#Dasukigate Probe Panel Summons 241 Firms Over Arms Scandal – FULL LIST HERE

The office of the National Security Adviser has invited 241 companies and organizations in relation with receipt of payments from the agency during the tenure of Sambo Dasuki, a retired colonel. 

 
Former NSA Col. Sambo Dasuki (rtd) Sahara Reporters Media

Mr. Dasuki is currently being prosecuted for allegedly distributing over $2.1billion meant for arms procurement to relatives, friends, political associates and campaign officials of the Peoples Democratic Party.
A public notice released on Friday directed the firms to appear before a panel probing payments to individuals, companies and foundations.

The companies are to appear between January 12 and 26 with their certificates of incorporation, particulars of directors, tax clearance certificates for their companies and directors from 2011 till date, letter of award of contracts, evidence of payments so far/outstanding balance, certified bank statements, and other documents considered relevant to the contracts.

The statement, signed by the Principal General Staff Officer in the NSA office, added, “The general public is please invited to note that companies or organizations that received payments from ONSA between 2011 and 2015, who have not appeared before the Committee, and their names are not reflected in the list below, should please endeavor to appear before the committee anytime within the stated period at the Office of the National Security Adviser’s Complex, 3 Arms Zone, Abuja.

“Your prompt appearance before the committee would be wise to avoid any embarrassment.”

#DasukiGate: List of companies to appear before the contract verification committee on January 12th includes;

1. 2020 Nigeria Limited
2. 313 BDC Limited,
3.A & Hatman Limited,
4.A A Master Nigeria Limited,
5. A and B Associate, Abbatare Inc.,
6. Abraham Telecommunication Limited,
7.Abuja Electricity Distribution Company,
8. Abusarhard Nigeria Limited,
9. Acacia Holdings Limited,
10. Ace of Wood Working Nigeria Limited
11. Africair Inc. 
Those expected on January 12 are: 
12. Afro-Arab Investment Limited,
13. Agabea Securities Limited,
14. Agbede A. Adesina and Co,
15. AGI Nigeria Limited,
16. Ahjuwa Nigeria Enterprises,
17. Air USA,
18. AI Noor Travels and Tours,
19. Albani Associates,
20. Allaje Motors Limited,
21. Almond Project Limited,
22. AMAC Aerospace,
23. APC Axial, Appledrop Nigeria Limited,
24. Apt Securities Limited,
25. AR Security Solution Limited,
26. Arewa House,  ASECNA
27. Associate Air Centre.
Companies to appear before the committee on January 13th 
28. Atlas Capital Sa,
29. Autoforms Integrated Enterprises Limited,
30. Autopoietic Telemetric Solutions Limited,
31. Aviation Techni GMBH, Bam Project
32. Projecties,  Baron Limited,
33. Bell Pottinger LLP
34. Belley Corporation,  
35. Belsha Nigeria Limited,
36. Bergons Security Consulting & Supply Limited,
37. Bilal Turnkey Contractors Limited,
38. Biodun & Adekunle Idiagbon,
39. Bluenory Limited,
40. Bob Oshodin Org,
41. Boeing Commercial Airplanes,
42. Brains & Hammers Limited,
43. Bureau Securitas Limited,
44. CAE Flight Training LLC
45. Cardiff Properties Limited,
46. Centre Etiquette Protocal
47. Social Graces Limited,
48. Centre for Regional Integration and Development,
49. Cert Protection Agency,
50. Circular Automobile Limited,
51. CLD Global Concepts Limited,
52. Clems Eze & Co,
53. Codan Limited,
54. Community Defence Law Foundation,
55. Complus International Service Limited,
56. Conella Services Limited
57. Coordinating Committee of Traditional Rulers.
Those to appear before the committee on January 14
58. Core Comm Association of Traditional Rulers,
59.  Corart Ventures Limited,
60. Crack Security Service Limited,
61. Crenfact Ventures Limited,
62. Cresco Limited,
63. Damaris Mode Coulture Limited,
64. Dar’Alsalam Travels & Tours,
65. Dassault Falcon Service,
68. Da’Voice Bnetwork Solution Limited,
69. Debanto Consulting Co. Limited,
70. Development Strategy International Limited,
71. Dezign Zentrum Limited
72. DEX BDC,
73. Digital Inspiration Limited
74. DM Communication Limited,
75. Donpedro Medical Company Limited,
76. Eastwise Trading,
77. E-Force Interservice Limited,
78. Eivor Media Nigeria Limited,
79. Enviromental Engineering and Construction Limited,
80. Enviromental One Global Enterprise
81. Enviromental, Engineering Construction Limited,
82. Eric Ventures Limited,
83. Fara Security Limited,
84. Fimex Gilt Limited,
85. First Aralac Global Limited,
86. Fiz-Hyl Global Investment Limited,
87. Fleetmeig HT W/A Limited,
88. FlightSafety International
89. Foretech Investment Limited.
On January 19th, companies to appear before the committee 
90. Forts and Shields Limited,
91. Forum for Protection of CNI,
92. Forum for Protection of Critical National Infrastructure,
93. GC Electronic Limited,  GDP Associate Limited,
94.  General Hydrocarbons Limited,
95. Geonel Integrated Service Limited
96. Gerhard Rothhaupt,
97. Geronimo Middle East & African Limited
98. Geronimo System Limited
99. GEW Technologies Limited
100. Girl Child Concern,
101. Glenair Training Centre Limited, England
102. Global Industrial and Defence Solution – Pakistan
103. Global Structures
104. Gold Reff Industries Nigeria Limited
105. Goodyear Properties Limited
106. Gracepeace Ventures Nigeria Limited
107. GTESC Limited
108. Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation
109. Halal Palace Ventures
110. Hamada Properties and Investment Co. Ltd
111. Hawker Beechcraft Corporation
112. Heintzmann Sicherheitssysteme GmbH,
113. Helpline Organisation
114. Hypertech (MR) Limited
115. IB Casa
116. Image Axis Limited
117. Imperial College Healthcare
118. Integrated Navigation Systems.
On January 20th, the committee will also verify the contracts of the following companies:  
119. International Res. Management Limited
120.  International Resources Management Co. Ltd
121. Investment Option Limited
122. ITSI-Bioscience, LLC,
123. Jabbama Ada Global Nigeria Limited
124. Jakadiya Picture Company
125. Jawaz Multipurpose Ventures Limited
126. JBE Multimedia Investment Limited
127. Jnzizi Investment Co. Limited
128. Kadawa Agro Products Limited
129. Kamala Motors Limited
130. Kampus Suites Limited
131. Kane Int. Limited
132. Key Information Service Limited
133. Kitwood Nigeria Limited
134. Kola Adejide & Associate
135. Konet Limited
136. La Kreem International Limited
137. Laconso Global Gotechniks Limited
138. Lambstar Limited
139. Law Partner and Associates
140. Lazer Detct System 2010 Limited,
141. Leaderette Nigeria Limited
142. Leeman Communication Limited
143. Lislie Tading Limited
144. Little Italy Global Service Limited
145. London Advertising Limited
146. Loure Global Service Limited
147. Maimakani Nigeria Limited
148. Makfab General Enterprises Nigeria Limited.
On January 21, the committee is expecting  
149. Manara Development Project Limited
150. Map Telecommunication Limited
151. Marshall Aviation Service Ltd
152. Max Air
153. MCAF Associates
154. Mithra – Oil Limited
155. Moortown Global Investment
156. MPS Global Services Limited
157. Murtala Mohammed Foundation
158. Musim Venture Company Limited
159. Muteedah  Travels & Tours Limited
160. Muzaq Investment Limited
161. Mystrose Limited
162. NARICT
163. National Agency for Computer Security of Tunisia
164. Nerris Limited,  NIALS Research Fund
165. Nigeria Guild Editors (NGE)
167. Nigeria in Safe Hands
168. Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ),
169. Norden Global Resources Limited
170. Numora Multi-Trade,
171. O O Osuntokun and Co
172. Obasa Specialty Vehicles
173. ODELL International LLC
174. OnePlus Holding Ltd
175. Onile Nigeria Limited
176. Ornyx Properties Limited
177. Patton Boggs LLP
178. Peoples & Passion Consult Limited.
List of those to appear before the committee on  January 25
179. PHK International Co. Ltd
180. Pickel Holdingd and Investment LTD
181. Pioneer Ventures Limited
182. Pratt and Whitney, Canada
183. Pro-Avionics Limited
184. Proptex Nigeria Limited
185. Prosedec Inter Global Limited
186. Proton Security Service Limited
187. Quarter One Consulting Limited
188. Rajco Int. Ltd
189. RECN Networks Limited
190. Real Property Investment Limited
191. Reliance Reference Hospital
192. Ripples Ventures Limited
193. Rolls Royce NA
194. Romix Technologies Limited
195. Rothhaupt GMGH
196. Safety Technologies Limited
197. Sanisah Communication Limited
198. Sanmilak Nigeria Limited
199. Sartoria Ventures
200. Savannah Centre for Diplomacy, Democracy and Development
201. Seal Chambers
202. Scientel Limited
203. Secureforces Logistics Limited
204. Shehu Musa Yar’Adua Foundation
205. Silk Resources Limited
206. SK Sawki
207. Sky Expert Nigeria Limited
208. Slyvan McNamara Limited.
The list of those to appear before the committee on January 26
209. Societe D’Equipment Internationaux
210. Soject Nigeria Limited
211. Southerland Associates Limited,
212. ST Aerospace Solutions, Denmark,
213. Starbriid Limited
214. Starr Concrete Blocks & Properties Limited,
215. Starepoint Integrated Service Limited,
216. Stellavera De. Co. Limited,
217. Tag Aviation S.A.
218. TechDecision Limited,
219. The Honda Place Limited
222. Tianjin Tianrong International Dev. Limited
223. Tosins and Co Limited
224. Traditional Rulers of Nigeria
225. Trafiga Limited
226. Transgurara Nig. Ltd
227. Trim Communication Nigeria Limited
228. Tripple Kay Company Nigeria Limited
229. UCBK Motors
230. Value Trust Investment
231. Vibrant Resources Limited
232. VIG Limited
233. Wakaso Research and Consultancy Limited
234. WEHSEC Farms Limited
235. West Autos Solutions Enterprise
236.  Westan Group Associates Limited
237. Westwood Motors Limited
238. White Zebu BDC
239. Wonder  Wheels Automobile Limited
240. Zamzam Option Limited
241. Zukhruf Nigeria Limited.

Why The Biafra Question Should Be Put To A Referendum By Malcolm Fabiyi

I have always been a firm believer that Nigeria should remain one united, indissoluble nation. It is an ideal that stems from a deep awareness of the unique possibilities that Nigeria offers, and an appreciation for the promise that it holds. There is no question that a strong and compelling case can be made for Nigerian unity, and there are many who would agree that there are sound historical, economic, and geo-political reasons why a united Nigeria makes sense both in an emotional and rational sense.   

Flag of Biafra 

 

The reality however is that from the very beginnings our union is one that has been plagued by doubts and clouded in uncertainty and distrust. In spite of those challenges, Nigeria has soldiered on. Through struggles, and even a brutal civil war, the Nigerian people have managed to take the union of convenience that Lugard consummated in 1914 and turn it into a partnership that is truly and uniquely theirs. 

Few people gave Nigeria any serious chance of survival. The death knell on Nigeria’s existence and corporate unity has been sounded very many times. Yet somehow, someway, a century later, Nigeria is still here, and Nigerians have managed to show the world that a nation split down the middle between Christians and Muslims can be united. 250 ethnic nationalities, each with its own unique and proud history, have found a way to call this land home.  

Yet, despite these victories, the path to Nigerian unity has come at a great price. Nigerian unity is a complicated matter. It is a marriage, and because of the multi-religious and multiethnic dimension to its reality, it is a polygamous one. If monogamous marriages are complicated, then polygamous ones are even more so. History and our unique culture teaches us that even such unions, imperfect as they might be can survive and even thrive. 

I have come to realize now, that to love Nigeria, is to be open to discussing the reality that it is not a perfect union – and that what we must all strive for is to make it such. To love Nigeria is to recognize that questions about marginalization that are raised by any ethnic groups are not necessarily coming from a place of malice or discontent. We must consider and accept the possibility that these yearnings are borne from a deep seated desire by these ethnic nationalities to chart a path for progress for themselves.  

None of us was there to negotiate the terms of this polygamous national union in 1914.  The reality is that questions about the terms of our union are now new, and they are certainly not without merit. There is a reason why there have been ten (10) different constitutions (1914, 1922, 1946, 1951, 1954, 1960, 1963, 1979, 1993 and 1999), in the life of a nation that is only a century old. Each one of these constitutions came about as a direct result of the never ending enterprise of seeking to enhance the Nigerian union – a step further in the quest for a more perfect union. There has also been at least one far ranging commission that looked into the question of minority marginalization (Willink Minorities Commission 1957) and a number of constitutional conferences whose recommendations were not adopted (e.g., the Abacha conference of 1994, and the Jonathan constitutional conference of 2014). 

In all the national dialogues about Nigerian unity held till date, any questioning of the foundational principle of national unity has essentially been a no-go area. It might be time to make an exception to this doctrinal principle that Nigerian unity is sacrosanct and cannot be challenged. I believe the Biafran secession debate is an area that is deserving of this exception. 

There are two reasons why a referendum on the Biafran secession case makes sense. 
Nigeria must understand how deep the sentiments for separation truly run: Supporters of Nigerian unity (and here we must concern ourselves only with those that are Igbo), contend that IPOB, MASSOB and other entities that are vociferously agitating for secession from Nigeria do not represent the silent Igbo majority.  However, no one has ever taken a poll of the Igbo nation to understand how deep the sentiment for separation from Nigeria truly runs. It is in the interest of the Igbo nation and all Nigerians to put this matter to rest once and for all. Are the majority of the Igbo people like other ethnic groups, believers in a united Nigeria, with an enduring interest in forging a more enduring union by seeking more equity in the structure of the Nigerian state, and in its relationship with its composite parts? Or is the idea of a united Nigeria with the Igbo as an integral part of that union a figment of the imagination of Nigerian patriots?

The Igbo nation has earned a right to a referendum: Nigeria must face up to the realities that the civil war did not buy us peace and unity. Peace can never be bought at any price. The only currency that guarantees peace is that of justice and equity. In prosecuting the Civil War, our forebears merely bought themselves time to make the case for, and develop a more perfect union. If in the 45 years since the guns fell silent, Nigeria has failed to make a convincing case for the Igbo nation to feel, know and believe that Nigeria is as much theirs as the Hausa, Ijaw, Efik, Nupe, Tiv, Igala, Yoruba, Kanuri, Fulani and others believe it to be, then it is in the interest of all patriots to know that, sooner rather than later. Much as many Nigerian patriots would prefer that the questions of separation be shelved forever, and that Nigerian unity should remain a sacrosanct matter, such willful ignorance can do the nation no good in the long run. No marriage lasts if one party remains fundamentally opposed to the union. If a family is to build for the future, and make plans for the future, all the parties to the union must believe that their partnership is an eternal one. The Nigerian family will falter and remain locked in dysfunction if this nagging and persistent question of national unity is not answered, once and for all. Only a referendum can provide a resolution to this question, and the Igbo nation has earned a right to a peaceful plebiscite.  

Why the Agitation for Biafra differs from other Marginalization struggles
There are those who would say that the Biafra matter was settled once and for all with the Nigerian civil war, and that the Igbo nation should accept that their secession bid was unsuccessful and get on with being Nigerians. However, majority of Nigerians today, who are from the post-independence or post war generation, did not witness the war, or were too young to appreciate the issues that led to it.  What most Nigerians know of that conflict is from the history books and from the stories that our fathers and uncles, our mothers and aunts have told us. 

The enduring quotation that Nigerians of this emergent generation hold onto from that internecine conflict was the declaration by General Gowon, the head of state that prosecuted the war for unity, that there was “No victor, No vanquished.”

If there was indeed “No Victor, No Vanquished” then Nigeria must be prepared to give voice to those who claim that their future lies outside the Nigerian nation. To fail to do so will be to tacitly imply that the “Vanquished” have no say in the terms of a post war settlement. This is not a path Nigeria should tow, as it will only keep us bogged down in this seemingly endless cycle of progress and retrogression.
How would this referendum work?

Such a referendum would take place in two stages. The first stage would be a simple “Yes or No” question as to whether or not a substantive referendum should hold to determine if the south eastern Igbo states should secede from Nigeria. It should hold only in the south eastern region, and only Igbo Nigerians should be eligible to participate. If the “No” vote prevails by a simple majority, then the matter of the enduring place of the Igbo within the Nigerian nation will be resolved. Should this initial referendum process have a simple majority “Yes” vote, then it would trigger the commencement of a process to set a date and prepare for a substantive referendum on the question of full Biafran secession. 

The second stage will need some preparation - from the authorities, from the proponents of National unity and from the advocates of separation and secession. The intervening period between the two referendums will provide some opportunity for the real world implications of separation to be debated.  Questions of citizenship, immigration, visa policies and terms of access of Igbo Nigerians to the other five regions post separation will need to be clearly outlined because those would be crucial to the debates that will ensue on the merits or demerits of separation. Guarantees for property rights and economic transfers in the event of political separation will also need to be discussed and addressed as well. Nigeria’s political leaders must be prepared to accept whatever outcomes emerge from this second referendum and it must necessarily be preceded by the passage of appropriate and binding legislative laws.
 
Postscript
No one can make the case for Nigerian unity to the Igbo nation, better and more effectively than Igbo sons and daughters, who believe in the vision and the promise of a united Nigeria. We must trust in their ability to do this. And if peradventure, Nigeria has failed the Igbo nation so irreparably, that there will be no voices that can sway the case in the favor of Nigerian unity, then we must be ready to accept that separation might be a necessary outcome, painful as it might be. 

We have been here before. In 1961, Northern and Southern Cameroon were offered a plebiscite to determine if they wanted to remain in Nigeria or enter into union with Cameroon. Northern Cameroon with its large Fula and Kanuri populations and extensive historical, religious and socio-political ties to Northern Nigeria, opted for union with Nigeria, while the Southern Cameroons opted to join Cameroon. The example offered by the recent agitations for Scottish independence, provides a template for how such a referendum might be handled by people on both sides of the divide. 

Every nation must determine its priorities and deal with them accordingly.  There are those who would argue that the Biafran question is a secondary issue and that Nigeria has more pressing concerns with security, and with reversing the damage perpetrated by a corrupt political class that has decimated the nation’s resources in decades of misrule. I would argue that the Biafran question is an existential one, and therefore demands to be treated with a fierce urgency. The Igbo nation is a crucial and essential part of Nigeria. Nigerian progress will be accelerated if we can determine once and for all, who the parties to our forward movement as a nation are. I am confident that the Nigerian family of the future, will include names like Okoro, Nnamdi, Kanu and Ngozi.  

God bless Nigeria.
Malcolm Fabiyi

Blood money: Explain Your Involvement In $2.1b Arms Deal Scandal, SERAP Asks Jonathan

Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has sent an open letter to former President Goodluck Jonathan seeking explanations from him on “what you knew or had reason to know on the apparent diversion and sharing of over $2 billion meant for purchase of arms to fight Boko Haram.” 

The letter dated 8 January 2016 and signed by SERAP executive director Adetokunbo Mumuni reads in part: “SERAP is sending you this open letter to seek explanations from you, as former President and Commander-in-Chief of the Nigerian Armed Forces, on what you knew, or had reason to know on the apparent diversion and sharing of the over $2 billion meant to purchase arms to empower Nigerian soldiers to fight Boko Haram.”

“SERAP considers that there is enough material in the public domain to suggest that over $2 billion meant for purchase of arms to equip Nigerians soldiers fighting Boko Haram in the North East of the country was diverted and shared among high-ranging government and party officials under your watch as President and Commander-in-Chief of Nigerian Armed Forces.”

“SERAP and indeed Nigerians reserve the right to pursue justice through appropriate national and international accountability mechanisms to ensure that everyone involved in this heinous crime is brought to justice in accordance with international standards of fairness.”

“Is it correct to suggest that the budget of over $2 billion to purchase arms for Nigerian soldiers fighting Boko Haram in the North-East of the country was authorised by you or your office? In other words, did your former National Security Adviser (NSA), Col. Sambo Dasuki (rtd) seek your approval to collect from the Central Bank of Nigeria the over $2 billion meant for purchase of arms for Nigerian soldiers?”
“If so, Nigerians would like to hear from you whether the apparent diversion and sharing of our commonwealth by your former NSA was expressly or implicitly authorised by you.”

“Is it then correct to suggest that the former NSA implements presidential decisions and not make them? If so, is it also correct to suggest that the apparent diversion and sharing of the over $2 billion meant for purchase of arms was a presidential-level decision and that you signed off on it?”

“Is it not correct to suggest that your Administration acted on the basis that it was essentially unrestrained by international or Nigerian law in engaging in or encouraging the apparent diversion and sharing of the over $2 billion meant to purchase arms for Nigerian soldiers in order to protect them against attacks from Boko Haram and to enhance their ability to defend the territorial integrity of the country and provide security for its citizens?”

“Assuming you did not directly order or authorise the apparent diversion and sharing of the over $2 billion meant to purchase arms for Nigerian soldiers, is it fair to suggest that you at least knew, or had reason to know, that your own former NSA was apparently involved in the heinous crime of corruption to wit: the diversion and sharing of over $2 billion meant to purchase arms for Nigerian soldiers; and did not take all necessary and reasonable measures in your power as Commander-in-Chief and President to prevent the alleged diversion and sharing of our commonwealth, as explained above?”

“Would you accept that the apparent diversion and sharing of the over $2 billion was largely due to your failure to ensure: (1) that system was in place to ensure a transparent and accountable spending of budget for military operations in strict accordance with the standards of international law including the UN Convention against Corruption; (2) that any such system was operating in a continuous and effective manner; and (3) that violations of the standards were punished when detected by that system?”

“After the apparent diversion and sharing of the over $2 billion was brought to your attention, did you take any step to refer your former NSA and all those involved in the diversion and sharing to appropriate anticorruption agencies to ensure that all those who were alleged to be responsible for this heinous crime of corruption are brought to justice?”

“Would you agree that the apparent diversion and sharing of the over $2 billion meant for purchase of arms for Nigerian soldiers has seriously undermined the ability of the soldiers to defend themselves and fight Boko Haram; resulted in some soldiers being unfairly tried for refusing to fight without being provided with necessary arms; inflicted severe pain or suffering; and caused unnecessary loss of lives and displacement of law-abiding citizens?”

“Would SERAP be correct to suggest that you, as President and Commander-in-Chief, knew about the authorization, apparent diversion and sharing of the over $2 billion meant to purchase arms for Nigerian soldiers, in the chain of command involving your former NSA and others?”

“Would it therefore be correct to further suggest that your acts and/or omissions concerning the apparent diversion and sharing of the over $ 2 billion were such as to give rise to personal liability through command responsibility for the actions of your former NSA and others who worked under you?”

“Would you now, on the basis of the above, apologise to Nigerians for the apparent diversion and sharing of the over $2 billion and the catastrophic consequences for Nigerian soldiers and their families, including those who have lost their lives; those unfairly tried and convicted; and millions of displaced Nigerians?”

“Nigerians are eagerly awaiting your clarifications on the issues raised above, and your apology.”  

Signed
Adetokunbo Mumuni                                                      
SERAP Executive Director

Nigerian Media In Dasukigate? Et Tu Femi Adesina? By Abiodun Ladepo

Nduka Obaigbena, owner of Thisday newspaper, is not going to go down in infamy all by himself. He is going to take down with him all of his newspaper-owner friends with whom he allegedly shared the N120 million doled out by ATM Sambo Dasuki. And Obaigbena is not going to take just the NPAN members down. He has, according to The Herald, now disclosed that some journalists…no, I take that back…some editors…also collected N50 million from him during the time that the Boko Haram insurgency was at its peak and our Soldiers were being routed mercilessly on the battlefields due, in part, to lack of adequate arms 

 and ammunition.  

Nduka Obaigbena New York Times The money was part of $2.1 billion meant for the purchase of arms, ammunition, equipment and other war-fighting gear for our military in order to prevent their further humiliation and annihilation by a rag-tag terrorist group. This was the money that Obaigbena, who was, himself, a former Editor-in-Chief of Thisday, said members of the Fourth Estate of the Realm (as journalists call themselves) placed on a conference table and carved amongst themselves. 

This would be a classic example of Jeun-Jeun Journalism gone wild if it were definitively true. Except that the Nigerian Guild of Editors (NGE) has come vigorously to Femi Adesina’s defense and laboriously explained how the government of Goodluck Jonathan, along with other individuals and institutions, responded generously with cash to a fund-raiser it held for the purpose of building its secretariat. The N50 million in question, according to the NGE, was never touched by Adesina - Special Adviser on Media and Publicity to President Buhari - and under whose reign as NGE President, Jonathan made the “donation”. The money, it says, has already been spent for the purpose which it was given. That should rest the matter right there, right? No. You can bet that Tony Anenih, Musiliu Obanikoro, Femi Fani-Kayode, Raymond Dokpesi, Ebenezer Babatope, Bode George, Tanko Yakassai and Ayo Fayose will use the same excuse to escape justice: “Oh, I was celebrating my birthday and I invited Jonathan. He couldn’t come but in his infinite generosity, he sent N650 million through Dasuki. There was no way for me to know if the money was part of what was supposed to be used to buy ammunition for our military”.

And they will have a strong leg on which they could anchor such exculpatory arguments if we excuse the media practitioners who may have profited on the blood of our Soldiers and defenseless civilians. 
As a former journalist myself (once a journalist, always a journalist), I am particularly pained and embarrassed by the depth to which some of the practitioners have descended as they struggle to join politicians and other government officials, naira-for-naira, in the inglorious, greedy fight to fleece Nigeria to death. We should ask ourselves: how does a publisher feel when he collects N9 million from Obaigbena and lumps it with the rest of his own money? Does he think Obaigbena has a money-growing tree in his backyard? Or does he think Obaigbena (or Thisday, for that matter) is that rich to be throwing money around like that?

What does he think the editor working for him thinks of him? How does an editor feel when he collects N1m, N2m or whatever from a Governor or Minister? How does the NGE provide the necessary over-watch, constructive criticism, and exposure of graft and other abuses of office if governments are the ones building their secretariat for them? Isn’t that the beginning of self-censorship? What then would be the difference between The Punch (privately-owned) and The Herald (government-owned) if both are joined by the umbilical cord to government funds? 

This idea of media organizations seeking patronage and accepting huge financial gifts from governments under the guise of fund-raisers is nothing but “fine bara” that serves as muffler to the otherwise strident voice of the media, and will only stultify the entire industry in the end. If I am paying huge sums of money for news, as a Newsmaker, do I not control the content? Do I not control the timing of the publication? Do I not control the medium? How then do we, as journalists, set the national agenda…the national discourse – which is one of our cardinal roles as the Fourth Estate of the Realm – if we have sacrificed our conscience at the altar of pecuniary interests?   

But the tempest in the teapot for President Buhari is the charge that his spokesman’s name is being tossed around in the discussion about money that was inappropriately given and received. Where does Adesina now get the moral authority to speak about or against corruption on behalf of Buhari’s government? In fact, where does Buhari himself now get the moral authority to talk tough about tackling corruption if one of his main spokespersons is tainted? 

You see, the way “brown envelope” works; a Newsmaker (or Source, if you will) calls a press conference or calls a particular friendly journalist and “makes” the news in public or in private. He could just read his prepared speech to a group of journalists and take questions thereafter (in the press conference format) or he could just say something to this effect: “Listen, I don’t want you to write such and such about so and so. Here is N50 million. I hope it covers it.” In the latter format, the journalist then calls his fellow journalists, knowing full well he could not “eat” all of that money by himself, and shares it with them. They all agree to kill the story if or when their poor reporter brings it up. How different is that rendition from the one given by Tony Anenih who claimed that he gave N63 million to Tanko Yakassai and Yakassai claims he shared the money with eight other “northern leaders” as transportation and hotel allowance for their trips around the north to mobilize Emirs for Jonathan’s reelection? Same thing! You collect money and share it with fellow corrupt people for the purpose of negatively impacting the society.

Little wonder we now have a dearth of investigative journalism! During his media chat a few days ago, President Muhammadu Buhari had to charge us to get back to doing our homework as journalists before we publish! With the exception of a few outfits, our media organizations have resorted to “agbeleko” (write-from-home) journalism where they write whole pages without attribution at all. Our reporters now attend news events and rely on Press Releases from which they will churn out their own copies. Radio stations just scour the Internet and steal news items there for broadcast. Even many of our TV stations’ news items are materials they plagiarized from the Internet. Out of all the corruption cases being announced by the EFCC and re-announced gleefully by our media, which did they unearth by themselves? How is a journalist different from any other note-taker if all he does is run back to the office with stuff written by others and re-writes them?
 
Jeun-Jeun journalism is not new in Nigeria. In fact, it is not peculiar to Nigerian journalists. The daily interaction between journalists and government officials who they are supposed to watch and on whom they are supposed to report makes it inherently possible for a dubious official to corrupt a vulnerable journalist. In most of the Western world, journalists are ethically allowed to receive from government officials only free or subsidized rides on airplanes or automobiles; a meal here and there; and some inexpensive drinks – all of which fall under Consumables. Those are also the things government officials are allowed to give journalists or anybody while in the line of duty and get reimbursed by government. 

But in Nigeria, we have bastardized the whole process by accepting all kinds of things from government officials  - parcels of land, money, large sums of money, SUVs, cows, goats, chicken, shopping sprees overseas, sponsored weddings, etc. And with that, we have lost the moral authority to hold politicians and government officials accountable. We have lost the essence for our existence. 

As the EFCC invited Olisa Metuh, Raymond Dokpesi and Obaigbena, so should it invite Adesina to give account of what he did with the N50 million he allegedly collected. Even if Adesina has been “cleared” by the NGE, he should still be invited by the EFCC. For Buhari and his corruption fight to go the distance, it is not enough for him to be fair; he must be SEEN to be fair. And if Adesina begins to name names of fellow editors and columnists who received part of that money from him, none of them should give the lame excuse that they did not know it came from funds earmarked for our military. Those who have given such horrible excuses – the Bode Georges, the Tony Anenihs, the Dokpesis, the Obaigbenas and even the newspaper houses – know they did not convince anybody of their innocence. If anybody in government gives you a large amount of money…large enough that you know could hurt his legitimate income, you have a duty to be a bit curious as to the source of the money and the intent behind the gift. If something sounds too good to be true, it probably is too good to be true!

Our journalists have been recklessly selling their pens to the highest bidder for a very long time. This time though, I think they may have bitten more than they can chew. How can they justify partaking in the sharing of government money that was budgeted (or not budgeted at all) for something else? President Buhari should stick to his guns (no pun intended) and collect every single kobo taken by all the journalists, just as he is going to do with those taken by the politicians. And where the misappropriation rises to criminality, he should prosecute all culprits to the full extent of the law. Perhaps this will teach all of us to live within our means and leave for government what belongs to government.

Abiodun Ladepo
Ibadan, Oyo State
Oluyole2@yahoo.com

The Orders For The Bail Of Dasuki & Kanu Should Be Obeyed By Femi Falana

For 16 years that the Peoples Democratic Party was in power, the federal government exhibited total contempt for the Rule of Law. The Constitution and other laws were breached with impunity while court orders were disobeyed on a regular basis. In the famous case of Attorney-General of Lagos State v Attorney-General of the Federation (2005) 2 WRN 1 at 150 the Supreme Court held that "In our democracy all the Governments of this country as well as organizations and individuals must kowtow to the due process and this they can vindicate by resorting to the courts for redress in the event of any grievance."

   One of the reasons why Nigerians voted for the candidate of the All Progressive Congress, General Mohammadu Buhari (rtd) during the last general election was his promise to fight corruption and end impunity in the country. Upon winning the election, President Buhari further pledged to abide by the Rule of Law. To that extent, he has a duty to ensure that all organs and officials of the Government operate within the ambit of the law. In particular,  he should not allow overzealous security personnel to engage in any form of impunity and thereby expose the Government to unwarranted embarrassment.

In July last year, the State Security Service (SSS)  searched the private residence of former NSA, Col Sambo Dasuki (rtd) at Abuja. When Col Dasuki alleged that his house was illegally searched, I pointed out that the action of the SSS was justified as there was a search warrant validly issued by a magistrate court in the federal capital territory that  authorised the search. He was eventually charged with money laundering and criminal diversion of huge sums of public fund before the Federal High Court and the Federal Capital Territory High Court at Abuja. Notwithstanding the gravity of the offences, both courts have admitted him to bail. But after he had met the bail conditions the SSS decided to rearrest him at the gate of Kuje prisons on the ground that investigations have not been concluded in respect of other criminal allegations.

The decision of the SSS to ignore the order admitting Col Dasuki to bail coupled with the failure to re-arraign him on fresh charges is tantamount to impunity in every material respect. If the federal government were aggrieved by the order admitting Col. Dasuki to bail it should have challenged it in the Court of Appeal. Much as the Nigerian people are fully behind the Buhari Administration in the patriotic move to recover the looted wealth of the nation, the federal government should be advised to ensure that the procedure for the loot recovery meets the tenets of the rule of law. The SSS and other security agencies should therefore refrain from allowing corruption to fight back by playing into the hands of the criminal suspects who have committed crimes against humanity by diverting money earmarked for the procurement of arms and armament to fight the terrorists.

 In the same vein, the order admitting the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Mr. Nnamdi Kanu, to bail should also be complied with. If the federal government has other charges against both suspects it should file them in the court. There is no provision for keeping criminal suspects at the pleasure of security officials. Meanwhile,  all valid and subsisting orders made by courts in favor of criminal suspects should be obeyed without further delay.

To ensure  that  suspects are no longer held in custody in any part of Nigeria without any legal justification section 34 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act has imposed a duty on each  the Chief Judges to designate  a Chief Magistrate and  a Judge of the  High Court to visit all police stations and other detention centers within their jurisdiction, at least once a month. During such visits, appropriate directives shall be given while any officer who detains any person illegally will be sanctioned.

 Femi Falana SAN.

Suspended Delta Council Boss' Thugs, Hoodlums, Invade Shoprite, Cart Away Millions Of Naira In Goods

Pandemonium broke out Friday when thugs said to be loyal to the suspended chairman of Uvwie Local Government Area (LGA) of Delta State, Mr. Henry Baro, invaded the popular Shoprite and surrounding stalls in Warri and carted away goods worth millions of naira. 

The chairman’s thugs were joined by hoodlums unassociated with him, but who wished to partake in the looting opportunity.

The thugs and the hoodlums, it was learned, destroyed various properties, including expensive automated glass doors, all of which was worth several millions of naira.

SaharaReporters reliably learned that the trouble began following a scuffle between the suspended embattled council chairman, Mr. Baro and two armed Navy personnel on mufti attached to Shoprite. The embattled council boss was said to be resolving an issue arising due to a hit and run incident involving a trailer driver who bashed his car along the Effurun roundabout by Shoprite.   

While Mr. Baro was arguing with the trailer drive the Navy personnel on mufti arrived on the scene and mercilessly assaulted and manhandled him.

During Mr. Baro’s confrontation with the Navy personnel rumors of his beating filtered into town. Shortly thereafter, several thugs, numbering in the thousands, loyal to the chairman arrived at the Shoprite and immediately invaded the area. Their activities attracted the attention of nearby hoodlums who joined in the mayhem.   

According to an eyewitness account, when the casually dressed Naval officers saw the approaching thugs and youths they ran into the main bowl of Shoprite.  The two Navy men were quickly pursued by the thugs just before the looting began.

"The theft occurred in broad daylight.  It was too much. Come and see how these thugs, youths, and hoodlums were looting and carting away goods. Most affected were the shops selling computers, phones, and other accessories.

“This [the looting] led to the shutdown of Shoprite and other shops for several hours but they later re-opened when the tensions were brought under control," an eyewitness told a SaharaReporters correspondent.
When contacted, the suspended embattled chairman, Mr. Baro denied the fact that his supporters were among those who invaded and looted the Shoprite in Warri. Speaking to a SaharaReporters correspondent he provided his own version of events.

"I was a victim of a power drunk naval officer, Mr. Rex Bogoadjera. I didn't go to the Shoprite, in fact, I have never stepped into that mall after the commissioning where I was present.

"I simply asked to know his identity and he flared up asking me if I was mad and warned me not to ask him again. The next thing I knew he held my t-shirt against my neck and brought out a dagger. He then beckoned for his colleague, who crossed over the road to meet us with a gun.

"While all of this was going on onlookers had raised the alarm and several Uvwie locals as well as many of my supporters trooped in to rescue me. At this point, it was still under control until other criminal elements hijacked the protest and it became riotous. However, I sincerely apologize for what happened. My core supporters would never do such an unholy thing, " Mr. Baro explained.

Delta State Police Public Relations Officer (PPRO), DSP Celestina Kalu and the Manager of Delta City Mall housing Shoprite, Mr. Oni Shola con­firmed the invasion.

Last year the Delta State House of Assembly suspended the embattled council chairman, Mr. Henry Baro following politics of opposition and the alleged misappropriation of public funds.

 

#BayelsaDecides: Interim Statement By Nigeria Civil Society Situation Room On The Bayelsa Supplementary Gubernatorial Election

The Nigeria Civil Society Situation Room (Situation Room) observed the Bayelsa State supplementary elections and received field reports from its deployed observers and other election observer networks. 

The Nigeria Civil Society Situation Room (Situation Room) observed the Bayelsa State supplementary elections and received field reports from its deployed observers and other election observer networks.

The supplementary elections follow from the December 5th, 2015, governorship election which Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) declared as inconclusive and scheduled re-run to hold on Saturday, January 9, 2016.

INEC conducted supplementary governorship election in 527 polling units spread across 50 wards in 7 Local Governments Areas where elections did not take place during the December 5 election due to irregularities. In this regard, we wish to make the following observations:

1.  As the supplementary polls conclude we wish to acknowledge the efforts of INEC, the security   services, and officials drawn from across the country. They have conducted their work at times    under enormous pressure, threats to their safety, and challenges from the very difficult terrain.

2.  Situation Room also wishes to commend voters in Bayelsa State for their effort in participating in the supplementary elections despite the tension in the State over the days preceding the  election. 

3.  Delays in the opening of polls which, was noted in a number of wards were regrettable and every effort should be made to continue to improve logistics because some delays were the result of the need to resolve local disputes before proceeding.

4.  That the performance and use of card readers were improved and the adherence in most areas to the commitment to cancel results where there was variance from electronic accreditation is welcome in promoting electoral discipline.

5.  That in some areas INEC staff faced unacceptable pressure or operated under duress and that in future every effort should be made to strengthen assistance to electoral officials facing such threats.

6. That despite clear signs of preparation for violence, key instigators were still able to move freely at the time of election and that in future polls pre-election security should be intensified, noting the importance of being seen to act neutrally at all times.

7. There were reports of widespread violence in Bassambiri in Nembe LGA and in other LGAs. There were also reports of ballot-box snatching, stolen card reader, destruction of INEC results  sheets, votes buying by party agents.

8. That amid some reports of violence after the supplementary elections there is need for Security agencies to have adequate resources and deployment to be on the ground to manage tensions after  elections in vulnerable areas.

In the light of the above, the Situation Room is obliged to put on record its profound disappointment in the conduct of major political parties where before and during polling there have been instances of:
Persistent allegations against INEC and security services that have increased tension and damaged confidence in the polls.

Violent incidents in which INEC full time and ad hoc staff have been abducted and threatened in the course of their duty.

Violence between party supporters, which have resulted in a number of casualties that are certain to include innocent bystanders.

Reported assaults and threats against election observers in some areas are unacceptable and form part of a pattern of violence that must be stemmed.

We call on all political parties to draw lessons from the conduct of their members, candidates, and spokespeople during the Bayelsa poll and to cease actions which are undermining confidence in our electoral process.

We also call on the security agencies to impartially follow up on the serious incidents that have been recorded in Bayelsa so that public confidence can be maintained in the right of citizens to participate fully in elections and cast their votes without fear.

The Situation Room is deeply concerned that unless there is reform in the conduct of the major political parties and accountability for political violence and abuse then the re-run polls that will hold across the country in coming weeks will be seriously jeopardized.

The Situation Room is made up of Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) working in support of credible and transparent elections in Nigeria and includes such groups as Policy andLegal Advocacy Centre (PLAC), CLEEN Foundation, Action Aid Nigeria, Centre for Democracy and Development (CDD), Enough is Enough Nigeria, Wangonet, Partners for Electoral Reform, JDPC and Youth Initiative for Advocacy, Growth & Advancement (YIAGA), CWAE. Others are Development Dynamics, Human Rights Monitor, Election Monitor, Reclaim Naija, Institute for Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, Centre LSD, CITAD, Stakeholder Democracy Network (SDN), CISLAC, WREP, Proactive Gender Initiative, Nigerian Women Trust Fund and several other CSOs numbering more than Sixty.

Chris Newsom, Programs Advisor Stakeholder Democracy Network
Ph+234 813 402 9078 / +44 777 916 9744
 http://www.stakeholderdemocracy.org