The Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions, yesterday walked out officials of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) led by the Director of Legal Services of the anti-graft agency, Mr. Chile Okoroma. Also walked out of the investigative hearing of a petition against the Chairman of the EFCC, Mr. Ibrahim Lamorde, over allegations of diversion of stolen funds recovered from looters was his personal lawyer, Mr. Ugochukwu Osuagwu, who came to represent him at the hearing.
The committee took the action at its first sitting of investigation into the allegation of fraud, involving alleged diversion of N1 trillion funds levelled against Lamorde, when members listened to the oral submission of the petitioner, Dr. George Uboh. Okoroma had, in company with six other lawyers, including the private lawyer of the EFCC Chairman, Osuagwu, barged into the venue of the hearing, about one hour into the 
commencement of the sitting.
commencement of the sitting.
The committee members were taken aback when they realised that representatives of Lamorde and the commission were in their midst, after the senators had received a letter from the agency, asking for extension of time to enable the chairman appear and respond to the petition against him.
After hearing the submissions of the petitioner against the EFCC boss, Okoroma sought for permission to make some comments upon which his identity and that of his other colleagues were demanded for by the Chairman of the Committee.
But Okoroma went ahead to make his comment without permission by describing the method being adopted by the committee to conduct the public hearing as unjust and contrary to the law, saying “it is very wrong for a petitioner to be heard publicly in the absence of the person the petition is against.” The Chairman of the Senate Committee, Senator Samuel Anyanwu, immediately read the letter from the EFCC, seeking the permission of the Committee to appear at a later date when the comprehensive annual audit report of the Commission would have been received from KPMG, an audit firm handling the audit of the agency.
The lawyer to the EFCC, Okoroma, however, stated that the decision of the Senate to entertain the presentation of the petitioner in the absence of the respondent (Lamorde) or the commission’s representatives was wrong. He also observed that the commission was not furnished with most of the documents presented to the committee as evidence by the petitioner, querying the propriety of the hearing process.
When the EFCC team was finally asked to quit the arena by the Committee Chairman, after consulting with his colleagues, Okoroma briefly spoke to the press outside the venue of the hearing, regretting that the Senate Committee breached the principle of fair hearing. He lamented that the parliament, which is a lawmaking institution had become a law-breaker by not adhering to the principle of fair hearing.
Also enraged by the action of the investigative committee, was the private lawyer to Lamorde, Ugochukwu, who condemned the hearing as a violation of natural justice and fair play, accusing the Senate of not allowing the commission opportunity to witness the presentation of the petition, in order to respond appropriately. He alleged that the commission wrote to the committee, requesting for extension of time before coming to face the panel, but regretted that the committee did not reply the letter, making the commission think that the request was rejected.
“The commission wrote them a letter for extension of time, but the Committee did not reply the letter; so, we concluded that they did not grant the request. And that is why we are here to make sure that the commission is represented.
“Rule of natural justice all over the world states that the petitioner and the respondent must be heard together. It is wrong for the Committee to hear the petitioner alone. We, the representatives of the EFCC are, therefore, disappointed in the investigation. So, I don’t have confidence in the Committee, but if they can correct the wrong now, that will be okay,” he stated.
However, Anyanwu insisted that the committee would not attend to any submission from the EFCC team because they were not being expected since the commission had already sought permission.
Earlier in his oral submission based on the documents before the committee, the petitioner, Uboh, had alleged that former Governor of Bayelsa State, Diepreye Alamieyeseigha, during an interaction, told him that the amount declared by the EFCC was a far cry from what was seized from him.
He also explained to the committee, how the incumbent Governor of Bayelsa State, Seriake Dickson, was allegedly intimidated by Lamorde’s EFCC to stop a legal process initiated to recover the shortfall of Alamieyeseigha’s money back to the Bayelsa State treasury. Uboh alleged that Lamorde gave some of the choice properties seized from the former governor and others, to Usman Lamorde, his younger brother.
The petitioner further requested that the EFCC should be compelled to remit N2.051 trillion to the Federal Government of Nigeria. Uboh also accused Access Bank of conniving with the EFCC to doctor accounts of recovered funds, asking that the bank should be compelled to bring complete and unadulterated statements from 2004 till date. He further impressed on the Committee to cause Aminu Ibrahim and co, an auditing firm, to be compelled to come and shed light on discrepancies in the audited accounts of the Commission.
Meanwhile, the Senate Unity Forum (SUF) has condemned the investigation of the allegation against Lamorde, describing it as a breach of the Senate’s Standing Rule, 2015 (as amended). In a statement signed by Senators Ahmad Lawan, George Akume, Abu Ibrahim and Barnabas Gemade, on behalf of the Forum, the group noted that the petition ought to have been routed through a Senator or a member of the House of Representatives, who would have notified the presiding officer of the Chamber for onward presentation at plenary for resolution of the whole chamber.
According to the Forum, it is after the presentation on the floor that the presiding officer would ask the member to lay it on the table, and subsequently refer it to the appropriate committee, which would work on it and return to the Senate. The statement reads: “Senate Unity Forum declares that the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions investigation on EFCC Chairman, Mr. Ibrahim Lamorde, is illegal and breach of the Senate Standing Rules. “In standard parliamentary practice, a petition is routed through either a senator or a member of the House of Representatives. Upon receipt of such petition, the representatives will inform the presiding officer of the chamber and, thereafter, present the petition in the plenary.
“Upon presentation in plenary, the presiding officer will invite the senator / House of Representatives member to lay the petition on the table in the chamber, which automatically becomes public document. “Thereafter, the presiding officer will refer the petition to appropriate committee for consideration upon which it would be returned to the Senate plenary.
“In this regard, nothing of the sort happened. Senate proceeded on recess on August 13 and it is not on record that petition of Mr. George Uboh, accusing Lamorde of diverting over N1 trillion recovered from some corrupt Nigerians, including former governor of Bayelsa state, DSP Alamieyeseigha, the former Inspector-General of Police, Tafa Balogun, was presented to Senate in Plenary.”
“The Senate Unity Forum do support the position earlier adopted by some of our colleagues that the Lamorde probe should be halted as it did not follow due parliamentary process….
“We stand against this probe. It is illegal and unconstitutional because it did not follow our rules.” Senate Unity Forum is made up of Senators who supported and campaigned for Senator Ahmad Lawan’s Senate Presidency. Since after the inauguration of the Eighth Senate, the group has been checkmating the activities of the leadership.
No comments:
Post a Comment