TheNewsGuru

Tag: Malami

  • Yoruba group calls for immediate resignation of AGF, Malami

    Yoruba group calls for immediate resignation of AGF, Malami

    Yoruba socio-cultural organisation, Afenifere, has called for the immediate resignation of the Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, for asking the International Criminal Court not to escalate its investigation against the Boko Haram sect.

    The group, in a reaction by its spokesperson, Yinka Odumakin, on Friday, stated that Malami could not double as the country’s number one law officer and as Boko Haram defender.

    The AGF had while hosting the new ICC President, Justice Chile Ebro-Osuji, in Abuja on Thursday, complained about the court’s investigation against Boko Haram and the Nigerian military, describing it as worrisome.

    “Presently, the ICC has escalated the eight potential cases against Nigeria – six against the Boko Haram and two against the military – from the initial preliminary examination to preliminary investigation.

    “This is worrisome, as Nigeria has demonstrated beyond doubt, and in absolute cooperation with the ICC, that it is willing and able and, as a matter of fact, it is indeed arresting, investigating and prosecuting anyone that commits an offence that falls within the Rome Statute of the ICC.

    “The above being the case, Nigeria views the escalation of the eight potential cases as uncalled for in the circumstance,” Malami was quoted to have said.

    But Odumakin, in his reaction, accused the AGF of turning his office into Boko Haram’s media department, stressing that Nigerians should be worried by the release of many top insurgents in recent times by the government.

    “If the ICC is Investigating Boko Haram, are they investigating the north and by extension, the Federal Government of Nigeria? This could have been a Freudian slip, but since we have not seen a denial from Malami, it means he is no longer the AGF of Nigeria, he can’t be the nation’s AGF and be speaking on behalf of Boko Haram, he should therefore resign,” he stated.

    He added, “For the Attorney General to turn his office to the media department of Boko Haram is almost unheard of and Nigerians should be worried about this.

    “In recent times, we have seen notorious Boko Haram kingpins being set free by the courts and the government has released hundreds of Boko Haram into the system.”

    “In 2013, the sect nominated the President as their negotiator, though he rejected the nomination, he was to later say any attack against Boko Haram was an attack against the north. Now, is what Malami doing now a continuation of that policy?”

  • Zimbabwe, Malawi ban South African meat products

    Zimbabwe and Malawi on Tuesday banned South African meat products following the outbreak of the listeria disease that has since been linked to meat products from a South African company.

    Malawi Competition and Fair Trading Commission stated this in a statement in Lilongwe.

    The statement further adds that the CFTC will inspect all business places to ensure that the banned meat products have totally been removed from the shelves of all shops.

    Since the government of South Africa linked the outbreak to one of its own meat production companies and instituted a recall of all the meat products involved, many southern Africa countries have banned meat import from South Africa.

    The countries are Namibia, Botswana, Zambia, Mozambique and Malawi.

    Also, Zimbabwe had joined other countries in banning imports of processed meat products from South Africa after a deadly listeria outbreak, Zimbabwe’s ministry of health said in a statement on Tuesday.

    South Africa on Monday said cold meat products were to blame for delays in tracing the cause of the world’s worst listeria outbreak, which has kill.

  • 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.

  • Magu, Malami manipulating Nigeria’s legal system – Reps

    The House of Representatives on Thursday condemned alleged manipulation of Nigeria’s legal system by Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and the Acting Chairman of Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC).

    The House also summoned the AGF, Abubakar Malami, for explanation on alleged manipulation of Code of Conduct Tribunal case involving the president of the Senate, Bukola Saraki.

    This was sequel to a motion under matters of urgent public importance by Yakubu Barde (Kaduna-PDP).

    Moving the motion, Mr. Barde expressed concern that the chairman of Code of Conduct Tribunal, Danladi Umar, had been charged with corruption at the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court by the EFCC.

    He said the same EFCC and Mr. Malami had previously cleared Mr. Umar of the same allegations that formed the basis of the fresh two-count charge.

    “Any possible convictions or findings which the CCT may make from the same Danladi Umar, may be rendered null and void by the Court of Appeal, thereby frustrating the course of justice.

    “The House should also recall that this same EFCC and AGF are equally prosecuting cases such as the case against the Senate President before the same CCT, which Umar sits as chairman,’’ Mr. Barde said.

    Taking turns, other lawmakers condemned the actions of the AGF and EFCC after the presiding officer, Yakubu Dogara, asked lawyers among the members, to educate their colleagues on the issue.

    Razak Atunwa (Kwara-APC) said “the shenanigans and intrigues in the CCT and the trial of senate president is laughable. No doubt, there is connivance between the AGF and the EFCC against the senate president.”

    Also, Aliyu Pategi (Kwara-APC) said the case against Mr. Saraki was an instance of political manipulation.

    “EFCC and CCT are political tools used by the present government to witch-hunt perceived enemies,’’ he said.

    However, Mohammed Monguno (Borno-APC) said “the presumption of innocence gives the judge the right to go ahead to preside over the matter.’’

    The motion was therefore, adopted by members when it was put to a voice vote by the speaker.

    Consequently, the Committee on Judiciary was mandated to interact with the AGF to ensure that sanity was brought back to the legal system.

     

  • Malabu scam: ‘You have no case against Adoke…’ Malami advises EFCC to consolidate charges

    Malabu scam: ‘You have no case against Adoke…’ Malami advises EFCC to consolidate charges

    Attorney General, Abubakar Malami, has asked the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, to review the charges of fraud against those accused in the infamous Malabu scandal.

    They include a former petroleum minister, Dan Etete, former attorney general, Mohammed Adoke, and other defendants who are facing charges of fraud in the $1.1 billion Malabu oil block case.

    They are accused by the EFCC of diverting the huge amount in a series of fraudulent transactions resulting in the transfer of the rich oil well, OPL 245.

    Mr. Malami’s view of the charges was contained in a memo read in court on Thursday by a counsel to Mr. Adoke.

    Meanwhile, the federal high court, Abuja, on Thursday fixed February 23, 2018 for ruling in a suit filed by Adoke seeking judicial interpretation of the legality of obeying presidential directives concerning the sale of the oil block to Shell and Eni by Malabu Oil and Gas in 2011.

    In a letter dated September 20, 2017, Malami told Magu that there is a need to consolidate on the charges.

    He said the Malabu case should be investigated “thoroughly in order to satisfy the constituent elements of offences”.

    The AGF said the investigation by the EFCC “does not appear to have clearly revealed the case of fraud against the parties in view of their claimed acting in their official capacities with purported approval of the president”.

    “Having fully examine the entire case file, I am incline to request you to consider the charge in relation to the composition of the parties, the offences, the proof of evidence and the case summary in view of the fact that nothing in the proof of evidence appears to have directly linked parties to the offences as charged,” the letter read.

    “A curious observation of the entire file clearly indicates that the proof of evidence is unlikely to support the counts which border on fraud, conspiracy and money laundering. The following reason apt.

    “A- there is nothing to show that the parties as constituted were at all times working together and having a meeting of the mind to wit: to forget CAC documents and use it for the purpose of divesting the shares of the complainant 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 nothing in the proof of evidence to support the charge of money laundering therefore it is unrealistic for the prosecution to proof the elements which include illicit funds, attempt to conceal/concealment of illicit funds, transfer of such funds through various channels to introduce same as legitimate funds, in financial institutions without the express proof of these elements, this count may not be sustainable.

    “I am of the view that 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 following the acts which are complained of unless if the acts were not within the mandate of the functions of the public officer, and your investigation needs to have covered that eventuality in view of the claim that the acts were authorized by the 3 Presidents before this current administration.

    “On the above grounds, I am of the considered view that there is the need to consolidate on the charges and the matter be thoroughly investigated especially regarding the allegations of wrongdoing in connection with the $ 1.1 Billion USD in order to satisfy the constituent elements of offences.

    “You are to also take steps to urgently file an application fora worldwide mareva injunction and or the forfeiture of the assets of the beneficiaries of the $1.1Billion USD pending the conclusion of your investigation in the areas above stated.”

    The letter is part of the exhibits filed by Adoke’s lawyer at the federal high court, Abuja.

  • Malabu oil scam: Adoke must be prosecuted – AGF, Malami insists

    Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) Abubakar Malami (SAN) has urged a Federal High Court in Abuja to dismiss a suit challenging the competence of the charges filed against former AGF, Mohammed Adoke (SAN) and others over their alleged involvement in the $1.1bn Malabu Oil scam.

    Malami also insisted that Adoke and others named in the charges must subject them selves to the court’s jurisdiction to prove their innocence.

    The AGF position is contained in the documents he filed opposing Adoke’s suit before a Federal High Court in Abuja, urged the court to decline jurisdiction to hear the case.

    He argued that such civil suit “cannot be used to stop criminal prosecution already initiated”.

    Malami noted in his papers that the charges which its validity Adoke was challenging were five counts involving the fraudulent transfer of billions of dollars derived from the Oil Processing Licence 245 deal.

    Adoke had in May 2017 filed his suit against his successor as the sole defendant, urging the court to declare as illegal his prosecution by the EFCC with respect to his involvement in the deal between Malabu Oil and Gas Limited and the Federal Government over OPL 245.

    Malami, through the Permanent Secretary and the Solicitor-General of the Federation of the Federal Ministry of Justice, Mr. Dayo Apata, filed in response to the suit, a notice of preliminary objection challenging the competence of the suit and the court’s jurisdiction to hear it.

    He also filed a counter-affidavit challenging the merit of the case.

    Malami contended in his notice of preliminary objection that the suit was not only competent but that a civil suit such as Adoke’s could not be used to stop a criminal trial that had been instituted.

    The four grounds of Malami’s preliminary objection to the suit read, “The plaintiff has not disclosed any cause of action in the suit.

    “The civil suit cannot be used to stop criminal prosecution already initiated.

    “That the plaintiff’s suit as constituted is incompetent.

    “That this honourable court lacks jurisdiction to hear and determine the plaintiff’s suit.”

    Thomas Etah of the Federal Ministry of Justice who deposed to the AGF’s counter-affidavit, stated that Adoke’s suit did not disclose any dispute between the former AGF and his successor, since it was EFCC that investigated the case and found it worthy to institute the charges.

    Malami described Adoke’s suit as an abuse of court process, as he insisted that contrary to the former AGF’s claim in the suit, the charges initiated against him by the EFCC had nothing to do with “actions authorised by the President”.

    The counter-affidavit read in part,, “That from the documents and the processes, the plaintiff did not show any dispute between him and the defendant.

    “That the plaintiff’s suit does not disclose any cause of action.

    “That there are allegations of commission of financial crime by the plaintiff.

    “That the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission has investigated the activities relating to the said money and has come to the conclusion that a prima facie case has been established against the plaintiff.

    “That the EFCC has drafted and filed a five-count charge against the plaintiff. A copy of the charge sheet dated January 30, 2017, the verifying affidavit dated March 2, 2017 together with the proof of evidence and dated March 2, 2017, all of which were filed on March 2, 2017, is hereby attached and numbered as Exhibit HAGF.

    “That the charges filed against the plaintiff does not relate to actions authorised by the President to be carried out by the plaintiff.

    “That the plaintiff’s suit is an abuse of court process.”

    Adoke had maintained in his originating summons that his involvement in the Malabu Oil deal as a serving minister was based on the presidential directive of former president, Goodluck Jonathan.

    In the suit filed on his legal team led by another former AGF, Chief Kanu Agabi (SAN), Adoke asked the court to determine whether by virtue of sections 5(1), 147(1), 148(1) and 150(1) of the 1999 Constitution a serving minister of the country could perform the “executive power of federation vested on the President as directed by the President.”

    He urged the court to declare that his involvement in the negotiation between the Nigerian government and Malabu Oil and gas Limited, Shell, Nigeria national Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) and Agip in the matter of OPL 245 was in “furtherance of the lawful directive/approval of the president in the exercise of his powers.”

    The former AGF also asked the court to declare that any correspondence he had with J.P Morgan and any other entity and ancillary actions and processes taken in respect to the Malabu Oil deal was in obedience to the lawful directive of the president in the exercise of his executive power.

    He also urged the court to declare that his prosecution by the EFCC in respect of Malabu deal on the account of carrying out the president’s directive was illegal, null and void.

  • Maina: Senate wonders why Malami is afraid of being investigated

    The Nigerian Senate has asked the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami, to explain why he is afraid of probe into his involvement in the reinstatement of ex-pension boss, Abdulrasheed Maina.

    In a statement released by the Chairman Senate Committee on Media and Publicity Affairs, Senator Sabi Abdullahi, the Red chambers said the AGF should tell Nigerians why he has been “running around the courts seeking to stop the probe” by the National Assembly.

    Abdullahi said: “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.”

  • 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.

     

  • Nigeria to receive $321m Abacha loot from Switzerland – AGF, Malami

    Nigeria to receive $321m Abacha loot from Switzerland – AGF, Malami

    The Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. Abubakar Malami, has said the government of Switzerland is set to return in tranches the sum of $321m stolen from Nigeria and stashed in the foreign nation by the late former Head of State, Gen. Sani Abacha, and his family.

    A statement by the AGF’s Special Adviser on Media and Publicity, Mr. Salihu Isah, stated on Tuesday that this followed a tripartite Memorandum of Understanding signed by Nigeria along with Switzerland and the World Bank in the United States of America on Monday.

    According to Isah, Malami, on behalf of Nigeria, signed the MoU alongside representatives of Switzerland and World Bank at the ongoing Global Forum on Asset Recovery in the US.

    Isah said the Director of the Directorate of International Law and head of the Swiss delegation to the GFAR, Roberto Balzaretti, signed the MoU on behalf of the government of Switzerland and the Country Director of the World Bank office in Abuja, Mr. Rachid Benmessaoud signed on behalf the World Bank.

    He explained that the MoU spelt out the modalities of returning the sum of $321m by Switzerland to Nigeria.

    He said, the funds would be returned to Nigeria in tranches under a project known as “the National Social Investment Program” aimed at strengthening social security for the poor in Nigeria.

    He stated, “The MOU stipulates that the restitution of funds will take place within the framework of a project known as the National Social Investment Program that will strengthen social security for the poor in Nigeria.

    “The MOU also regulates the disbursement of restituted funds in tranches and sets out concrete measures to be taken in the event of misuse or corruption.

    “The chosen solution for restitution is being undertaken by the three contracting parties as a partnership” in line with the objectives of Switzerland’s strategy to freeze, confiscate and return the illicitly acquired assets of politically exposed persons (asset recovery) which is based on the principles of transparency and accountability.

    “It also allows the involvement of civil society in the monitoring of the restitution process. Furthermore, the return of these funds makes a concrete contribution to the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and can set a good example internationally for future restitution cases.”

    He explained that that the sum of $321m was initially frozen in Luxembourg and confiscated by Switzerland as part of criminal proceedings brought by the public prosecutor’s office of Geneva against Abba Abacha in December 2014.

    The statement added, “The signing of this MoU gives Nigeria visibility and will set precedence on the need for transparent management of returned assets internationally.

    “The GFAR brought together experts from the field of asset recovery to strengthen international cooperation in this area.

    “Nigeria will also use the opportunity of the GFAR meeting at the headquarters of the International Finance Corporation in Washington DC to negotiate the return of other assets and also engage in bilateral meetings with several other countries.”

    According to Isah, the Nigeria’s delegation to the meeting was led by Malami.

    The members of the delegation the Special Assistant to the President on Justice Reform and Coordinator, Open Government Partnership comprised Mrs. Juliet Ibekaku-Nwagwu; Nigeria/GFAR Focal Person and Assistant Director, Federal Ministry of Justice, Mrs. Ladidi Abdulkadir; a representative of the civil society organisations, Reverend David Ugolor, who is also the Executive Director, African Network for Environment and Economic Justice.

    The delegation is expected to return to Nigeria Thursday.

  • I warned Malami not to meet Maina alone – SSS DG Lawal Daura

    The Director General of the State Security Services, Lawal Daura, said on Thursday that he advised the Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, to meet with Abdulrasheed Maina abroad

    Mr. Maina is wanted for alleged pension fraud and is currently on the run from the anti-graft agency, EFCC.

    Mr. Daura, while giving his submission on Thursday to the House of Representatives ad-hoc committee investigating Mr. Maina’s controversial reinstatement and promotion in the civil service, however said he advised him to do so in presence of a third party.

    “The attorney general of the federation sometime in 2016 or 2015 (can’t remember the exact day) because it was not through a formal document, placed a call to me when he was outside the country and requested me on a request he got through a source that Maina wanted to meet him.”

    “He wanted me to advise him whether to agree to see Maina or not in that foreign country.”

    “I responded to the attorney general that he should accept to see Maina but he should not see him alone”

    “He should see him with a third party,” Mr. Daura said.

    The security chief said the attorney general complied and met Mr. Maina in the presence of a third party.

    On the accusation of the SSS shielding Mr. Maina, Mr. Daura said Mr. Maina had approached the service with a letter alleging threat to his life and therefore requested for protection.