TheNewsGuru

Tag: AGF

  • Prolonged detention: Dasuki sues DSS, AGF for ‘rights violation’

    Former National Security Adviser Sambo Dasuki has sued the State Security Service (SSS), its Director General Lawal Daura and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) Abubakar Malami over his continued detention.

    Dasuki has been in the custody of the SSS since December 29, 2015. The Community Court of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) in a judgment delivered on October 4, 2016 declared his detention unlawful and ordered his release.

    In a fundamental rights enforcement suit marked filed on March 15 before the Federal High Court, Abuja, Dasuki is praying the court to order his unconditional release.

    He is also praying the court to award in his favour, and against the respondents, N5billion as “general damages and compensation” for the alleged violation of his rights.

    The ex-NSA wants the court to order the respondents to the suit to tender public apology to him in two widely published newspapers for allegedly violating his rights “as enshrined under Sections 34(1), 35(1), (4) & (5), 37 & 41(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended)”.

    Dasuki also wants the court to declare that the applicant is entitled to the dignity of his person, personal liberty, freedom of movement, private and family life as enshrined under Sections 34(1), 35(1), (4) & (5), 37 & 41(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).

    “A declaration that the continued detention of the applicant, Col. Sambo Dasuki (retd), by the operatives of the 2nd respondent under the instruction and direction of the 1st respondent (Daura) since Tuesday December 29, 2015 till date violates his fundamental rights under Sections 34(1), 35(1), (4) & (5), 37 & 41(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) and Article 6 and 12 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act Cap 10, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 and is therefore unconstitutional, unlawful, illegal, null and void.

    The suit has been assigned to Justice Ahmed Mohammed , but no date has been scheduled for hearing.

     

  • Malabu Oil deal: AGF Malami writes Buhari, seeks immediate suspension of Adoke, Diezani’s trial

    Malabu Oil deal: AGF Malami writes Buhari, seeks immediate suspension of Adoke, Diezani’s trial

    The Attorney-General of the Federation, AGF Abubakar Malami, has written to President Muhammadu Buhari stating in details why the federal government must suspend the trials of former Attorney-General of the Federation, Mohammed Bello Adoke and former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Diezani Alison-Madueke; both principal actors in the controversial Malabu Oil deal.

    Recall that the raging scandal over the OPL 245 oil block began in 2011 when the Goodluck Jonathan administration allegedly approved its purchase by Shell and Agip-Eni from Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd., a suspected briefcase firm with ties to Dan Etete, Nigeria’s petroleum minister from 1995 to 1998.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has been pursuing fraud and criminal conspiracy charges against Mr. Adoke, Mr. Etete and their alleged accomplices since 2016. Messrs. Adoke and Etete are believed to be at large, and the anti-graft agency had repeatedly sought to fish them out.

    However, Adoke, Etete, Alison-Madueke and all other officials named in the scandal have denied wrongdoings.

    Adoke in his defence had insisted that the sale was approved to save Nigeria from huge financial losses that could arise from international arbitration lawsuits.

    In his letter to the president, Malami explained that following due examination of the case files, he was able to determine that the EFCC has no significant evidence to prove its allegations of sharp practices against prominent players like Bello Adoke, Diezani Alison-Madueke and others.

    Besides, Malami noted that the Nigerian government risks being portrayed before the international community and foreign investors as an unserious country that could not be trusted to live up to its obligations to international partners

    “Clearly, potential investors will not have the confidence to invest in Nigeria if the government of the country is perceived as one which does not honour its commitments,” Mr. Malami said of the OPL 245 oil deal which was approved by at least three former Nigerian Attorney-Generals.

    The September 27, 2017 letter advised the president to pursue Nigeria’s possible investment in the disputed oil blocks rather than trying to repossess it or prosecute former Nigerian government officials or Shell or Agip-Eni chiefs involved in the deal.

    Read full letter below:

    RE: FORWARDING OF CASE FILE IN RESPECT OF CHARGE NO. FHC/ABJ/CR/268/17 AND FCT/HC/CR/124/2017 MALABU OIL & GAS LTD

    May I refer Your Excellency to the above subject matter, please.

    2. This case file was received from the EFCC in a letter dated 21st December, 2016 for vetting and further directive. Having fully examined the entire case file I am inclined to request you to note the following and direct accordingly.

    3. A curious observation of the entire Malabu story clearly indicates that there are the civil and criminal aspects to the case.

    4. The civil aspect bothers on the skirmishes between the directors of the company which led to the claims that shares of the same directors were divested without their consent thereby taking over their interest. Having examined the cases it is important to note that the cases are pending before the courts and therefore sub-judice; the FGN should await the outcome of the cases- Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/201/2017 MALABU OIL & GAS LTD vs. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF NIGERIA AND & 6 ORS; and Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/206/2017 MALABU OIL & GAS LTD vs. MR KWEKU AMAFAGHA & 9 ORS.

    5. In the criminal case, the aggrieved parties through their lawyers petitioned the EFCC against some directors of Malabu Oil and Gas alleging fraudulent divestment of their shares and subsequently depriving them of their benefits in the sale of OPL 245. EFCC investigated the case and filed nine-count charge dated 16th September, 2016.

    6. Attached to the charge are a proof of evidence, case summary and list of witnesses in support of the counts which bother on fraud, conspiracy and money laundering.

    Regarding the criminal charge. Your Excellency is invited to note that the charge as presently constituted may most likely not succeed against the parties for the following reasons:

    a. There is nothing to show that the parties as constituted were at all times working together and having a ‘meeting of minds’ to wit; to forge CAC documents and use same for the purpose of divesting the shares of the complainants and thereafter, enter into a settlement agreement with FGN and other parties to take delivery of the proceeds of sale of OPL 245.

    b. There is also nothing in the proof of evidence to support the charge money laundering and it is therefore impossible for the prosecution to prove the elements which include illicit funds, transfer for such through various channels to re-introduce same again into the regular financial system as legitimate funds in financial institutions etc. Without the express proof of these elements, the count may not be sustained on the premise of the attached proof of evidence.

    c. The EFCC investigation and attached proof of evidence do not appear to have clearly revealed the case of fraud against the parties who claimed to have acted in their official capacities with the approval of three consecutive presidents of the federal government of Nigeria at the time with further claim that the matter was intended to be resolved in national interest thereby saving the nation acrimonious litigations resulting in high legal fees and the dormancy of the oil field while litigation lasted.

    d. In this regard, the Public Officers Protection Act CAP P41 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 limits liability of Public Officers to a period of three months much naturally come to mind considering their claim that the acts which are complained of were authorised by the three presidents before this current administration.

    7.”Your Excellency, the beneficial approach I counsel in the circumstances is for the federal government to take advantage of the terms of the agreement under clauses five and 11 to acquire a stake in the OPL 245 converting it to a production sharing contract (PSC) between FGN/NNPC, Shell and Agip after negotiating with the ENI/Shell to absorb the cost of the FGN/NNPC entry under the said clauses five and 11 through the PSC mechanism,” Mr. Malami said.

    8. The idea of revisiting the settlement agreement which resulted in the sale of the oil field to SNUD, SNEPCO and NAE is not workable. It is important in this regard for His Excellency to note the following:

    a. The agreement was executed by the highest authority in Nigeria and remains sacrosanct unless it is eventually set aside by the decision of a competent court of law and denying the parties immediate benefit of reaping the fruit of their investments. The agreement has its mechanism for compensation in the event of any of the rights conferred to ENI or SHELL are challenged or violated. For the FGN to revisit the agreement, the consent of Shell and ENI will be required.

    It is very unlikely that the consent will easily be obtained but rather they would rely on the protection afforded in the contract, and any unilateral effort by FGN to vary the terms of the agreement would probably open up a new bout of litigation, deter further investment, give rise to a claim for damages and payment of huge legal fees. Your Excellency may wish to note some of the FGN’s representations and assurances in the clauses 12, 13 and 17 of the agreement.

    “12. FGN confirms that the terms of this FGN resolution agreement have been agreed by all the appropriate agencies of the FGN including the Ministry of Finance and the Federal Inland Revenue Service.’

    “13. FGN acknowledges that, in entering into this FGN resolution agreement, the other parties have relied on its expressed or implied representation before the signature of this FGN resolution agreement regarding the efficacy of the terms thereof.”

    “17. FGN shall indemnify, save and hold harmless, and defend SNUD, SNEPCO and NAE from and against all suits, proceedings, claims, demands losses and liability of any nature or kind, including, but not limited to, oil litigation costs, attorneys’ fees, settlement payments, damages, and all other related costs and expenses, based on, arising out of, related to or in connection with: (i) this FGN resolution agreement. (ii) the resolution agreement/ (iii) the issuance of the oil prospecting license in respect of Block 245 jointly in the name of SNEPCO and NAE and arising out of any asserted prior interest in Block 245.”

    9. The above commitments are binding on the FGN. ENI/Shell legitimately expects that the FGN would respect the commitments. Failure by the FGN to respect them would cast Nigeria in a very bad light internationally and negatively impact the FGN’s quest for foreign investments. Clearly, potential investors will not have the confidence to invest in Nigeria if the government of the country is perceived as one which does not honour its commitments (captured in an agreement signed by three of its ministers).

    10. ENI/Shell claims to have invested in excess of US $2.5 billion in OPL 245 from 2011 to date and as such would seek the protection of international law, including applicable investment treaties which prohibit the unreasonable, unfair and inequitable treatment of their investments and could expose FGN to international arbitration involving multi-billion dollars claims.

    11. As the FGN/NNPC relies on the provisions of the resolution agreement, charges preferred against ENI/Shell companies and employees would necessarily have to be withdrawn as continuing with the charges will be inconsistent with the spirit of the relevant clauses of the resolution agreement which will enable FGN to obtain immediate interest in OPL 245. Regardless, as submitted in paragraph five and six above, the charges as constituted and filed by the EFCC are unsustainable.

    12. Accept the assurances of my warm regards and loyalty, always.

    Abubakar Malami, SAN

    Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation & Minister of Justice.

    DPPA/FMPR/198/17
    September 27, 2017.

  • Maina’s Case: What’re you afraid of?, Senate asks AGF

    The Senate has asked the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Mr. Abubakar Malami, SAN, to explain to Nigerians why he has been running around the courts seeking to stop the probe by the two chambers of the National Assembly into how Mr. Abdulrashid Maina, an Assistant Director in the Ministry of Interior, was surreptitiously reinstated into the service after being dismissed.

    In a statement by Senator Aliyu Sabi Abdullahi, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Media and Public Affairs, the Senate said it was surprised that the AGF who had utilized the ample opportunity given to him by both chambers of the National Assembly to state his case on the Maina issue is now the one going to court to stop the legislature’s investigation.

    “We are wondering what the AGF is afraid of. When he appeared before our committee, he was well received and fairly treated. He indeed expressed his happiness with the protection given to him by the committee handling the Maina case. Why then is it very important and urgent for him to stop the investigative hearing? What is the AGF trying to hide?

    “Let it be known that the legislature has the power of investigation on all institutions, bodies and individuals, particularly those who access funds that have been appropriated by us. We, however, expressed our commendation to the judiciary for upholding the principles of separation of powers and insisting on fair hearing. We believe that is the reason why the judge refused to grant the prayers of the AGF yesterday and rather insisted that the National Assembly should be put on notice and served all the court processes so that we could enter our own defence.

    “While we respect the position of the court and would respond accordingly, the Senate has further directed the committee investigating the Maina issue to expedite action and submit their reports on time. The Senate believes Nigerians are interested in knowing the how, who, why and where of what is now known as the ‘Maina Gate’. We definitely will not allow those who want the facts buried to prevail”, Abdullahi stated.

  • Court rejects Malami’s bid to halt senate probe of Maina’s return

    Court rejects Malami’s bid to halt senate probe of Maina’s return

    Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) Abubakar Malami (SAN) failed yesterday in his bid to halt the ongoing probe, by the National Assembly, of the controversial reinstatement of former Chairman of the Presidential Pension Task Team, Abdulrasheed Maina.

    Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court, Abuja declined to grant an ex-parte motion by Malami, seeking principally, to stop the National Assembly’s probe of Maina’s controversial reinstatement into the civil services.

    Although the proceedings took place in the judge’s chambers, it was learnt Justice Nyako ordered the AGF to put the respondents on notice, by serving them with court papers, to enable show cause why the motion should not be granted.

    The judge adjourned January 15 for possible hearing.

    The AGF is, by the motion, asking the court to determine if the National Assembly has the right to probe issues relating to the “employment, attendance at work, disengagement, reinstatement and or promotion of a civil servant.

    It is his argument that the power of investigation vested the National Assembly by Section 88 (1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) is limited and could be exercised within the confines of Section 88 (2) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).

    Malami argued that, as the nation’s Chief Law Officer and Attorney General of the Federation, it was his responsibility to ensure that the Federal Government of Nigeria and or any of its cognate organs/agencies comply with the express or implied contents of extant judgements and orders of competent courts in Nigeria.

    He contended that the National Assembly could not constitute itself into a quasi-appellate court, tribunal or panel with a view to reviewing any executive action taken in compliance with the adverse judgment in suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/65/2013.

    Malami wants the court to among others, declare that: “the employment, attendance at work, disengagement, reinstatement and or promotion of a civil servant are matters outside the Exclusive and Concurrent Legislative lists contained in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).

    He seeks a declaration that the National Assembly cannot legitimately regulate the employment, attendance at work, disengagement, reinstatement and or promotion of a civil servant, which are matters exclusively within the purview of the Federal Civil Service Commission under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).

    Malami also wants the court to declare that the National Assembly lacks the legislative competence to investigate the employment, attendance at work, disengagement, reinstatement and or promotion of a civil servant which are matters exclusively within the purview of the Federal Civil Service Commission under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria1999 (as amended).

    This suit contradicts Malami’s position in another suit filed before the Federal High Court in Kaduna by Maina, challenging the arrest warrant issued against him by an Abuja court at the instance of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    Malami, in his counter affidavit to the suit, urged the court to dismiss it and allow the EFCC, the government agency that got the arrest warrant, to proceed with Maina’s arrest and prosecution.

    The AGF told the court that granting any of the reliefs sought by Maina in his suit, will do incalculable and permanent damages to the nation’s fight against corruption as well as reverse all gains made so far.

     

  • I’m yet to receive brief on arrest of Innoson boss – AGF

    The Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of the Federation, AGF, Abubakar Malami, has said that he is yet to receive briefs on the facts that led to the arrest and detention of the chairman of Innoson Motors company, Innocent Chukwuma, by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC on Tuesday.

    Mr. Malami stated this on Thursday while speaking with State House correspondents at the end of the meeting of the Federal Executive Council, FEC, at the Presidential Villa Abuja.

    The FEC meeting which was started on Wednesday was concluded Thursday afternoon. It was chaired by President Muhammadu Buhari.

    The arrest of Mr. Chukwuma has generated controversy with many saying the EFCC over-reached itself by getting involved in a commercial matter between a bank and its client.

    The EFCC, however, said Mr. Chukwuma jumped bail and is being investigated for alleged forgery.

    Speaking Thursday on the matter, Mr. Malami said, “In all sincerity, l wasn’t privy to facts that led to the stated arrest. I haven’t been briefed by relevant agencies.

    “But one thing l know is the fact that there has been a case between him and the GTBank that is pending in court and it is being prosecuted.

    “Until I am briefed by relevant arrest agencies, I am not in a clear position to make any disclosure about the arrest.”

    Mr. Chukwuma, arrested on Tuesday, was granted bail on Wednesday by the EFCC.

    The Innoson boss has since rejected the bail, insisting that the anti-graft agency should explain to the world why he was arrested in the first place.

    His company equally accused EFCC of illegal arrest and detention without providing any offence for which Innoson was arrested.

     

  • AGF seeks arrest, prosecution of Maina, others for pension fraud

    The Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) Abubakar Malami (SAN) has asked a Federal High Court in Kaduna to declined jurisdiction over a suit by embattled former chairman of the Presidential Pension Task Team, Abdulrasheed Maina, challenging the arrest warrant issued against him by an Abuja court.

    Malami urged the court to dismiss the suit and allow the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the government agency that got the arrest warrant, to proceed with Maina’s arrest and prosecution.

    The AGF told the court that granting any of the reliefs sought in the suit by Maina will do incalculable and permanent damages to the nation’s fight against corruption as well as reverse all gains made so far.

    Malami spoke in court processes he filed in response to the suit filed by Maina. The suit has the EFCC, AGF, Senate President and Speaker, House of Representatives as respondents.

    It basically challenges the legitimacy of the arrest warrant got against him by the EFCC and the commission’s decision to declare him wanted based on the said order issued by a Magistrate’s Court in Abuja.

    It is Maina’s contention that the EFCC was an illegal body, on the grounds that law setting it up – the EFCC Establishment Act 2004 – was an illegal legislation, the amendment of its principal Act having not been allegedly effected by the National Assembly.

    He claimed that the principal Act – the EFCC Act 2002 – was amended as EFCC Act 2004 unilaterally by then President Olusegun Obasanjo.

    He argued that since the President lacked the constitutional powers to unilaterally alter any law made by the legislature, the EFCC Act 2004, allegedly altered by President Obasanjo, becomes illegal and void and on which the EFCC cannot rely to act, including declaring him wanted.

    Maina, among others, urged the court, in his originating summons, “to hold that the plaintiff (he) cannot be declared wanted or arrested by any government agency invoking the powers of the EFCC Act 2004 for the same (the law) being an illegal enactment”.

    However, the AGF, in his counter affidavit, argued that “since a court of law cannot shield any person from arrest, investigation and possible prosecution, the plaintiff (Maina) cannot claim to have any legal right in an effort to stop any subsequent arrest, investigation and prosecution”.

    Malami faulted Maina’s claim about the enactment of the EFCC Act 2004, insisting that it was validly passed by the two chambers of the National Assembly.

    He challenged the competence of the suit in an objection he filed.

    He urged the court to decline jurisdiction because the suit was wrongly commenced.

    The AGF also described the suit as an abuse of court process on the grounds that Maina had filed a similar suit before the Federal High Court, Abuja.

    Further proceedings will resume in the case on January 15, 2018.

     

  • FG obtains court order declaring IPOB activities acts of ‘terrorism’

    The Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami has obtained a court order proscribing the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB).

    According to the court order, the activities of the group in any part of the country amounts to an act of terrorism.

    The order gotten from the Federal High Court in Abuja and signed September 20 also stated that any group or individual is restricted from engaging in any activity similar to that of the group.

    Recall that the South-East Governors’ forum had proscribed the group. The Nigerian Army also declared IPOB a terrorist organisation.

  • EFCC submits 103 high profile cases to AGF

    EFCC submits 103 high profile cases to AGF

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has made available, the details of the high profile cases it handled to the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice.

    The recent list which was reportedly sent to the AGF’s office, comprised 103 high-profile cases.

    “Those on the list, it was learnt, include top-ranking judicial officers, including a justice of the Supreme Court, a judge of the Federal High Court, and a sacked justice of the Court of Appeal.” Punch reports

    Buhari’s cabinet, and others serving their terms in the Senate.

    Other politically-exposed persons named in the list are some former ministers, senators and some persons being investigated for the $2.1 billion arms purchase scam.

    The report says no names were made public in order not to compromise investigation, but that investigations were said to have been completed in majority of the cases while investigation was stalled in some of them due to “disappearance” of the suspects from Nigeria.

    “Some of the cases are still at intelligence-gathering stage, while some are at investigation stage.

    “There are some that are the stage of charges being drafted while some are already ongoing in court but foot-dragging,” Punch quotes an unnamed EFCC source.

    The Special Assistant to the President on Prosecutions and Chairman of the newly-constituted Recovery of Public Property Panel, Chief Okoi Obono-Obla confirmed that the EFCC had now yielded to the AGF’s request and that the AGF’s office had received the list from the EFCC but, refused to give details.

    Obono-Obla, who works under the AGF, said the ICPC would send its list to the AGF when the new chairman of the commission is inaugurated.

    “They are cooperating. They have sent the details of the cases we requested to us,” the presidential aide said.

    When asked whether the AGF will by its action take over the prosecution of the cases from the EFCC, Obono-Obla said the AGF’s request was in line with constitutional and statutory provisions conferring on the AGF the supervisory authorities over the EFCC and other anti-corruption agencies.

    He said, “The essence of getting the file was not to take up the prosecution. The essence is in line with the law that says the Attorney-General of the Federation is the chief prosecutor of the country.

    “All those agencies are under the Office of Attorney-General of the Federation. So, we have to know what they are doing.

    “We have to see what they are doing, so that if they are not doing the right thing we will advise them accordingly. The office of the AGF is as old as this country; the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation is as old as the country.

    “These are some of the oldest institutions in this country. They have a lot of experiences.”

    When asked to give the details of the list received from the EFCC, he said, “I don’t want to go into the details for now. At the appropriate time, we will let you know what we have seen and what we are going to do.”

    When reminded of his earlier claim that both the EFCC and the ICPC were not cooperating with the AGF, Obono-Obla said, “Yes, I said so initially, but they are cooperating now because they now know that the law is very clear and that there is what we call EFCC enforcement regulation which was made by the office of the AGF pursuant to section 43 of the EFCC Act.

    “Also in the constitutional provision, section 150(1) of the Constitution, section 174(1) of the constitution, sections 105 to 106 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, it is very clear that the AGF is the chief prosecutor of the Federation and the EFCC is under him.”

    He said there was no pressure from higher authorities before the EFCC submitted the details requested to the AGF’s office.

    The presidential aide said, “The law is clear. I don’t think there had to be any superior intervention. I have mentioned the constitution, the administration of Criminal Justice Act and the EFCC Act.

    “The laws are very clear that they have to comply with the request of the AGF. The AGF can request files from any law enforcement agency in Nigeria and the law enforcement agency is obliged to comply.”

    Denying any face-off between the AGF and the EFCC, he said it probably took the anti-corruption agency so long to respond to the AGF’s request because of the number of cases spanning over a decade that had to be compiled by the agency.

    He said, “Well, they have not refused (to comply), we have the details from them now. Maybe they were taking their time. As I told you before, most of these cases are old cases from 2003 to 2004.

    “So, if you make a request, it will take them time to put all the cases together. But as I told you, there cannot be any question of, they not obeying us. They cannot afford not to obey the Attorney-General of the Federation.”

  • FG yet to retrieve $15m seized by South Africa from Jonathan’s govt – AGF

    FG yet to retrieve $15m seized by South Africa from Jonathan’s govt – AGF

    The Federal Government has said it is yet to retrieve the $15m seized by the South African Government under the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan.

    This was revealed on Tuesday by the Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) Abubakar Malami during a review of the activities of the ministry in the last one year.

    The minister noted that the bureaucracies involved in retrieving monies laundered abroad was quite cumbersome.

    In his words: “As it relates to the money in South Africa and other countries, my reaction to recovery generally is that it is a process; a process involving mostly nations whose legal systems differ.

    “The process in respect of diplomatic consideration equally plays a key role over and above international convention and best practices.

    “So, when multiplicity of legal systems is in issue, multiplicity of diplomatic engagement is in contention, delay is naturally bound to set in.

    “But, one thing I want to state categorically is that the government is doing whatever is possible to ensure the recovery of moneys that relate to Nigeria in all jurisdictions and not necessarily limited to South Africa,” he said.

    The minister however declined to answer a question on the rift between him and the Acting Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Ibrahim Magu, over the country’s suspension from the Egmont Group.

    He also declined comments on whether or not his directive that the EFCC provide him with a status report on on-going high profile cases had been complied with.

    Malami said the Federal Government planned a committee on how to defray the N113billion judgment debt pending against it and its agencies to avoid its assets being attached.

    He said the Judgment Debt Verification Committee, to be headed by the AGF, will, among others, ensure compliance with enforcement of court judgments and orders against government and its agencies.

    Malami said memos on the recommendations of the Senator Ken Nnamani-led Constitution and Electoral Reform Committee would soon be presented before the Federal Executive Council (FEC) for deliberation and adoption, following which Bills relating to the recommendations would be sent to the National Assembly.

    The minister, who could not confirm if members of the Nnamani committee had been paid their allowances, said he was aware the Federal Government has approved the payment and that the approval had been forwarded to the Ministry of Finance.

    On the prosecution of Boko Haram suspects being kept in custody, Malami said a speedy trial had been planned.

    He said some judges have been assigned to handle the prosecution. He declined to give further details, citing security concerns.

    Malami also hinted of plans for prisons decongestion, which he said would be electronically driven and last for the next two years.

    The AGF, who praised his ministry for a successful outing in the last legal year between 2016 and 2017, said it concluded 7,119 criminal cases, including 4,709 petitions and 325 civil cases in the last legal year.

    Malami, who highlighted various plans to be executed in the new legal year, said a coordinating centre would be created in his ministry for among others, ensure coordination of all criminal justice agencies.

    The unit will enable the office of the AGF to “have a first-hand information of the status of all criminal investigations/trials in the country”.

    Malami also spoke about a plan to create an investigation unit in the ministry to address the “want of legal expertise in the conduct and process of investigation by the various security agencies and to address such anomalies leading to the consistent rejection of vital evidence in the course of prosecution.”

    The AGF is relying on his constitutional powers and the provision of Section 105(1) and (3) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) to create the unit, it will coordinate and form part of every investigation to ensure robust investigation and successful prosecution of cases, Malami said.

     

  • AGF/EFCC faceoff: Do as Justice Ministry orders or face sanctions, Presidency warns Magu

    AGF/EFCC faceoff: Do as Justice Ministry orders or face sanctions, Presidency warns Magu

    Sequel to a letter written by the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN) on Tuesday directing the Acting Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, to forward the list of high profile corruption cases to him (Malami) and henceforth wait for directives, the presidency on Friday issued strong warning to the EFCC leadership or face sanctioned.

    The letter, which sparked off speculations of a rift between the ministry and the EFCC, directed the commission to submit details of its investigations into ‘serious cases’ to the Justice Ministry.

    TheNewsGuru.com reports that such cases include matters with international dimensions, cases involving alleged misappropriation of N50 million and above; cases of fraud involving numerous suspects, among others.

    According to the letter written on August 1, the Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, accused the EFCC chairman, Ibrahim Magu, of violating section 10 of the commission’s performance regulation guidelines, 2010.

    “I am directed by the Honourable Attorney- General and Minister of Justice to refer to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Enforcement) Regulations 2010 (the Regulation) published in the Federal Republic of Nigeria Official Gazette No.61 Vol. of 21st September 2010, particularly the obligations of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC/the Commission),” Abiodun Aikomo from the AGF’s office said in the letter to the EFCC sourced by The Cable newspapers.

    “I am directed to refer specifically to Section 10 (1) which mandates the Commission to forward to the Attorney- General, in respect of a case of complaint which is serious or complex within the context of the Regulation, the outcome of its investigation(s) with its recommendations on whether there are sufficient grounds to initiate prosecution.

    “The Honourable Attorney-General observes that the Commission has been in breach of the above-cited provision of the Regulation for some time, hence this reminder to the Commission to ensure compliance going forward,” the letter added.

    Shortly after reports regarding the letter were published by the media, the EFCC and the justice ministry denied any rift regarding the matter.

    “For the avoidance of any doubt, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, wishes to categorically state that it is compliant with all provisions of law and has no intention to stoke a misunderstanding over requests from the office of the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice,” the commission said.

    The commission also said the EFCC was not negating any known laws in the discharge of its duties.

    However, the Punch Newspapers reported that the Special Assistant to the President on Prosecutions, Okoi Obono-Obla, on Friday waded into the matter, warning the commission to reply the latter or face sanctions.

    “The EFCC cannot be more patriotic than the office of the AGF. Why is it that the EFCC is not cooperating when we are working for the same government? If the EFCC refuses to act on the letter, there will be consequences on acts of indiscipline and insubordination”.

    Obono-Obla however said there was no ‘personality clash’ between the two organisations.

    “There is no personality clash between the two heads. It is wrong to say that there is a clash. The EFCC is an institution and the office of the AGF is another institution. What we need is compliance. We should not personalise our institutions.”