Connect with us

Government

Alison-Madueke: I Did Not Forfeit $153.3m Because I Did Not Own it

Published

on

Diezani Allison-Madueke - Investors King
  • Alison-Madueke: I Did Not Forfeit $153.3m Because I Did Not Own it

A former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Mrs. Diezani Alison-Madueke, on Saturday said she did not forfeit $153.3 million to the Federal Government as claimed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

Arguing that no such money belonged to her, she said, “I cannot forfeit what was never mine.”

A Federal High Court in Lagos presided over by Justice Muslim Hassan had on January 6 ordered the temporary forfeiture of the sum of $153,310,000 allegedly siphoned by the former minister from the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) and stashed in three banks. The forfeiture order was sequel to an ex parte order sought by the EFCC and accompanied by a nine-paragraph affidavit claiming that Alison-Madueke, sometime in December 2014, conspired with a bank chief executive on how the sum of $153,310,000 would be moved from the NNPC. Justice Hassan had given the banks and any other interested party 14 days to appear before him to prove the legitimacy of the monies, failure of which the funds would be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government.

But in her reaction yesterday, Alison-Madueke said EFCC was now taking advantage of her silence and decision to allow ongoing investigations by the British National Crimes Agency into alleged corrupt practices against her to run its full course, to defame her.

The former minister said she would no longer give the anti-corruption agency any more mileages to vilify her.

She said the $153.3 million the EFCC said she forfeited to the Federal Government did not belong to her, and as such she could not have given up what did not belong to her.

In her response to the EFCC corruption claims against her which was obtained in Abuja, she said there was no evidence to establish she owned the $153.3 million.

She explained that the EFCC capitalised on a legislation on advanced fee fraud and other related offences to link her name and identity to funds it could not establish their real owners.

Noting that this was unethical, she said: “I am deeply disturbed and bewildered by recent media reports claiming that by virtue of an order of the Federal High Court, I have forfeited to the Federal Government, the sum of $153.3 million which I purportedly stole from the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation.

“The principle of fair hearing demands that I should have been notified of formal charges if truly there was a prima facia evidence or indictment against my person linking me with the said issue, so as to ensure I have adequate legal representation. This was never done.”

Continuing, the former minister said: “I cannot forfeit what was never mine. I have never stolen any money from NNPC or any other entity I do not know the basis on which the EFCC have chosen to say that I am the owner of these funds as no evidence was provided to me before the order was obtained.”

“I am also informed by my lawyers that the legislation under which the EFCC obtained this order is for situations where the funds are believed to be proceeds of crime and the owner is not known. I do not therefore understand how the EFCC can in the same breath say the monies were mine when they would/should not have used the procedure which applies only to funds of unknown ownership.

“If indeed they used this particular legal procedure because they did not know who owned the monies, then how can they now falsely be attributing the ownership to me.”

Alison-Madueke also challenged the EFCC to publish incontrovertible evidence of the $153.3 million lodgement, its beneficiaries, and links to her, as well as the NNPC’s accounts from which the lodgments were made and her authorisation of same.

She said as minister of petroleum resources, she only had statutory influence as approved in the Petroleum Act, over NNPC’s finances.

She note another instance where the EFCC alleged that $700 million was found in her Abuja home, the former minister asked the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) to further clarify and lend credence to EFCC’s claims by showing evidence it has the money in its custody.

“Should the videos of this $700 million cash discovery not have made good viewing? Or should those who recovered this money not tell the public where exactly the money has been kept? Perhaps, the Central Bank should corroborate that it is in custody of these monies found in my house,” she said.

On claims she illicitly benefitted from the $1.3 billion financial settlement of the protracted Oil Prospecting Lease (OPL) 245 oil block deal between Malabu Oil, Royal Dutch Shell and Eni, Alison-Madueke said as minister she did not participate in any activity relating to financial payments in the agreement, and only played the statutory role mandated to her to see to the end of the dispute.

She also said that she had no house worth $18 million in Abuja as claimed by the EFCC, and that her family home in Yenagoa Bayelsa which the agency said was worth billions of naira, was uncompleted and worth N394 million as declared in the code of conduct.

“It is saddening that after eight years of serving my country, my experience as a public servant has been fraught with continuous malicious castigation and character assassination, all in the name of personal vendettas or political horse-trading.

“One error that cannot be ascribed to me is stealing from Nigeria and defrauding my country. I cannot sit back and allow the fabricated accusations against my person designed by unscrupulous persons with vengeful agenda go unchallenged,” she said.

On the dividends that accrued to Nigeria from her stake in the Nigerian Liquefied Natural Gas (NLNG) Ltd, the former minister said: “It is pertinent to note that at the end of my tenure, I left behind in the LNG dividend fund for the incoming administration, the sum of $5.6 billion.

“I did this to ensure continuity in the crucial gas sector development which underpins the entire power and energy sector and which was and still is absolutely imperative for the country’s current and future economic development.”

Is the CEO/Founder of Investors King Limited. A proven foreign exchange research analyst and a published author on Yahoo Finance, Businessinsider, Nasdaq, Entrepreneur.com, Investorplace, and many more. He has over two decades of experience in global financial markets.

Continue Reading
Comments

Government

EFCC Declares Former Kogi Governor, Yahaya Bello, Wanted Over N80.2 Billion Money Laundering Allegations

Published

on

Yahaya Bello

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has escalated its pursuit of justice by declaring former Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Bello, wanted over alleged money laundering amounting to N80.2 billion.

In a first-of-its-kind action, the EFCC announced Bello’s wanted status in connection with the alleged embezzlement of funds during his tenure as governor.

The commission, armed with a 19-count criminal charge, accused Bello and his cohorts of conspiring to launder the hefty sum, which was purportedly diverted from state coffers for personal gain.

The declaration of Bello as a wanted fugitive came after a series of failed attempts by the EFCC to effect his arrest.

Despite an ex-parte order from Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court, Abuja, mandating the EFCC to apprehend and produce Bello in court for arraignment, the former governor managed to evade capture with the reported assistance of his successor, Governor Usman Ododo.

This latest development shows the challenges faced by law enforcement agencies in holding powerful individuals accountable for their actions.

However, it also demonstrates the unwavering commitment of the EFCC to uphold the rule of law and ensure that justice is served, irrespective of the status or influence of the accused.

In response to the EFCC’s declaration, the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, issued a stern warning to Bello, stating that fleeing from the law would not resolve the allegations against him.

Fagbemi urged Bello to honor the EFCC’s invitation and cooperate with the investigation process, saying it is important to uphold the rule of law and respect the authority of law enforcement agencies.

The EFCC’s pursuit of Bello underscores the agency’s mandate to combat corruption and financial crimes, sending a strong message that individuals implicated in corrupt practices will be held accountable for their actions.

Continue Reading

Government

Concerns Mount Over Security as National Identity Card Issuance Shifts to Banks

Published

on

NIMC enrolment

Amidst the National Identity Management Commission’s (NIMC) recent announcement that the issuance of the proposed new national identity card will be facilitated through applicants’ respective banks, concerns are escalating regarding the security implications of involving financial institutions in the distribution process.

The federal government, in collaboration with the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the Nigeria Inter-bank Settlement System (NIBSS), introduced a new identity card with payment functionality, aimed at streamlining access to social and financial services.

However, the decision to utilize banks as distribution channels has sparked apprehension among industry stakeholders.

Mr. Kayode Adegoke, Head of Corporate Communications at NIMC, clarified that applicants would request the card by providing their National Identification Number (NIN) through various channels, including online portals, NIMC offices, or their respective banks.

Adegoke emphasized that the new National ID Card would serve as a single, multipurpose card, encompassing payment functionality, government services, and travel documentation.

Despite NIMC’s assurances, concerns have been raised regarding the necessity and security implications of introducing a new identity card system when an operational one already exists.

Chief Deolu Ogunbanjo, President of the National Association of Telecoms Subscribers, questioned the rationale behind the new General Multipurpose Card (GMPC), citing NIMC’s existing mandate to issue such cards under Act No. 23 of 2007.

Ogunbanjo highlighted the successful implementation of MobileID by NIMC, which has provided identity verification for over 15 million individuals.

He expressed apprehension about integrating the new ID card with existing MobileID systems and raised concerns about data privacy and unauthorized duplication of ID cards.

Moreover, stakeholders are seeking clarification on the responsibilities for card blocking, replacement, and delivery in case of loss or theft, given the involvement of multiple parties, including banks, in the issuance process.

The shift towards utilizing banks for identity card issuance raises fundamental questions about data security, privacy, and the integrity of the identification process.

With financial institutions playing a pivotal role in distributing sensitive government documents, there are valid concerns about potential vulnerabilities and risks associated with this approach.

As the debate surrounding the security implications of the new national identity card continues to intensify, stakeholders are calling for greater transparency, accountability, and collaboration between government agencies and financial institutions to address these concerns effectively.

The paramount importance of safeguarding citizens’ personal information and ensuring the integrity of the identity verification process cannot be overstated, especially in an era of increasing digital interconnectedness and heightened cybersecurity threats.

Continue Reading

Government

Israeli President Declares Iran’s Actions a ‘Declaration of War’

Published

on

Israel Gaza

Israeli President Isaac Herzog has characterized the recent series of attacks from Iran as nothing short of a “declaration of war” against the State of Israel.

This proclamation comes amidst escalating tensions between the two nations, with Iran’s aggressive actions prompting serious concerns within Israel and the international community.

The sequence of events leading to Herzog’s grave assessment began with a barrage of 300 ballistic missiles and drones launched by Iran towards Israel over the weekend.

While the Israeli defense forces managed to intercept a significant portion of these projectiles, the sheer scale of the assault sent shockwaves through the region.

President Herzog’s assertion of war was underscored by Israel’s careful consideration of its response options and ongoing discussions with its global partners.

The gravity of the situation prompted the convening of the G7, where member nations reaffirmed their commitment to Israel’s security, recognizing the severity of Iran’s actions.

However, the United States, a key ally of Israel, took a nuanced stance. President Joe Biden conveyed to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that, given the limited casualties and damage resulting from the attacks, the US would not support retaliatory strikes against Iran.

This position, though strategic, reflects a delicate balancing act in maintaining stability in the volatile Middle East region.

Meanwhile, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and his Iranian counterpart Hossein Amir-Abdollahian cautioned against further escalation, emphasizing the potential for heightened tensions and provocative acts to exacerbate the situation.

In response to the escalating crisis, the Nigerian government issued a call for restraint, urging both Iran and Israel to prioritize peaceful resolution and diplomatic efforts to ease tensions.

This appeal reflects the broader international consensus on the need to prevent further escalation and mitigate the risk of a wider conflict in the Middle East.

As Israel grapples with the implications of Iran’s aggressive actions and weighs its response options, President Herzog reiterated Israel’s commitment to peace while emphasizing the need to defend its people.

Despite calls for restraint from global allies, Israel remains vigilant in safeguarding its security amidst the growing threat posed by Iran’s belligerent behavior.

The coming days are likely to be critical as Israel navigates the complexities of its response while international efforts intensify to defuse the escalating tensions between Iran and Israel.

The specter of war looms large, underscoring the urgency of diplomatic engagement and concerted efforts to prevent further escalation in the region.

Continue Reading
Advertisement




Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Trending