WHEN the House of Representatives rose from an emergency session in January and ordered an extensive investigation into the management of funds voted for subsidy on petroleum products, most of the intrigues, controversies and even political manipulation, which characterise the issue today, were unrecognised.However, before the Farouk Lawan-led ad-hoc committee submitted its report to the House, the kind of underground manoeuvres that played out within and outside the National Assembly heightened fears and suspicion that the dark forces had hijacked the spirit, motive and objective of the investigation in the system.Between Reps and NNPCTHE Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), the agency of government that got the hardest punch from the subsidy investigation committee, has a long history of face-off with the House of Representatives. The issues ranged from that of its alleged refusal to submit its annual budget to the legislature for appropriation to the question of its reported debt of N450 billion to the Federation Account. The hot exchanges that occurred between the two on the debt issue dovetailed into the commencement of the subsidy probe.For instance, the House descended very hard on the NNPC over comments credited to its Group General Manager, Public Affairs, Dr. Levi Ajuonuma, describing the remarks as irresponsible.Specifically, the NNPC spokesman had described as unnecessary, the recent public hearing by the House of Representatives Joint Committee on Finance, Petroleum Resources (Upstream and Downstream) and Gas Resources on the alleged indebtedness of the corporation to the Federation Account.Ajuonuma was quoted as saying that: 'Public hearing is not the first thing you do when you are just less than six or nine months in the job. That's not what to do. So, you have to continue to educate and re-educate and educate. As I said, I'm not proud to say what the white man or Europeans said that if you want to hide anything from a black man, write in a book.'He rubbed the seeming insult in by stressing: 'Those people (House members) do not read and you know that the least qualification to be a lawmaker in advanced democracy is that you must be a lawyer. But here, we are learning. It should be made clear to anybody who comes to Abuja, as a lawmaker, that the first thing you will assemble is a good library; the first people you must employ is(sic) good research assistants so that when issues that you are interested in are raised, they must get you up-to-date information...'Needless to say that the House was livid over those comments by Ajuonuma but they kept their powder dry for another day, which eventually came via the subsidy probe and its report.A lawmaker reviewed the controversy between the NNPC and the House on the subsidy probe recommendations and said: 'It was just unfortunate that due to some knotty issues within the Joint Committee set up to investigate that N450 billion debt, the House never got a report despite the serious expectations from the public on the matter. So, when the subsidy matter came up, it was clear that sentiments relating to how the NNPC had related with the House and, indeed, the National Assembly in the past would come up.'In fact, the relationship between the two had suffered serious dent before the commencement of the subsidy probe in January 2012. The public hearing on the subsidy probe actually brought to the fore that both the NNPC and the committee already had issues to settle between them.'When the 61 recommendations of the subsidy report were unveiled, it turned out that the Ministry of Petroleum Resources and its parastatals like the NNPC, Department of Petroleum Resources (DPR) and Petroleum Products Pricing Regulatory (PPPRA) received a good dose of mention, albeit for the wrong reasons.The report equally turned the heat on the former Accountant General of the Federation and incumbent governor of Gombe State, Ibrahim Dankwambo as well as former chairman of the Board of PPPRA, Dr. Ahmadu Ali, who was the national chairman of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party.Apart from the outcry, which resulted from the unofficial and speculative reports presented to the public by some section of the media, the management of the NNPC and the House were practically locked in terrible exchange of hot words when the official report was finally released.Some of the recommendations against the NNPC, which generated the hot exchanges, read thus:' The NNPC should refund to the Federation Account, the sum of N310,414,963,613 (three hundred and ten billion, four hundred and fourteen million, nine hundred and sixty three thousand, six hundred and thirteen Naira only) paid to it illegally as subsidy for kerosene contrary to the Presidential Directive of July 29th, 2009 withdrawing subsidy on the product.' The Committee wishes to recommend that the House do direct for the auditing of the NNPC to determine its solvency. This was as a result of plethora of claims of indebtedness and demands for payments by NNPC's debtors which, if not well handled, will notonly affect the entire economy of Nigeria, but also the supply anddistribution of petroleum products.' The Management and Board of the NNPC should be completely overhauled and all those involved in the following infractions be further investigated and prosecuted by the relevant Anti-Corruption Agencies:' Payment of N285.098 billion in excess of the PPPRA recommendedfigure for 2011.' Subsidy deductions of N310,414,963,613 for kerosene against a Presidential Directive.' Direct deductions from funds meant for the Federation Account incontravention of Section 162 of the Nigerian Constitution.' Illegal granting of price differential (discounts) of crude oil price per barrel to NNPC to the tune of N108.648 billion from 2009-2011.Expectedly, the NNPC reacted very swiftly, describing the report as lacking credibility and reliability.A statement by its spokesman, Levi Ajuonuma stated that:'The Committee, in arriving at its alleged actual volumes of PMS imported for year 2011, relied on 'probable figures' and '... what we suspect as over-invoiced volume of 3,276,949,993.' Also in its computation of the required volumes of product for domestic consumption, the Committee acted on unfounded beliefs and adopted absolute values without taking into consideration the volumes lost to vandalism and legitimate pipeline losses.'The wide ranging comments, observations and recommendations made by the Committee were not based on any empirical evidence but on assumptions and wild guestimates calculated to sensationalise the Report and were not within the scope of the Terms of Reference (ToR.) The recommendations for the criminal prosecution and investigation and dismissal of officials of the Corporation were also out of the scope of the ToR. Clear facts made available to the Committee were not countenanced by the Committee in arriving at the said recommendations and comments.'The Committee, despite all attempts by NNPC to clarify the process for the subsidy scheme as applicable to NNPC, failed to grasp the mechanisms of NNPC's involvement in the subsidy scheme. If such basic facts are understood but ignored by the Committee, it calls to question the integrity and reliability of the Report. In view of the fore-going, NNPC's position is that the Committee failed to adhere to its ToR as(sic) rather than focus on investigation and verification of facts, figures and procedures made available to it, the Report, which makes strong and indicting statements, is based on unsubstantiated beliefs, mere conjecture and suspicion.'On the issue of alleged illegal deductions, the Corporation stated: 'Curiously, while acknowledging the right of the Corporation to deduct cash calls for the funding of joint venture operations as a legitimate first line deduction on the income of the FGN by NNPC, the Report alleges that the deduction of subsidy by NNPC is illegal.'NNPC was established as a Statutory Corporation by the Federal Government through the NNPC Act with a mandate to, among others, give effect to agreements entered into by the Federal Government with a view to securing participation by the Federal Government and/or the Corporation in activities connected with petroleum.'By virtue of the provisions of section 7(4) of the NNPC Act, NNPC is legally required to recover its costs in operations.'How Diezani Survived Sack PlotTHE debate also brought out the politicking in the attempt to get the Petroleum Minister, Diezani Allison-Madueke, indicted.Although it was rumoured that moves were made to get the committee compromised and the leadership to water down the aspects of the recommendations where key officials were indicted, no official confirmation had been publicised apart from the aborted move to force the minister to resign last week.On the floor of the House last Wednesday, two attempts were made to compel the House to push for the minister's sack. Minutes into the day's session, a member, Robinson Uwak, raised a motion of 'Matters of Privilege' and informed the chamber that his constituents had accused the House of shielding the minister.But before he could go further on the issue, the Deputy Speaker, Emeka Ihedioha, who led the session, asked Uwak 'to approach the chair.' After a few minutes of discussion in low tone, Uwak returned to his seat looking very dissatisfied.However, insisting on his motion, the lawmaker asked that a special recommendation be inserted in the report to compel Alison-Madueke to resign as Petroleum Minister for presiding over the reported fraud in the petroleum industry.A thunderous applause by many members greeted Uwak's request. But then, the House Deputy Leader, Leo Ogor, drew the chamber's attention to the premise that Uwak had breached the rule of procedure. According to him, since the House was yet to start the report's consideration, it would be improper to entertain the motion proposed by Uwak.Ihedioha, who stated that Uwak erred and consequently ruled him out of order, supported this observation.Explaining his actionat the end of the session, Uwak said that he tried to save the House from attracting criticisms to itself for the minister's sake. 'It was improper not to have a specific recommendation against the minister who had publicly admitted that there were lots of shady deals in the oil sector,' he said.Nonetheless, another member, Benjamin Aboho, came back with the same anti-Alison-Madueke motion a few minutes later, insisting that there was need to amend the recommendations, to accommodate the request for the minister's resignation. He specifically moved that recommendation 45 be amended to achieve this objective.Yet again, the Deputy Speaker overruled him and any other member never raised the matter until the session ended.Dankwambo Escaped IndictmentWHAT became the fate of Governor Dankwambo was a product of swift response from the governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Malam Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, in which he tactically exonerated Dankwambo from blame.Recommendation 43 of the House report stated that: 'The payment of N999,000,000 in 128 times within 24hrs (12th & 13th January, 2009) by the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation should be further investigated by relevant Anti-Corruption Agencies.'But the lawmakers, after listening to three different letters on the issue from the CBN and the PPPRA resolved to investigate only the PPPRA and let Dankwambo out of the hook.Chairman of the ad-hoc committee, Farouk Lawan, had read the letter addressed to his committee by the CBN, explaining that the withdrawals were sanctioned by the PPPRA and as such, it would not be necessary to involve Dankwambo.The clause was thereafter amended to read: 'That the payment of N999,000,000 in 128 times within 24 hrs (12 and 13 January, 2009) by the PPPRA be further investigated by the relevant Anti-Corruption Agency.'Reacting to his initial indictment by the committee, Dankwambo had urged his people not to be disturbed by the publication, saying, 'I have never been involved in a fraud throughout my tenure as Accountant-General of the Federation.'He said the office of the Accountant-General of the Federation was not responsiblefor payment ofsubsidy, and disclosed that after some enquiries, he found that the statement used by the committee was that of the PPPRA, which the AGF has no control over.'The AGF only pays online from the source, either through the consolidated revenue account or the domestic excess crude account to be monitored and paid by the PPPRA,' he said.He emphasised that, having served as Accountant-General of the Federation since 1999, he has done his best to ensure that he demonstrates accountability and transparency in the way he operates, insisting that he had not and would never be involved in fraud.The governor did not rule out the possibility of political opponents exploiting the opportunities provided by the issue to score points against him.'Don't forget, Dankwambo is now apolitician, so there can be many factors that will be added to ridicule Gombe State's name. But be clear in your mind that Dankwambo had never committed and will never be involved in a fraud,' he said.The governor promisedto get to the root of the matter, in order to clear his name from the wrong misconception created by the report.Issues With The 17 Oil FirmsTHE National Assembly has always stressed the point that it has the powers to invite, for the purpose of investigation, anybody in Nigeria to answer questions.But that claim is facing a threat. The 17 oil firms, which the Lawan ad-hoc committee had been instructed to re-invite for questioning, are pushing hard to make that claim a mere display of legislative posturing.The firms have threatened to sue the House over the matter. Mike Ozekhome (SAN), who spoke in defence of the firms, hinted that they might sue for over N100 billion damages.He said: 'Most of these oil firms were never invited by the House Ad Hoc Committee but they were indicted. I will lead the team; the oil firms have reached out to me. In as much as I am against corruption and that those who mismanaged the oil sector should be dealt with, I also believe there must be fairness and justice.'I am also a lawyer; I owe an obligation to the legal profession to ensure justice. Even God gave Adam and Eve fair hearing in the Garden of Eden. These companies were neither invited nor interacted with in any manner.'But considering the recommendations against the 17 oil firms, many lawmakers reasoned there was need to give the companies a fair hearing before taking a decision against them. The Farouk Lawan-led ad hoc committee had recommended that the 17 firms be made to refund N41.936 billion.Speaking on the resolution of the House to compel the 17 marketers to face the Lawan panel, the House spokesman, Zakari Mohammed, explained that the decision was done in the spirit of fair hearing and in the best interest of the country.'The onus lies on us to give them fair hearing so that they do not rubbish the report in court. In the court of public opinion, people know that the 17 oil companies are being economical with the truth. So, we are giving them two weeks to come up and defend themselves.'Whatever the findings are like, I am sure it will come by way of a supplementary report of the House. As far as we are concerned, we have taken that decision in the best interest of Nigeria. If they fail to come at the end of two weeks, the law will take its course.'If you say you were not invited and the House, in its wisdom, has given you an opportunity to come, that is fair enough. If they don't come then, it's their own kettle of fish. So, as far as we are concerned, we have given them another opportunity to appear and at the same time to either deny or confirm whether they have collected any payment whatsoever.'Mohammed discountenanced any fears by the House regarding reported insinuations of a biased report. 'We don't have those fears; people can insinuate but at the end of the day, because of where we are coming from, people have liberty to suggest or to imagine all kinds of verdicts,' he said.'But as far as we are concerned, we are focused and at the end of the day, we are going to deliver to Nigerians a report that is implementable and of course, we will go further.'Like I told you, our ingenuity about legislation is that if we put it to those who should implement and they refuse to, then in the course of time, the private prosecutor case is not out of place.'Implementation ProblemsEVEN when the report received unanimous support from members of the House, there were apprehensions regarding its implementation by the executive arm of government. Many people believed that the report might go the way many of its kinds had gone: in a trash can of the Presidency.In the desperation to get the document strictly adhered to, the House vowed to hire private firms to prosecute all those indicted by the report.Chairman, House Committee on Media and Public Affairs, Zakari Mohammed, who spoke at the end of Thursday's session, explained that:'We don't have those fears that the Executive may not execute the report. People can insinuate. If the Attorney General of the Federation is not forthcoming, we can get a private prosecutor, just like it happened in Dele Giwa's case when Gani Fawehinmi got a private prosecutor and the case went on.'At the same time, we can do that, too. So, we are saying that we are resolved to explore all possibilities within our disposal to ensure that this report, for once, is not going to be rubbished.'Before the commencement of the consideration of the report, Speaker Aminu Waziri Tambuwal described, as unacceptable, the decision by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to wait for the adoption and harmonisation of the report before investigating and prosecuting the indicted agencies, firms and individuals.He said: 'I have heard all kinds of insinuations, including the one about anti-graft agencies waiting for a 'harmonised version' of this report before taking any action. Let me quickly say here that this is at best an excuse that cannot stand; after all, the same agencies accept and investigate petitions from individuals, how much more resolutions of this House''There will be no such document. So, they should just go ahead and do their job and where they find any person or body culpable, they should proceed in accordance with the law.'Our only interest here is to mitigate the suffering of Nigerians by showing how the subsidy regime has been hijacked for the benefit of a few. At the end of our deliberations, we hope that the executive arm will act upon the resolutions of this House and bring more transparency to bear on the system.'Tambuwal declared that the investigation was intended to make operations in the oil industry more transparent, noting that it was lamentable that the sector had been regarded as a secret sector in the past.'The probe of the oil sector has raised so much dust from certain segments of the polity such that it became clear that the intention was to frustrate it,' he said. 'For those who regard the oil sector as a secret society or sacred cow, I wish to state without equivocation that it is not. All public agencies in the oil sector are the creation of Acts of the National Assembly and this Honourable House has no powers to legislate for the creation of secret societies.'Similarly, all private sector corporate bodies operating in the sector are the creation of the Corporate Affairs Commission and that commission also is not vested with any powers to incorporate secret societies. Let it, therefore, be known that in our drive to sanitise the polity, there are no sacred cows and we do not intend to discover any.'House May Shun U.S ConferenceIT emerged during the week that the House was weighing the option of stopping members of the Petroleum Resources Committee and those of the Ad-hoc Committee on Subsidy from going to the Offshore Technology Conference (OTC) in Houston, Texas, United States on any marketer's ticket.Indeed, it was learnt that some oil marketers were offering some members of the House sponsorship to the OTC summit.The decision, which was yet to be formally communicated to the affected members, was aimed at preventing the oil marketers from blackmailing the House after sponsoring those members to the conference.These rigmaroles more than summarise the intrigues, controversies and political manipulation, which have typified the issue of fuel subsidy and its uses, as revealed by report of the ad-hoc committee of the House of Representatives.
Click here to read full news..
