Meanwhile, shortly after the judgment, IPOB’s lawyer, Ejiofor, vowed to
take the case before the Court of Appeal.
Ejiofor decried that the Judge failed to consider fundamental issues
that IPOB raised in its application.
IPOB had asked the court to vacate the proscription order which it said
was surreptitiously obtained by the AGF.
The court had in the ruling last year, declared as illegal, all
activities of the IPOB, particularly in the South-east and South-South
regions of the country.
It specifically restrained “any person or group of persons from
participating in any of the group’s activities”.
However, the IPOB, in a motion it filed pursuant to Section 6(6) (1) of
the 1999 constitution, as amended, maintained that the proscription
order “was made without jurisdiction”, adding that it was “granted
against an entity unknown to law.”
IPOB queried the legal validity of the order, saying there was “clear
suppression and misrepresentation of facts,” in the affidavit evidence
the AGF submitted, upon which the order was granted.
It argued that the proscription order was tantamount to declaring over
30 million Nigerians of Igbo extraction as terrorists.
Ruling, denigration of judiciary—Ohanaeze
In a related develpoment, President General of Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Chief
Nnia Nwodo in his reaction said: “It is unfortunate that our courts are
allowing themselves to be used for unlawful and political ends. IPOB
has done nothing to qualify, as defined by international standards, to
be called a terrorist organisation.
“Sadly, the Federal Attorney General in his parochialism, unmitigated
bias and calumny has not found it necessary to classify Fulani herdsmen
as terrorists inspite of their classification by the Global Terrorist
Index as the fourth deadliest terrorist organization in the world.
“Ohanaeze frowns at this nepotism, this denigration of our judiciary and
this stigmatization of our children.”
Similarly, another Igbo group, Aligbo Development Foundation, ADF, said
the court decision sounded like a political statement.
President of ADF, Prof. Timothy Nwala said: “the declaration sounds like
a political statement. Legal declarations are born out of sound logic. I
doubt if there is any rational thought in this case.
“There was no rational basis for the court verdict. The world knows what
they are doing. If Fulani Marauders are not terrorists, I wonder what
the world would say.”
IPOB not terorist group—Survey
However, an air of disbelief and shock enveloped parts of Imo State
yesterday, following the court judgment that confirmed Federal
Government’s position that the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, is a
terrorist group.
People were seen in groups, discussing the development in hushed tones,
as soon as the outcome of the judgment filtered into Owerri
municipality.
Efforts made to get some government officials to speak on the issue
failed, as they reasoned that “it is a very delicate national issue”.
However, some people who claimed to be IPOB loyalists said they were not
surprised by the judgment of the court.
“What did you expect from the court controlled by the same government
that called us a terrorist group? It is sheer irony that those who don’t
carry firearms and don’t believe in wasting precious human lives are
branded terrorists. This is Nigeria for you”, Ikechukwu Okam said.
According to Ikechukwu, “everything about Ndigbo must be treated like
our views and aspirations don’t count”.
In her own opinion, Florence, a mother of three queried why the
rampaging herdsmen that have killed several people, are still treated
with kid gloves, while IPOB loyalists are branded terrorists.
“Go and tell government that they can kill the flesh but definitely not
the spirit. Many souls may still be killed by the security agencies, but
generations after us will continue from where we stopped”, Florence
said.
Read more at: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2018/01/ipob-remains-terrorist-organisation-court/
Read more at: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2018/01/ipob-remains-terrorist-organisation-court/
Comments
Post a Comment