1.  Before EFCC is disgraced

Written by Chuks Akunna    
Wednesday, 08 June 2011 19:21


Now that Dimeji Bankole, former Speaker of the House of Representatives, has been arraigned by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on a 16-count charge of fraud, and the heated reactions that have trailed the move, it becomes pertinent to raise the following questions:
As at the time (Sunday, June 5, 2011) Bankole was arrested, Nigeria had no Attorney-General of the Federation. President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan
had dissolved the Federal Executive Council about 10 days earlier. Now, the charge sheet before the Federal High Court, Abuja, (where Bankole is being tried) read Federal Republic of Nigeria (Complainant) and Dimeji Bankole (Accused).

I am not a trained lawyer, but as a journalist I know that no private lawyer can prosecute on behalf of the federal government without the fiat of the Attorney-General of the Federation. In the FGN vs. Bankole case, who issued Mr. Festus Keyamo the fiat to prosecute Bankole?

2.            In the very unlikely event any ‘Attorney-General of the Federation’ had issued Keyamo with  such fiat, can EFCC claim ignorance of the fact that Justice Adamu Bello of the Federal High Court had recently discharged a dubious fiat the same Keyamo obtained  to prosecute Chief Kenny Martins in the Police Equipment Foundation (PEF) saga? His Lordship had ruled that it ran against the grain of justice for Keyamo who had done a petition against Kenny Martins to assume the role of a prosecutor in a case involving the same Martins.

Now, the same Keyamo had penned several petitions against the Bankole-led House during the Peugeot 407 cars saga. Also, Keyamo had severally condemned Bankole’s handling of the suspension of 11 lawmakers last year. How could the same EFCC that lost the case against Kenny Martins, partly on account of the withdrawal of the federal government’s fiat to Keyamo, now engage the same Keyamo to prosecute Bankole?

3.            Also in the charge sheet was that Dimeji Bankole “and others now at large, with intent to defraud, did conspire amongst yourselves to inflate the cost of” various electronic gadgets. Could the EFCC clear the air on the identities of these “others now at large” as there is this whispering campaign that the persons may actually be Aminu Tambuwal and Emeka Ihedioha, serving Speaker of the House and his deputy respectively?

4.            Who raised the memos for the purchase of the now controversial television and computer sets? How much was in the memo? Was Bankole involved in the process leading to the award of the contract for the supplies? Did he usurp the functions of the Clerk of the House as well as its procurement officers? If Bankole was the approving authority, it follows that some persons (most probably including those now at large) must have prepared the papers for him to approve. How come it is only Bankole that is on trial? In any case, what happened to the dust initially raised by EFCC on the N10 billion loan?

5.            Finally, Section 58 (3) of the Public Procurement Act 2007 states: “Prosecution of offences under this Act shall be instituted in the name of the Attorney-General of the Federation or such other officer of the Ministry of Justice as he may authorize to do so, and in addition, without prejudice to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.” It therefore follows that that only the Attorney-General of the Federation or any officer in his ministry, and not EFCC, can prosecute any breach of the Public Procurement Act, 2007. In other words, EFCC is on its own- a meddlesome interloper!

Correct me if I’m right (apologies to Rudolph Okonkwo).

Ka Chineke dozie obodo Nigeria.

Source: http://elombah.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=6913:before-efcc-is-disgraced&catid=25:politics&Itemid=92