Daybreak, Politics, Entertainment, Sport

Tag: $418m Paris Club Refund

  • $418m Paris Club Refund: Governors Objection Baseless – Malami

    $418m Paris Club Refund: Governors Objection Baseless – Malami

    THE Attorney-General of the Federation, AGF, and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, on Thursday, declared that state governors have no basis to complain about deductions from the Paris Club refund paid to consultants they hired.

    The AGF said that the noise making arising from the governors forum was not only unjustified, but a clear case of absence of defence.

    Speaking when he featured on the Ministerial Media Briefing organized by the Presidential Communications Team at the Presidential Villa, Abuja, the minister reminded the governors that they created the liability whose payment they have also indemnified.

    Fielding question on why despite a presidential directive to suspend the deduction from the Paris Club refund, he has not deemed it fit to enforce the directive as some deductions were been said to be made, he affirmed that when the Nigeria Governors Forum (NGF) made a request for the refund, one of the component was the settlement of the consultants who were engaged by the forum.

    Malami recalled that when the refund was paid to the states, the governors initially made to states, part payment was also made to the consultants..

    However, he said the governors later decided to stop payment while asking for an out of court settlement.

    The Minister said this resulted to request to the President to make the payment, a request he said, was then passed on to the Office of the AGF for legal opinion.

    Malami noted that after being subjected to necessary checks, it was found out that there was no element of fraud involved.

    According to him, the indemnity of the governors was also sought and received.

    He said, “On the issue of Paris club that is raised. You mentioned that there exists a presidential directives that payments should not be made and then in breach of that position directives payments were perhaps maybe arising from the conspiracy between the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice payments have been made.

    “I think you need to be informed first, as to the antecedents, prevailing circumstances and how the liability arose but one thing I’m happy to state, which I want to reiterate having stated same earlier, is the fact that the Office of the Attorney General and the government of President Muhammadu Buhari has not indeed incurred any major judgment debt for the period of seven years it has been on.

    “Now, coming to the antecedents background of the Paris Club. The liability or judgement debts related to pirates Club was indeed a liability created by the governor’s forum in their own right.”

    Continuing, he explained, “The Governor’s forum comprising of all the governors sat down commonly agreed on the engagement of consultant to provide certain services for them relating to the recovery of the Paris Club. So, it was the governor’s forum under the federal government in the first place that engaged the consultant.

    “Two, when eventually, successes were recorded associated with the refund, associated with Paris Club, the governors collectively and individually presented a request to the federal government for the fund. And among the components of the claim presented for the consideration of the federal government was a component related to the payment of these consultants that are now constituting the subject of contention. So the implication of that is that the governors in their own right recognized the consultant, recognized their claim and presented such claim to the federal government.

    “Three, when the claims were eventually processed and paid to the governor’s forum. They indeed on their own, without the intervention of the federal government took steps to make part payments to the consultants, acknowledging their liability over same.

    “And then four, when eventually they made such payments at a point they took a decision to stop the payment. The consultants instituted is an action in court against the governors forum. Ans what happened in court? They submitted to consent judgment. They asked and urged the Court to allow them settle out of court.

    “The court granted them an opportunity to settle. They commit terms of settlement in writing, they signed the terms of settlement, agreeing and conceding that such payments be made to the consultant.

    “And then five, thereafter, the federal government under the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari was requested to comply with the judgment and effect payment.

    “The President passed all the requests of the governors to the Office of the Attorney General for consideration. I suggested to the President on the face value of the judgment and the undertones associated with the consultancy services.

    “It was my opinion, the same treatment we metted to P&ID, that let us subject this claim, the consent judgment to investigation by the agencies of the government. Mr. President approved, I directed the EFCC and DSS to look into these claims and report back to the office of the Attorney General.

    “And these agencies reported and concluded that there are no problem undertone associated with it. The government may continue to sanction the payment dependent. Now, that was the background.

    “Even at that, we took further steps after receiving these reports from the EFCC among others, to demand for indemnity from the governors. You, as a forum, you incurred this liability, as a forum you submitted to consent judgment. We have subjected this claims to investigation and we have a report, but even at that, we need independent indemnity from you, establishing that it is with your consent and understanding that these payments should be made, in writing.

    “And I’m happy to report to you that the governors individually and collectively provided the desired indemnity to the Office of the Attorney General, conceding, agreeing and submitting, that the payment should be made.

    “Yes, and that was the ground and the basis on which we eventually took a decision by advising the president that the payment should be made. And then along the line, there was a change of leadership of the governors forum. And all the noise making that is now being generated arising from the Governors forum is not only unjustified, but indeed, a clear case of absence of defense.

    “But one other point of interest you may wish to note, is the fact that the new leadership of the governors forum instituted an action, even when the federal government was indeed acting on the basis of the judgment of the Supreme Court. They now embarked on a fresh legal suit, challenging the payment, challenging the previous agreement, challenging the indeminity and the court dismissed the application. Their case was dismissed by the Federal High Court.

    “So that is the foundation and I’m happy to report one, that the judgment and contention was a judgment that was obtained long before the Attorney General, Abubakar Malami came into office, long before the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari came into office.

    “It was a product of their own doing and they had it is submitted to judicial proceeding, judgment was entered against them. They have committed to the payment of the money, they have on their own indeed effected part payment. I closed my case and I will not like to answer any further question on that.”

  • $418m Paris Club Refund: Your Statement is Half-Truth – NGF Tackles Ned Nwoko

    $418m Paris Club Refund: Your Statement is Half-Truth – NGF Tackles Ned Nwoko

    The Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF) has accused the lead counsel in the Paris Club refund case, Ned Nwoko, of telling what it described as “half-truths” following the latter’s claim that the governors demanded and received $100 million to prosecute elections in some states.

    A statement by the NGF on Sunday said Ned’s claim in Saturday’s press briefing is an attempt to hide the truth.

    “In his desperation to justify his claim, NED peddled untruths that his team was a member of the Federal Government Committee constituted to reconcile figures under the Paris Club refunds to the States and Local Governments. That is patently false,” the NGF’s Director, Media and Public Affairs, Abdulrazaque Bello-Barkindo, said in the statement.

    “The report of that committee dated May 2007 shows that only the FMF, OAGF, CBN, DMO, and RMFC (secretariat) were members. Private persons who were not privy could not have been included in a committee that was meant to examine purely public financial records. It was this Committee that did all the work now claimed by NED and the other consultants.”

    It also said “the desperate, spurious and futile advocacy mounted and coordinated by the AGF on behalf of the so-called Paris Club Consultants to justify the plundering of the humongous sum of USD418.9m from the public treasury of the States and Local Governments continued on Saturday 20th August 2022, when Ned Nwoko, in a press statement, attempted to blur and obfuscate the real facts and legal issues in controversy by dishing out blatant lies and half-truths.

    “The facts are and will always remain: whether the claims of the consultants are lawful and justified under our Constitution and whether any Judgment which is a subject of a pending appeal can be enforced or executed as the consultants now attempt to do? If both questions are answered in the negative, it does not matter if the contracts leading to the claims were entered into by any public official, past or present.”

    The NGF noted that it will not waste time defending “unsubstantiated claims”, maintaining that its “role in the whole of this Paris Club refund debacle to consultants is to ensure that Nigeria citizens are not unlawfully deprived of resources meant for their development”.

    “NGF will not, therefore, waste its valuable time to defend unsubstantiated allegations against individuals or persons who are in a position to defend themselves. If NED is sure of his facts, he is at liberty to approach the necessary authorities to bring to justice any person or persons and all conspirators (including himself) who were allegedly involved in misappropriating public resources for campaign financing,” the statement further read.

    “The NGF hereby states unequivocally that it has not at any time been involved in or been in receipt of USD$100m or any other funds from NED Nwoko to finance elections in any State.”

  • $418m Paris Club Refund: NGF Accuse AGF of Pursuing Selfish Agenda

    $418m Paris Club Refund: NGF Accuse AGF of Pursuing Selfish Agenda

    The crisis of interest between state governors and the Federal Government over deductions made in respect of the Paris Club debt refunds may have taken a fresh dimension as Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF) on Wednesday, lashed back at the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, over recent comments credited to him regarding the $418 million Paris Club debt refunds.

    The governors after their deliberations at the Presidential Villa, Abuja, accused Malami of orchestrating the deductions from their funds to settle the consultancy fees, from a point of personal interest, a development they were ready to fight to finish in the law court.

    Chairman of the NGF, who doubles as Ekiti State governor, Kayode Fayemi, who read out the communique, also accused Malami of selfishness and self-serving agenda.

    Recall that Malami, who featured at the weekly briefings coordinated by the Presidential Media Team, had stated that there was no basis for agitation by the NGF concerning deductions from the Paris Club refunds paid to the consultants they hired. Malami had also described the governors’ action as akin to crying over spilled milk.

    While reacting to the Paris fund controversy, the AGF reminded the governors that they created the liability whose payment, he said, they have also indemnified.

    In addressing the controversy over deductions made from the refund, the minister explained that when the NGF made a request for the refund, one of the components was the settlement of the consultants whose services were engaged by the governors’ forum.

    But in NGF’s reaction, Fayemi, who read the outcome of the meeting as contained in the communiqué, said: “Governors extensively reviewed the purported attempts by the Attorney General of the Federation and the Minister of Finance to circumvent the law and a recent judgment of the Supreme Court to secure the approval of the federal legislative council to effect illegal payment of a sum of $418 million to contractors who allegedly executed consultancy in respect to the Paris Club refund, to state and local governments.

    “The forum set up a committee comprising the chairman, the governor of Ekiti State, the vice chairman, the governor of Ondo State, the governor of Plateau State, the governor of Nasarawa State, and the governor of Ebonyi State to interface with the committee set up by Mr. President to review the matter.

    “But the position of the Governors’ Forum is clear and unequivocal. Although this matter is sub judice and we are very reluctant to get in the way of a matter that is still being pursued in the court.

    We’re constrained by the manner in which the honourable attorney has been going around various media houses and purporting to create the impression that this is a liability to which governors had committed themselves to and agreed to, even though he is very much aware that that’s not the case. “And we reject all of the claims that he has made on this issue.

    And we also insist that states will not give up on insisting that these purported claims are fraudulent and will not stand as far as governors are concerned and we would take every constitutional and legal means to ensure that these purported consultancy are fully litigated upon by the highest court in the land.

    “If the courts now find governors, and the Nigeria Governors’ Forum and states liable, then we will cross that bridge when we get there.

    As far as we’re concerned, this is a matter that governors feel very strongly about and we do not believe that the Attorney General of the Federation is acting in the public interest, we believe he is acting in personal, selfish interest that will ultimately become clear when this matter is fully addressed in the law court.”

    On the ongoing strike by the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), which is now in its sixth month, the governors appealed to both parties to sheathe their swords and reach amicable resolution. The governors said: “On the prolonged strike by Nigerian universities.

    The forum encourages the Federal Government and the Academic Staff Union of Universities to find meaningful resolutions to the lingering impasse and as proposed to engage with both parties just as we have done in the past in a bid to end in the strike.”

    On the state of the economy, the governors said: “Finally, the forum extensively discussed the state of the Nigerian economy and security.

    Following a presentation by Mr. Bismarck Rewane, a member of the President’s Economic Advisory Council.”

    The forum resolved to immediately engage with the Federal Government and other critical stakeholders, labour, the presidential candidates of political parties and corporate actors on finding resolutions and suggestion to implement a set of immediate actions to ameliorate the worsening economic conditions in the country.”

  • $418m Paris Club Refund: Governors’ Complaint Baseless – Malami

    $418m Paris Club Refund: Governors’ Complaint Baseless – Malami

    The Federal Government has reacted formally to the complaints by the Nigerian Governors’ Forum over the contentious $418 million Paris Club Refund saying the governors have no basis to express reservations over the refund.

    Making the government position known at a media briefing Thursday at the State House, Abuja, was the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami who declared that there was no basis for agitation by the NGF concerning deductions from the Paris Club refund paid to the consultants they hired.

    Commenting on the fund controversy, the Minister reminded the governors that they created the liability whose payment, he said, they have also indemnified.

    According to him, when the NGF made a request for the refund, one of the components was the settlement of the consultants whose services were engaged by the 36 stat governors.

    Malami recounted that when the Paris Club refund was paid to the states, the governors initially made part payment to the consultants, but explained that the governors later decided to stop payment while asking for an out of court settlement.

    He said the development resulted in an appeal in the form of a request to the President to facilitate the payment to the consultants, a request that was consequently transmitted to the Office of the AGF for legal advice.

    The AGF noted that after subjecting the request to critical checks, it was discovered that there was no element of fraud involved.

    He revealed that the indemnity of the governors was also sought and received, which culminated in the decision to make the payment.

    His words:”On the issue of Paris Club, you mentioned that there exists a presidential directives that payments should not be made and then in breach of that position, directives payments were perhaps maybe arising from the conspiracy between the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice payments have been made.

    “I think you need to be informed first, as to the antecedents, prevailing circumstances and how the liability arose. But one thing I’m happy to state, which I want to reiterate having stated same earlier, is the fact that the Office of the Attorney General and the government of President Muhammadu Buhari has not, indeed, incurred any major judgment debt for the period of seven years it has been on.

    “Now, coming to the antecedents, background of the Paris Club. The liability or judgement debts related to Paris Club was indeed a liability created by the Governors Forum in their own right.

    “How do I mean? The Governors Forum comprising of all the governors sat down, commonly agreed on the engagement of consultants to provide certain services for them relating to the recovery of the Paris Club. So, it was the Governors Forum under the federal government in the first place that engaged the consultants.

    “Two, when eventually, successes were recorded associated with the refund, associated with Paris Club, the governors collectively and individually presented a request to the federal government for the fund. And among the components of the claim presented for the consideration of the federal government was a component related to the payment of these consultants that are now constituting the subject of contention.

    “So, the implication of that is that the governors in their own right recognized the consultants, recognized their claim and presented such claim to the federal government.

    “Three, when the claims were eventually processed and paid to the Governors Forum, they indeed on their own, without the intervention of the federal government, took steps to make part payments to the consultants, acknowledging their liability over same.

    “And then four, when eventually they made such payments, at a point they took a decision to stop the payment. The consultants instituted an action in court against the Governors Forum. And what happened in court? They submitted to consent judgment. They asked and urged the Court to allow them settle out of court.

    “The court granted them an opportunity to settle. They committed to terms of settlement in writing, they signed the terms of settlement, agreeing and conceding that such payments be made to the consultants.

    “And then five, thereafter, the federal government under the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari was requested to comply with the judgment and effect payment.

    “The President passed all the requests of the governors to the Office of the Attorney General for consideration. I suggested to the President on the face value of the judgment and the undertones associated with the consultancy services, it was my opinion, the same treatment we meted to P&ID, that let us subject this claim, the consent judgment to investigation by the agencies of the government.

    “Mr. President approved, I directed the EFCC and DSS to look into these claims and report back to the office of the Attorney General. And these agencies reported and concluded that there are no problems undertone associated with it. The government may continue to sanction the payment dependent. Now, that was the background.

    “Even at that, we took further steps after receiving these reports from the EFCC among others, to demand for indemnity from the governors. You, as a forum, you incurred this liability, as a forum, you submitted to consent judgment, we have subjected this claims to investigation and we have a report. But even at that, we need independent indemnity from you, establishing that it is with your consent and understanding that these payments should be made, in writing.

    “And I’m happy to report to you that the governors individually and collectively provided the desired indemnity to the Office of the Attorney General, conceding, agreeing and submitting, that the payment should be made.

    “Yes, and that was the ground and the basis on which we eventually took a decision by advising the President that the payment should be made.

    “And then along the line, there was a change of leadership of the Governors Forum.

    “And all the noise making that is now being generated arising from the Governors Forum is not only unjustified, but indeed, a clear case of absence of defense.”

    The AGF also hinged the agitation over the payment to the consultants on the change of leadership at the NGF.

    According to him: “One other point of interest you may wish to note, is the fact that the new leadership of the Governors Forum instituted an action, even when the federal government was indeed acting on the basis of the judgment of the Supreme Court.

    “They now embarked on a fresh legal suit, challenging the payment, challenging the previous agreement, challenging the indeminity and the court dismissed the application. Their case was dismissed by the Federal High Court.

    “So, that is the foundation and I’m happy to report one, that the judgment and contention was a judgment that was obtained long before the Attorney General, Abubakar Malami came into office, long before the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari came into office.

    “It was a product of their own doing and they had it submitted to judicial proceeding, judgment was entered against them.

    “They have committed to the payment of the money, they have on their own indeed effected part payment. I closed my case and I will not like to answer any further question on that.”

    Malami also revealed that the federal government has so far secured more than 1,000 convictions for terrorism-related court cases in the last 18 months.

    According to him, the federal government had also won 312 convictions in various other criminal cases during the period under review.

    His words: “The ministry has so far secured over 1000 convictions on terrorism. Convictions have also been secured in 45 cases by the Complex Casework Group (CCG), Maritime unit, and the special task force on electricity offenses and across the 13 zonal offices of the Ministry.”

    He noted that the Ministry, through the CCG unit, is coordinating the next phase of terrorism related trials in collaboration with the federal high court, the Legal Aid Council, and the Defence Headquarters.

    Malami further stated that the Ministry of Justice has successfully processed over 350 Mutual Legal Assistance and 50 extradition requests including extradition proceedings against suspended DCP Abba Kyari from the United States of America.

    His words: “My office filed extradition proceedings against the suspended DCP Abba Kyari in line with an MLA request from the USA”

    The Minister disclosed that the present administration had also recovered over N3.2bn (£6,324,627.66) of stolen monies from various jurisdictions globally.

    He, however, disclosed that the recovered foreign loots had been judiciously expended on executing key infrastructure projects across the country, including the Second Niger Bridge, Abuja-Kano Road and the Lagos-Ibadan expressway, among others.

    He also noted that the Justice Ministry has supported the Federal Government in various infrastructure funding agreements, adding that the country currently grapples with a N329 billion funding gap.

  • How Buhari Shut Down Payment Plans for $418m Paris Club Refund

    How Buhari Shut Down Payment Plans for $418m Paris Club Refund

    Interesting details have emerged on how President Muhammadu Buhari, a week today, shut down plans by the federal government to commence a phased payment of the $418 million Paris Club refund, allegedly owed four contractors from the federation account, but not before some heated debate amongst ministers had first taken place.

    The instruction expressly directed to the Minister of Finance, Zainab Ahmed, followed efforts by some ministers, who during the weekly Federal Executive Council (FEC), moved against the idea being pushed by the the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami and Ahmed, saying the idea was insensitive to time and inimical to current realities in the country.

    After suspending the planned deductions, the president immediately set up a committee, majorly of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SAN) in the cabinet to take a wholesome look at the matter again and advise appropriately.

    The Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF), had last week, resisted renewed move by Malami to pay the money.

    In a letter to the federal government, through the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), Boss Mustapha, the governors contended that, restarting the deduction process, which was being challenged in court.

    According to the letter, signed by Chairman of the NGF and outgoing Governor of Ekiti State, Dr. Kayode Fayemi, the governors described the new move as an “attempt by the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami, and the Minister of Finance (HMF) to circumvent the law and the recent judgement of the Supreme Court by surreptitiously securing the approval of the FEC to effect payment of the sum of $418 million to four contractors, who allegedly executed contracts in respect of the Paris Club refunds to the states and local governments.”

    Specifically, in their letter, the governors were of the position that the essence of the definitive pronouncement by the Supreme Court was that none of the contractors recommended for payment of the sum of $418 million could be so paid, because the contracts and payments relied upon were not processed as prescribed by the constitution and the law.

    However, at the FEC meeting of Wednesday, August 3, Ahmed and Malami, had presented a memo, asking the cabinet to approve the deductions from funds due to states from the federation account.

    Unfortunately for the duo, prior to the FEC, the governors had written to all ministers and also met some of them in persons, explained their position as well as sought their intervention in stopping the planned deduction being pushed by both Ahmed and Malami.

    Thus, soon after Ahmed and Malami made their presentations, they were immediately countered by Ministers, the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Boss Mustapha and the Vice-President, Yemi Osinbajo.

    According to sources, the FEC members, who spoke against the deduction contended that it would be sub-judicial for any payment to be made to the contractors while cases were pending in courts.

    Even more instructive, they held the view that it was insensitive of their colleagues to have brought forward a proposal for the payment of controversial debts to contractors at a time the government was battling to pay workers and fulfilling its obligations to citizens.

    A source hinted: “Our argument was simple and it was the fact that since the issue was being challenged in court, and there was a supreme court pronouncement in place, it would be illegal to go ahead with the planned deductions.

    “What further drove our argument home was that, we contended that the planned deductions was also made against the context of the nation’s economic crisis, poor revenue, and uncertain fiscal position. So, our the FEC would sit back and agree to that was clearly impossible.”

    However, after all the ministers had submitted their arguments, the president, another presidency source disclosed, spoke in support of the ministers’ position, and instructed that the planned deductions be suspended for further review.

    The president, it would be recalled, had earlier approved the payment through the issuance of promissory notes, based on proposals by Malami and Ahmed, but the move was resisted by the governors, who approached the court for redress through their attorneys-general.

    The governors insisted that the matter was on appeal at the Court of Appeal in Abuja, adding that the Nigerian government should exercise restraint in its handling of the matter.