Friday, 27 December 2013
ACCOUNT OFFICER WITH GUARANTY TRUST HOME ARRESTED FOR FRAUD OF N50M
The
Special Fraud Unit, Ikoyi, Lagos State, has arrested an account officer with
Guaranty Trust Homes, Adeola Olokojobi, in connection with a N50m fraud at the
financial institution.
Prior
to his arrest, Olokojobi was said to be working at the GT Homes, Saka Tinubu
branch, Victoria Island.
PUNCH Metro gathered
that the SFU had received a petition in October 2013, from a customer of the
branch where Olokojobi worked. The customer had alleged that Olokojobi, who was
his account officer, had “not been forthcoming with his account balances.”
A
statement by the SFU Commissioner of Police, Mr. Tunde Ogunsakin, said, “The
petitioner also alleged that the balance given to him was at variance with his
actual balance in the account.
“An
internal investigation conducted by GT Homes into the account revealed that
Olokojobi in April 2013, forged an instruction, transferring N15m from the
petitioner’s account, to an unknown account.
“The
bank also discovered other various fraudulent withdrawals made by the account
officer from other customers’ accounts in his care through fake transfer
instructions. It amounted to over N50m.
“He
said the funds were used to finance his political campaign, a proposed pure
water company and purchase of an uncompleted building at Sango-Ota, Ogun State.
“Olokojobi
in his confessional statement said he had fraudulently withdrawn monies
amounting to N50,640,748 from the account of the customers by transferring
funds into the accounts of fictitious customers and subsequently withdrawing
same.”
A
banking and finance graduate, Olokojobi told PUNCH Metro that he joined GT
Homes in 2009.
He,
however, denied that he had fraudulently transferred over N50m, insisting that
instead, it was N27m.
He
said, “I didn’t have to forge the instructions from GT homes customers. All I
did was manipulate them. What happens is that they usually send instructions to
the account officers by email, requesting that some money be transferred to an
account of their choice. All I simply do is add another million or two to the
sum the customer requested.
“It
went unnoticed all this while because after using the money to do some business
transactions, I always paid it back. I was into several businesses; I would buy
land and resell for profit.
“I got
into trouble with this one because I withdrew N15m at once from a customer’s
account; I didn’t take it bit by bit, but I meant to pay it back. In fact, I
had already started doing so before I was caught and arrested. But the police
are not right in saying that the money I had withdrawn from customers amounted
to N50m; it is N27m.”
Punch
SHARE THIS POST
Designer: Emeka
Saturday, 21 December 2013
PASTOR CHRIS OKOTIE BOUGHT ROYCE ROLL WORTH OF N120M TO MARK HIS 30TH ANNIVERSARY
The
Pastor of the Household of God Church International, Chris Okotie, recently
bought a Rolls Royce Coupe, the 2014 Bespoke Edition, to mark his 30 years as
born-again Christian and 27 years as a pastor, SUNDAY PUNCH learnt on Saturday.
According
Okotie’s close aide, the pastor spent N120m on the luxury car and had earlier
spent N33m on a Range Rover Autobiography to mark a milestone of his church.
The
source, in a text message, said, “Pastor Okotie just bought a Rolls Royce
Coupe, 2014 Bespoke Edition at N120m to mark his 30 years as a born-again
Christian and 27 years as a pastor. He had earlier bought a Range Rover
(Autobiography) 2014 Model for N33m, reputed to be the costliest SUV in the
world to mark this ministry’s milestone.”
Checks
on the Internet showed that the cheapest price of same Rolls Royce model is
about N65m, but it could be more expensive if armoured.
Fifty-five-year-old
Okotie was in the news recently for the controversial comments he made during a
church service in which he claimed that “all Catholics will go to hell,” and
referred to Pope Francis as anti-Christ.
Punch Nigeria
SHARE THIS POST
Designer: Emeka
Friday, 20 December 2013
MAHEEDA GIVES REASON FOR HER NUDE POSTING ON TWITTER AND INSTAGRAM
Controversial Nigerian singer Maheeda (real name Caroline
Sam), who is known for posting nude pictures on the internet, insists she’s a
gospel singer, reveals why she returned to her old lifestyle in an interview
with Galaxy TV
The Edo
State born singer, who was once a prostitute and made an open confession that
she has repented and found Christ, said the reason she posted sensuous pictures
of herself on her twitter and instagram accounts lately was because she wanted
to show the world how sexy she is.
“I’m
not posting those nude pictures on the internet to teach people to start going
naked, I posted them because I felt I am sexy and I love sexuality. In Europe,
where I live, at a certain age, parents will start to teach their children
about sex education. But it is unfortunate that I came from this part of the
world where sentiment is attached to everything.
“I’m 31 years old and
I can’t pretend to behave like a baby or something. I’m sexy and I like it. I’m
still spiritually inclined and I have some gospel songs which are not out yet.
One of them is Papangolo. Those nude pictures you see is Maheeda. That is me. I
am just expressing myself. I’m sexy and I am only appreciating that fact
because I love sexuality".Do you agree with her?
SHARE THIS POST
Designer: Emeka
Thursday, 19 December 2013
"THE RULING PARTY IS DEAD, READY TO BE BURIED"- GOV. LAMINDO
IT was
a grim verdict yesterday on the fate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) by
one of its governors.
The
ruling party is dead, waiting to be buried, declared Jigawa State Governor Sule
Lamido.
Lamido,
one of the founding fathers of the PDP in 1998, was one of the Group of Seven
(G7) aggrieved governors who challenged the leadership of Alhaji Bamanga Tukur
and joined the Kawu Baraje-led New PDP.
Five of
the governors – Rotimi Amaechi (Rivers), Aliyu Wamakko (Sokoto), Murtala Nyako
(Adamawa), Rabiu Kwankwaso (Kano) and Abdultfatah Ahmed (Kwara) – have defected
to the All Progressives Congress (APC).
Lamido
and Niger State Governor Babangida Aliyu stayed back in the PDP.
Lamido
said he would not leave PDP because doing so is like leaving a house he built.
But
yesterday, Lamido reviewed the latest development in the troubled party
especially the defection on Wednesday of 37 House of Representatives members to
the APC and declared the PDP dead.
“We are
today witnessing the de-construction of what appears to be the final collapse
of our dear party, the PDP, under the inept and imbecile National Working
Committee (NWC) led by Bamanga Tukur,” he said, adding: “I am short of words to
express my pain. It is agonising to see the party built in every home, in every
village, town and cities all over Nigeria with lots of sacrifice being
destroyed.”
Urging
President Goodluck to take action, Lamido said: “Is it too late for the
‘leader’ of the party to intervene and save our party?”
He,
however, warned that “Nigeria’s democracy must not be truncated”.
But
Tukur insisted yesterday that he would not step down as demanded by the
governors elected on the platform of the party because the process being
adopted is illegal.
Tukur,
who spoke at a breakfast session with reporters in Abuja, said those after his
sack were trying to ambush the process.
He
said: “I was lawfully elected into the position by the party; so why should I
be removed through an illegal process. That is why I challenge them to allow
the rules prevail.
“Yes, I
have also heard that the party’s National Executive Council (NEC) meeting has
not held for a long time, but I will also remind the public and the party that
even at the state levels, there are executive councils and they have not also
held meetings in the past years, even in the states of those that hold against
me the NEC meeting issue.
“The
NEC does not exist on its own; it derives from the states and the states should
be in order before we put the national body and level in working order.”
Tukur
said the party, after the defection in the National Assembly, would begin
another round of reconciliation.
He
added: “There is never a time any party would rule out the importance of
reconciliation, and that is what I have been doing and many of the people you
hear kick against the leadership of the party still visit me here and hold
meetings with me.
“But
when one is bent on something, I have seen that some of them who engineer this
problem don’t relent in inciting others against the party.
“But I
promise you and I am sure the final move we have commenced will bring an end to
the problems and most, if not all, the members that left would be back.
“What
the public doesn’t also know is that new members and blocs have not ceased to
join the PDP.
“However,
I promise the aggrieved members that I am not the problem of the party and they
should feel free to tell me what I have done wrong and, as a family, we would
sit down and find a way out of it.”
He went
on: “In a situation where people have a mindset on an issue, it is difficult to
reconcile with such persons and that is what is playing out. I cannot tell you
I am not disturbed by the development in the party. It hasn’t been a healthy one
because much as we believe that the party still enjoys good standing among the
electorate, we know the strength of a party is in the membership it commands.
“I have
viewed the issues in the party and I know for sure that it is not getting
better but I can assure you that I can take any lawful condition the aggrieved
members come up with to make sure peace reigns in the party. I have heard it
many times from outside and the media that I am the problem of the party, but I
challenge you to have audience with the aggrieved members of the party and ask
them if I have not had private audiences with them.
“Whenever
they are with me, I ask them from a sincere mind what exactly I have done to be
the problem of the party, and I can swear to you that none of them ever told me
what the problem I constitute is.”
In
Tukur’s view, the problem may be that he disagrees with situations where
governors impose candidates on the electorate. “Some governors do not like
that. My agenda is to reform the party and stop the attitude of handpicking
candidates and imposing them on the people,” he said.
Explaining
that the crisis was being misunderstood by the public, Tukur said his prolonged
battle with governors started with his insistence that a governor and state
party chairman must not come from the same area in accordance with the
stipulations of the party’s constitution.
“Why
should a sitting governor decide who should succeed him at the end of his
tenure without any form of consultation with the people whose votes must count
at the elections?
“It was
the effort to change the negative status quo ante that created the protest,
which led to the existing crisis,” Tukur said.
The Nation
SHARE THIS POST
Designer: Emeka
PASTOR CAUGHT DOING IT WITH ANOTHER MAN'S WIFE (VIDEO)
SHARE THIS POST
Designer: Emeka
Wednesday, 18 December 2013
OBASANJO'S DAUGHTER, IYABO, DENIES WRITING ANY ILL-WORDED LETTER TO HER FATHER
The
letter-writing trend that has taken over the polity took a different dimension
on Wednesday when an 11-page letter allegedly written by daughter of former
President Olusegun Aremu Obasanjo hit the news.
The
letter was allegedly written in response to the 18-page letter written by the
retired General criticizing the present Jonathan-led administration.
The
letter which was highly personal in nature criticized the former military Head
of state as a father, a man, a leader and a statesman. That did not, however,
mark the end of the surprise.
The
nation was still trying to grasp the purpose of the letter which outrightly
stated that the letter had no political undertones when the former Senator and
PhD Holder announced that she had nothing to do with the letter nor had she
written or sent the letter to anyone or organization. She was said to have made
this denial in a call to a radio station.
SHARE THIS POST
Designer: Emeka
Monday, 16 December 2013
HOW WE ARE ORDERED BY AL MUSTAPHA TO KILL KUDIRAT ABIOLA - SGT ROGER
Testimony of Sergeant Barnabas Jabila Mshiela aka “Sergeant
Rogers” a member of the killer squad trained and maintained by Major Hamza Al
Mustapha the former Chief Security Officer of late Nigerian dictator, Sanni
Abacha testifying on how the former CSO ordered him and others to assassinate
Kudirat Abiola.
Major
Mustapha is fingered as the brain behind the of training snipers, some of them
reportedly members of his former BG/Strike Force team at the “Security
Department”, ostensibly to be used by President Goodluck Jonathan to
assassinate political opponents in the upcoming 2015 election(By Saharareporters)
SHARE THIS POST
Designer: Emeka
Saturday, 14 December 2013
DESMOND TUTU LEFT OUT OF GUEST LIST FOR THE FUNERAL OF HIS CLOSE FRIEND, NELSON MANDELA.
Desmond Tutu is said to be “heartbroken” after he was apparently left off the guest list for the funeral of his close friend Nelson Mandela.
The 82-year-old retired archbishop said he received “no indication” he had been invited to the burial service.
He worked closely with the former South African president in his long struggle against apartheid and welcomed Mr Mandela into his home after his fellow campaigner’s release from jail.
“Much as I would have loved to attend the service to say a final farewell to someone I loved and treasured, it would have been disrespectful to Tata to gatecrash what was billed as a private family funeral,” he said. Contradicting President Jacob Zuma’s claim that he was “definitely” on the guest list, Mr Tutu added: “Had I or my office been informed that I would be be welcome, there is no way on Earth that I would have missed it.”
The apparent exclusion of the Nobel Peace Prize winner has led to speculation he is being punished for vocal criticism of the ruling African National Congress (ANC) party.
Don Mullan, who travelled from Ireland to South Africa as Mr Tutu’s photographer, told Sky News the veteran campaigner is “grieving very, very much” and deserved to be at the event.
“The world needs Desmond Tutu to be here to say goodbye to his old friend,” he said.
“This is about Madiba, it’s about South Africa and it’s about two very important peacemakers saying farewell to each other.”
Mr Mullan, who said he will refuse to attend the service in protest against the apparent omission of Mr Tutu, said there was “great confusion” but also “great sadness” at his absence.
“Mr Tutu was the one who kept the flame of freedom alive when Mr Mandela and other campaigners were in prison or in exile,” he said.
“He is the one Mr Mandela spent his first night of freedom with and the one he and Graca Machel asked to assist at their wedding.”
Zelda la Grange, a former private secretary to Mr Mandela, said South Africa’s first black president was “very fond” of the man he affectionately called “The Arch”.
“Madiba really adored him,” she said. “He respected him, he loved him – there was a very close relationship.”
Mr Mandela will be buried in his childhood home of Qutu following South Africa’s first state funeral.
Thousands of people lined the streets of Mthatha, as his body was driven towards its final resting place.
Skynews
SHARE THIS POST
Designer: Emeka
OBASANJO DISCUSSION WITH JONATHAN AT KENYA
More
facts have emerged over the unscheduled visit of former president, Olusegun
Obasanjo, to President Goodluck Jonathan on Thursday in Kenya.
A presidential source revealed that the former leader did not
deny the content of the letter, but made some clarifications to the president.
According to the source, who was in Nairobi, during Obasanjo’s
visit, the former president told President Jonathan that he stood by the
contents of the letter including the sentiments expressed in it, but stressed
that he was not responsible for the leakage of the letter to the online medium,
Premium Times, which published the 18-page letter that was later re-published
in all Nigerian newspapers.
According
to the source, the appearance of the former leader at the hotel took many aides
of the president by surprise, even though a protocol liaison officer was
reported to have preceded the visit.
Obasanjo,
on arriving the venue, was said to have exchanged banters with some of the
dignitaries accompanying the president before his one-on-one with Jonathan.
Obasanjo
was quoted as telling Jonathan that while he was not responsible for the
leakage, he was still expecting a reply from Jonathan. It was however gathered
that certain elements within the administration believed the former leader did
the leakage as part of ongoing offensive against the number one citizen.
“Baba
denied responsibility for the leakage of the letter. But Mr President was
non-committal,” the source said.
The
interaction between the two men was, however, said to be devoid of tension
associated with the letter back at home.
“Both
men were not stiff or confrontational,” the source said.
Obasanjo
was said to have advised that the leakage was either done by some elements
within the administration or linked to any of those he copied.
Meanwhile,
worried by the disunity in the South-West zone of the ruling Peoples Democratic
Party (PDP), former President Obasanjo has summoned a meeting of the
stakeholders in the zone for today.
Saturday
Tribune learnt that the fence mending meeting would hold at Chief Obasanjo’s
Top Hill residence in Abeokuta, Ogun State.
According
to a source, all the six states, namely; Ekiti, Lagos, Ondo, Osun, Oyo and Ogun
would be represented at the meeting while invitation had been extended to the
states’ representatives.
“We
are having a meeting with Baba Obasanjo on Saturday (today) in Abeokuta. We
have not received any counter order (from Abuja). We are going there to know
the way forward.
Honestly,
we don’t know what is happening to the PDP in the South-West. We have lost our
identity in the scheme of things; strangers seem to have taken over the party
we laboured for because of disunity among us, so, I think the meeting is
timely,”the source told Saturday Tribune in confidence on Friday.
It was
further learnt that five representatives per state are being expected at the
meeting.
Nigerian Tribune
SHARE THIS POST
Designer: Emeka
Friday, 13 December 2013
FAKE INTERPRETER AT MANDELA'S MEMORIAL SERVICE CHARGED FOR THEFT.
The
interpreter at Nelson Mandela’s memorial service has been convicted of theft
and once had a string of criminal charges, including murder, laid against him.
eNCA reported reported that a murder, attempted murder and
kidnapping case from 2003, against Thamsanqa Jantjie and two other men, was
referred to the High Court in Johannesburg in 2004, and was finalised in
November 2006.
However the outcome was unknown as the court file for the case
was found empty by eNCA reporters.
Using
court and police records, eNCA established that Jantjie was convicted of theft
in 1995, and is recorded to have received a three-year sentence.
He was charged with housebreaking in July 1997 and malicious
damage to property in April 1998.
Jantjie was charged with rape in September 1994, but was later
acquitted.
Jantjie was metres away from the likes of SA President Jacob
Zuma, US President Barack Obama, Cuban President Raul Castro, and Mandela’s
widow Graca Machel, during proceedings at Mandela’s memorial at FNB Stadium, in
Johannesburg, on Tuesday.
Jantjie
has reportedly said he had suffered a schizophrenic episode during the
memorial, in which the signs he made were dismissed as gibberish by the deaf
community
SHARE THIS POST
Designer: Emeka
Thursday, 12 December 2013
BOKO HARAM LEADER THREATENED AMERICA GOVERNMENT, "YOU ARE NEXT"
You
couldn’t crush us when we were carrying sticks,” he said, adding: “By Allah, we
will never stop. Don’t think we will stop in Maiduguri.
“Tomorrow
you will see us in America itself. Our operation is not confined to Nigeria. It
is for the whole world.”
Shekau’s
claims about the international nature of Boko Haram stand at odds with
analysts’ general assessments that the group is largely Nigeria-based.
But
the United States has said the group and Ansaru have links the wider Islamist
jihadi network, in particular Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), which has
provided limited training and funding.
The US
State Department in July offered a reward of up to $7 million for information
leading to the arrest of Shekau.
The
group leader also added that they were behind a daring raid on military
installations in Maiduguri earlier this month.
“Allah
the Almighty has given us victory in the attack we launched inside Maiduguri
(which was) called Borno in ancient times,” said Abubakar Shekau in a 40-minute
clip.
Speaking
in Arabic, Hausa and Kanuri, Shekau added: “We stormed the city and fought them
(and) Allah blessed us with lots of booty.”
The
video, which was obtained through an intermediary, shows Shekau dressed in
military fatigues with a turban and Kalashnikov assault rifle leaning on his
chest.
He
speaks for 19 minutes in all while the rest of the tape shows images of burning
buildings and aircraft said to be from the December 2 attack in Maiduguri,
which is capital of Borno state.
It
also shows a display of weapons the banned Islamist group says it seized in the
attack, including dozens of Kalashnikovs and rockets.
The
authenticity of the tape could not be verified independently.
Gunmen
who arrived on pick-up trucks besieged an army and air force base, destroying
aircraft, razing buildings and setting shops and petrol stations ablaze,
witnesses said.
The
early morning raid was seen as significant because the Nigerian military had
previously claimed to have pushed the militants out of urban centres and into
more remote, rural areas.
Local
people reported that the attackers were carrying AK-47 assault rifles and
rocket propelled grenades in the assault, which prompted the local authorities
to impose a city-wide curfew.
In the
Maiduguri raid, Nigeria’s military said 24 militants were killed and two
service personnel were wounded.
But
Shekau said only seven fighters lost their lives — three in suicide bombings,
three were shot and one in “friendly fire”.
At
least two local residents were also killed, people in the city said.
SHARE THIS POST
Designer: Emeka
Wednesday, 11 December 2013
OBASANJO ACCUSED JONATHAN OF DESTROYING NIGERIA
An
apparently angry and frustrated ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo has written what
clearly competes as one of the most acerbic letters in modern history to
President Goodluck Jonathan, accusing him of ineptitude and of taking actions
calculated at destroying Nigeria.
“Nigeria is bleeding and the
hemorrhage must be stopped,” Mr. Obasanjo said in the 18-page letter dated
December 2, 2013 and exclusively obtained by PREMIUM TIMES Tuesday.
He said Mr. Jonathan has
failed to deliver on his promises to the Nigerian people, stem corruption,
promote national unity and strengthen national security.
He
said in the letter titled “Before it is too late” that rather than take steps
to advance Nigeria’s interest and up the standards of living of Nigerians, Mr.
Jonathan had betrayed God and the Nigerian people that brought him to power,
and has been pursuing selfish personal and political interests based on advice
he receives from “self-centred aides”.
In the
detailed letter, dripping of anger , frustration and what appears a genuine
concern to rescue a nation on the brink, Mr. Obasanjo lamented that Mr.
Jonathan had become terribly divisive and clannish, destroying his own party,
polarizing the country along regional and religious lines and ridiculing
Nigeria in the comity of nations.
Without
mincing words, Mr. Obasanjo blamed Mr. Jonathan for the crises tearing the
ruling Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, apart.
He
said apart from using party chairman Bamanga Tukur to cause multiple crises and
divide the ranks of the party, the president’s failure to keep a promise he
made not to seek a second term is also generating tension within the ruling
party.
“It
would be unfair to continue to level full blames on the Chairman (Tukur) for
all that goes wrong with the party,” Mr. Obasanjo said. “The chairman is
playing the tune dictated by the paymaster (Jonathan). But the paymaster is
acting for a definitive purpose for which deceit and deception seem to be the
major ingredients.
“Up
till two months ago, Mr. President, you told me that you have not told anybody
that you would contest in 2015. I quickly pointed out to you that the signs and
the measures on the ground do not tally with your statement. You said the same
to one other person who shared his observation with me. And only a fool would
believe that statement you made to me judging by what is going on. I must say
it is not ingenious. You may wish to pursue a more credible and more honorable
path.”
The
former President said Mr. Jonathan told him before the 2011 election he would
not seek a second term, and made the same promise to governors, party
stakeholders and Nigerians.
The
president’s refusal to keep that promise cast him as a man without honour, Mr.
Obasanjo said.
Saying
it would be “fatally morally flawed” for Mr. Jonathan to contest in 2015, Mr.
Obasanjo added, “As a leader, two things you must cherish and hold dear among
others are trust and honour both of which are important ingredients of
character. I will want to see anyone in the Office of the Presidency of Nigeria
as a man or woman who can be trusted, a person of honour in his words and
character.”
Mr.
Obasanjo also accused Mr. Jonathan of anti-party conducts – supporting
opposition parties’ candidates in governorship elections in Lagos, Ondo, Edo
and Anambra states at the detriment of PDP’s own candidates –, and of pitting
party members against one another.
Saying
the President had failed to address the underlying causes of the Boko Haram
menace, Mr. Obasanjo urged Mr. Jonathan to adopt a carrot and stick approach in
dealing with the insurgency explaining that “conventional military actions
based on standard phases of military operations alone will not permanently and
effectively deal with the issue of Boko Haram”.
Mr.
Obasanjo also tackled Mr. Jonathan for allegedly being clannish. “For you to
allow yourself to be “possessed”, so to say, to the exclusion of most of the
rest of Nigerians as an “Ijaw man” is a mistake that should never have been
allowed to happen. Yes, you have to be born in one part of Nigeria to be
Nigerian if not naturalized but the Nigerian President must be above ethnic
factionalism. And those who prop you up as of, and for ‘Ijaw nation’ are not
your friends genuinely, not friends of Nigeria nor friends of ‘Ijaw nation’
they tout about.
“To
allow or tacitly encourage people of ‘Ijaw nation’ to throw insults on other
Nigerians from other parts of the country and threaten fire and brimstone to
protect your interest as an Ijaw man is myopic and your not openly quieting
them is even more unfortunate.
Two
Ijaw men, ex-militant Mujahid Dokubo-Asari, and a former federal commissioner
for information, Edwin Clark, who carries himself around as the political
godfather of the president, are known to talk down on people opposed to the
president.
Mr.
Obasanjo also accused Mr. Jonathan of placing over 1000 Nigerians on political
watch list and “training snipers and other armed personnel secretly and
clandestinely acquiring weapons to match for political purposes like Abacha and
training them where Abacha trained his killers”.
He
wondered why the Presidency was providing assistance for a murderer to evade
justice.
“Presidential
assistance for a murderer to evade justice and presidential delegation to
welcome him home can only be in bad taste generally but particularly to the
family of his victim,” Mr. Obasanjo said. “Assisting criminals to evade justice
cannot be part of the job of the presidency. Or, as it is viwed in some
quarters, is he being recruited to do for you what he had done for Abacha in
the past? Hopefully, he should have learned his lesson. Let us continue to
watch.”
Mr.
Obasanjo did not mention the name of the murderer he accused the President of
protecting but he seems to be referring to Hamza Al-Mustapha, a former security
aide to late Head of State, General Sani Abacha, who is facing trial for
allegedly masterminding the killing of Kudirat Abiola, the wife of Moshood
Abiola, the winner of the annulled 1993 presidential election.
Mr.
Al-Mustapha was freed by the appeal court in July but the Lagos state
government has since appealed the judgment at the Supreme Court.
The
former President also called on the National Assembly to rise up and take
decisive action over the recent allegation in the country that the Nigerian
National Petroleum Corporation failed to remit billions of dollars in proceeds
of crude oil sales to the federation account.
“This
allegation will not fly away by non-action, cover-up, denial or bribing
possible investigators,” Mr. Obasanjo told the President. “Please deal with
this allegation transparently and let the truth be known.
“The
dramatis personae in this allegation and who they are working for will one day
be public knowledge. Those who know are watching if the National Assembly will
not be accomplice in the heinous crime and naked grand corruption. May God
grant you the grace for at least one effective corrective action against high
corruption which seems to stink all around you in your government.”
Mr.
Obasanjo said he wrote the letter in the national interest, saying nothing, at
this stage of his life, would prevent him from standing up for whatever he
considers to be in the best interest of Nigeria, Africa and the world.
He
said he was ready for whatever backlash his letter would provoke from the
presidency.
“Knowing
what happens around you most of which you know of and condone or deny, this
letter will proke cacophony from hired and unhired attackers but I will
maintain my serenity because by this letter, I have done my duty to you as I
have always done, to your government, to the party, PDP, and to our country,
Nigeria…,” Mr. Obasanjo said.
“I
have passed the stage of being flattered, intimidated, threatened, frightened,
induced or bought… Death is the end of all human beings and may it come when
God wills it to come.”
SHARE THIS POST
Designer: Emeka
Tuesday, 3 December 2013
ASUU TO FG - "WHAT WE WANT THE FG TO DO BEFORE THE STRIKE CAN END BY ASUU NATIONAL PRESIDENT
PRESS STATEMENT
If you look at the Government’s paper of 6 November, 2013, it
states that the Federal Government shall provide N200billion in 2013. ASUU’s
letter to the President does not change that agreement.
1.
Introduction
On Monday 4th
November, 2013, the leadership of our Union had a meeting with a government
team led by the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Dr. Goodluck
Ebele Jonathan. The meeting was necessary because all the previous government
teams (separately led by the Minister of Education, Gov. Gabriel Suswam, the
Minister of Labour and Productivity, Secretary to the Government of the
Federation and by the Vice President) had failed to address the requests made
by our Union ASUU to implement the 2009 Agreement in accordance with the 2012
Roadmap, and to commence the process of review of the said Agreement
thereafter.
Gentlemen of the
Press, the benefits of implementing the 2009 Agreement have been articulated
severally in a number of addresses I made. Suffice to restate again that the
objectives of the 2009 Agreement are:
i. To reverse the
decay in the University System, in order to reposition it for greater
responsibilities in national development;
ii. To reverse the
brain drain, not only by enhancing the remuneration of academic staff, but also
by disengaging them from the encumbrances of a unified civil service wage
structure;
iii. To restore
Nigerian Universities, through immediate, massive and sustained financial
intervention; and,
iv. To ensure genuine
University autonomy and academic freedom.
These
objectives were made even more potent by the findings of Government Committee
on the Needs Assessment of Nigerian Universities in 2012. The shocking findings
of that Committee should make any serious government thoroughly ashamed of its
colossal failings.
At the
end of the meeting with President Jonathan, a message was given by the
government to the members of ASUU nationwide. Branches deliberated and debated
on the message and gave their responses to the National leadership of the Union.
These responses were articulated by the National Executive Council (NEC) of
ASUU and sent to President Jonathan through the supervising Minister of
Education.
Gentlemen
of the Press, since the issuance of the Union’s response to the said letter,
the salvos that have been coming out, allegedly from the Minister of Education
makes one to wonder whether the person that is charged with the responsibility
of superintending over the Nigeria’s Education system has the wherewithal to
handle such a vital national assignment. It is my intention this afternoon,
therefore, to clear the air on the rumours, lies and mischiefs that are milling
out of government circle (especially from Ministry of Education and National
Universities Commission), all with the intent of misleading the Nigerian
public. I will therefore speak to the letter from government and the
yet-to-be-replied response of our Union. I will establish, to all discerning
minds, that ASUU did not bring any ‘new conditions’ as claimed by the Minister
of Education and the Senior Special Assistant to the President on Public
Affairs, Mr Doyin Okupe. Rather, it is government that is trying to avoid
taking responsibility.
The
Letter from Government to ASUU
The
letter from the Government was communicated by the Federal Ministry of
Education, ref. FME/TE/SS.IM/C.I/1/99 and was titled “Resolutions reached at
the meeting between Federal Government and
Representatives of the Academic Staff Union of University (ASUU)” The content of that letter was not the judgment of a court: it was not, and could not be properly taken as conveying the words of a commander who must be obeyed.
Representatives of the Academic Staff Union of University (ASUU)” The content of that letter was not the judgment of a court: it was not, and could not be properly taken as conveying the words of a commander who must be obeyed.
Government’s
communication was as follows:
1.
“That the Federal Government is irrevocably committed to the overall
improvement in the quality of education especially at the tertiary level in the
country.
2.
That there is an overarching need to find a lasting solution to the challenges
facing university education in the country through the development of
sustainable, affordable and implementable strategies that are within the
revenue profile of government.
3.
Arising from the above understanding, it was further noted with particular
emphasis on funding that:
(a)
Nigerian Universities must be revitalised for effective service delivery.
(b)
All the provisions in the extant agreement/MoU for the revitalisation of the
University system shall be fully implemented as captured in the 2012 Needs
Assessment Report.
(c)
Federal Government shall mobilise resources towards this goal.
4. In
view of the above understanding the following resolutions were reached:
i.
Federal Government shall provide funds for the revitalisation of the University
system in the following manner in the next six years
S/N0
|
Year
|
Amount(billion) Naria
|
1
|
2013
|
200
|
2
|
2014
|
220
|
3
|
2015
|
220
|
4
|
2016
|
220
|
5
|
2017
|
220
|
6
|
2018
|
220
|
Total
|
6 years
|
1.3 trillion
|
ii. A
dedicated revitalisation account shall be opened at the CBN by Federal
Government. Funds shall be paid into [sic] on a quarterly basis from which the
Universities will draw. Federal Government shall ensure that these funds will
be ring-fenced.
iii.
That a central monitoring committee shall be established in addition to monitor
the implementation of the revitalisation of the university and shall submit
quarterly report to the Minister of Education.
iv.
Earned allowances: It was agreed that the Implementation Monitoring Committee
(IMC) shall monitor and verify the level of payment already made from the 30
billion Naira released by Government and report back on the exact situations in
the Universities on this matter. Federal Government undertakes to pay the
outstanding balance after the verification report for the period 2009 to 2012.
Furthermore a practicable and affordable strategy will be put in place to
mainstream the payment of earned allowances in the University system.
v.
Government is willing to engage the services of the universities in special
consultancy series such as geological/solid minerals survey, biotechnology,
environmental impact assessment, shelter belt and mineral mapping amongst
others to boost the IGR base of the Universities.
vi.
That FGN requests that ASUU shall within 7 days call off its four month strike
action.
vii.
The above resolutions were reached in good faith by all the stakeholders that
attended this crucial meeting.”
In the
ordinary meaning of the word “resolution” the government’s letter was not a
resolution. The document was a report of Government’s understanding of the
decisions or agreement reached on the matters discussed with ASUU. Neither side
had a final authority on the correct wording or substance of the agreement
reached. The title of Government’s letter “RESOLUTIONS REACHED AT THE MEETING
BETWEEN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ACADEMIC STAFF UNION OF
UNIVERSITIES (ASUU) . . . showed quite clearly that there were two sides. The
agreement between the two sides would be the legitimate resolution of any
issue. Furthermore, representatives of both sides must sign the document of
resolution to make it valid for both sides. This is why ASUU, in its reply to
Government’s letter, insisted that ASUU and the Federal Government should sign
the document of Resolutions. It is not an added new issue. It is a simple,
required procedure, to be strengthened by some witness in whom both sides had
confidence. This is not only reasonable but required in the resolution of
conflicts. Whether the Minister of Education understands it or not is another
matter which we shall not address here.
The
Reply of ASUU to Government’s Letter
1. The
process leading to ASUU’s reply
The
letter from the Government, signed by Dr. Mac John Nwaobiala, was delivered at
ASUU National Secretariat on 6th November, 2013. ASUU had made it clear to
Government through the Minister of Education, and at the meetings held with
Government’s representative, that our Union does not have an EXECUTIVE
PRESIDENT who has the power to decide for the Union on crucial matters,
including and especially on trade disputes and strikes. Similarly, the internal
democracy of our Union does not permit the Principal Officers to make decisions
on Union matters of trade disputes without advice from the National Executive
Council. Allowing branches to meet, advise and take positions is the only way
we know how to run a democratic organisation.
2. The
content of ASUU’s reply
Here
is the relevant portion of ASUU’s reply to government’s letter, as contained in
Union’s letter of 22nd November, 2013 signed by Nasir F. Isa, President of
ASUU:
“On
behalf of NEC I hereby convey the Union’s appreciation of the expressed concern
of Your Excellency to bring an end to the crisis occasioned by the poor
implementation of the 2009 Agreement and the 2012 Memorandum of Understanding
(MoU) arising therefrom through your personal intervention.
NEC
would have taken a definitive decision on ending the strike, especially in view
of Your Excellency’s intervention but for certain uncertainties, the clearance
of which would have been decisive in making the relevant decision. These
uncertainties involve issues on which ASUU members nationwide have strong
feelings. They are about certain gaps evident in Government’s report as
presented to our Union.
Specifically,
our members are requesting that Your Excellency facilitates the resolution of
the issues as a way of concretising their understanding of the agreed
positions. This will involve the following:
(a)
That the N200 billion agreed upon as 2013 Revitalisation Fund for public
universities shall be deposited with the CBN and disbursed to the benefitting
universities within two weeks.
(b)
That the renegotiation of the 2009 Agreement in 2014 be included in the final
document as agreed at the discussion with Your Excellency.
(c)
That a Non-victimisation clause which is normally captured in all interactions
of this nature be included in the final document and
(d)
That a new Memorandum of Understanding shall be validly endorsed, signed by a
representative of government, preferably the Attorney General of the Federation
and a representative of ASUU, with the President of the Nigeria Labour Congress
(NLC) as a witness.
Your
Excellency please be assured that the Union is willing to do all that is
needful to resolve the lingering crisis as soon as the expressed observations
of our members are addressed.
Thank
you
Yours
in the struggle
Naisr
F. Isa, Ph.D
President”
JUSTIFICATION
OF ASUU’S REQUEST TO THE PRESIDENT
1. The
request to disburse the N200 billion agreed in 2013 within two weeks
If you
look at the Government’s paper of 6 November, 2013, it states that the Federal
Government shall provide N200billion in 2013. ASUU’s letter to the President
does not change that agreement. The National Executive Committee (NEC) of
ASUU’s position, conveyed to His Excellency Dr. Goodluck Ebele Jonathan through
the Minister of Education only said the following: “Our members are suggesting
that “the N200 billion agreed upon as 2013 Revitalisation fund for public
universities should be deposited in the CBN and disbursed to the benefitting
universities within two weeks.”
Upon
any sincere stretch of interpretation, it would be unreasonable to suggest that
this is a new demand. ASUU NEC’s position that the funds for revitalisation due
to universities in 2013 should be released within the first two weeks of
December 2013 is not a new demand. It is a sensible suggestion to guard against
implementation failure.
2. The
Renegotiation of the Agreement in 2014
There
was an agreement at the interaction with the President of Nigeria that the
Renegotiation of the ASUU/FGN Agreement of 2009 shall be undertaken in 2014.
ASUU’s position that this shall be included in the “Resolutions” is a correct
report of what actually transpired and was agreed upon, and should be
reconsidered. This is important, especially in view of the fact that this
agreement took place at the meeting with the President and was pointed out to
staff of the Ministry of Education who were recording the agreements. ASUU’s
asking the restoration of that agreement in government’s letter to the Union is
not a new demand but only a demand to put the records right.
3. The
Non-Victimisation Clause
The
resolution to end a strike since 1980s, has always included the provision that
no one would be victimised for participating in the strike in question. This is
the position of the International Labour Organisation: No one should be
penalised for carrying out or attempting to carry out a legitimate strike”
(1996 Digest of the Decision and Principles of the freedom of Association
Committee of the Governing Body of the ILO fifth (revised) edition, 2006
paragrph 590; 302 and report case NO 1849, para 211, 307th Report, case NO
1890, para 372; 310th Report Case NO 1932, para 515; 311th Report, Case NO
1937, para 211 318th Report, Case NO 1978, para. 218; 321st Report, Case NO
205th Para 137, 624th Report, Case NO 2072; para 587; 326th Report; Case NO
2091, Para 154; 331st Report Case NO 1937/2027, para 105, and 333rd Report,
Case NO 2164, para 608.”
The
Minister of Education needs to consult the ILO which has ruled that:
“Respect
for the principles of freedom of association requires that workers should not
be dismissed or refused employment on account of their having participated in a
strike or other Industrial action.” (ILO, Freedom of Association Digest, 2006;
603)
“Imposing
sanctions on unions for leading a legitimate strike is a gross violation of the
principles of Freedom of association” (658)
“The
closure of trade union offices, as a consequences of a legitimate strike, is a
violation of the principles of freedom of association” (652).
These
positions of the ILO are domesticated in the Labour Act section 9 vi which
states “No contract shall –
(a)
make it a condition of employment that a worker shall not join a trade union or
shall not relinquish membership of a trade union; or
(b)
Cause the dismissal of, or otherwise prejudice a worker –
(i) By
reason of trade union membership; or
(ii)
Because of trade activities outside working hours or, with the consent of the
employer, within working hours.
ASUU’s
invoking of the non-victimisation clause, rather than being an introduction of
a new demand, is a commonplace ILO position which Government ought to know, as
Nigeria is a signatory to the relevant ILO Convention NO 87 and 98 of the ILO.
It is also the position of the Nigerian Labour Act. The Minister of Education
ought to know that this is so. It is not a new demand.
4. Why
ASUU insists on a validly endorsed Memorandum of Understanding
As we
have shown, the proper way to go is not to take the position of, or
understanding by one party to the dispute, either ASUU’s or government’s to be
the resolution of the issues. The legitimate procedure is that both sides
should sign a resolution showing what was agreed and what was not. Resolution
of a dispute is not a favour done by one side to the other. But this is how the
Minister of Education expects ASUU to take it. He would want ASUU to accept
that Government was doing ASUU a favour. This is wrong.
Second,
the on-going crisis was exacerbated when one side to the dispute – Government,
represented by the Secretary to the Federal Government announced to the public
and ASUU that the 2012 Memorandum of Understanding (a document authorised by
himself) was not binding on Government since it was signed by a Permanent
Secretary and was, therefore, a mere promise and a non-binding piece of paper.
The valid endorsement of agreed Resolutions by both sides is a sine qua non for
a just and a lasting resolution of the present dispute. It is a universal
position, not a new demand.
5.
Deliberate lies and misinterpretation
i. The
Lying Pro-Chancellor
We
have observed that there are individual role players who serve governments and
who have clearly less than honest intention, and consequently violate the
principle of truth-telling, when presenting ASUU’s positions to government. One
such person is a Pro-Chancellor who told the President of Nigeria that the
University of Uyo shared the money sent by government to the University as
earned allowances – to all staff and still had enough to return to the
Government. We found that this person lied.
We
have also received the information that this same person as Pro-Chancellor
informed Government that 60% of ASUU branches voted for and 40% voted against
suspending the strike unconditionally.
But
here is the truth: of the Fifty-two (52) branches of ASUU, forty-eighty (48),
roughly 92% advised conditional suspension of the strike i.e, suspending the
strike only if certain conditions are met, and four (4) advised suspension of
the strike before pursuing the implementation of certain conditions.
The
truth is that if a liar of the kind we have discovered occupies an important
position among Pro-Chancellors, should anyone expect honest leadership in times
of crisis in the University system? This is a fundamental problem that needs to
be addressed and we invite the public and government to address it.
ii.
The Minister of Education’s misrepresentation
From
all the evidence, it is clear that ASUU has not made any new demands. First,
asking the government to implement its agreement to provide N200 billion in
2013 in two weeks is not a new demand. Pointing out that the President and ASUU
agreed that the 2009 Agreement will be renegotiated in 2014, and re-asserting
it because the letter from the Ministry of Education omitted it, is not a new
demand. The inclusion of the non-victimisation clause is a universal practice.
And ASUU’s insistence that the resolutions accepted by both sides be signed by
both sides is not a new demand but a requirement of all agreements.
6. The
Sack Threat and the Return of Fascism
The
threat to sack all lecturers for exercising their right to strike was made in
1993-1996 by the Generals Babangida and Abacha regimes. Professor Ben Nwabueze,
who was the Minister of Education in General Babangida’s regime and who was
instrumental to the military assault on the right of Nigerians to strike, is
still alive. It is unfortunate that close to twenty years of national life have
not taught politicians and their government the simple lesson that the job of
lecturers is bound by the University statutes, which stipulate conditions for
employment, promotions and dismissal of lecturers at all levels. There are, at
present, in Nigeria over thirty thousand (30,000) academic staff, each of whom
has certain rights that cannot be pronounced away by any government or
Minister. That a Minister of Education would pronounce a threat of mass sack of
academic staff is a tragedy of huge proportion for Nigeria and Africa. While
ASUU has been struggling for conditions in which Nigerian students would
benefit from a very much enhanced academic environment in teaching and research
facilities, the Minister of Education is thinking of a thoughtless mass sack as
a solution to the problems arising from Government’s non-implementation of an
Agreement reached with ASUU as if Nigerian rulers have made no intellectual
progress since Abacha!
To be
clear: Nigerian lecturers – from Graduate Assistants to Professors, are not
begging anybody for jobs. It is now well known that since 2003, successive
governments have told the Nigerian people, repeatedly, that the solution to
Nigeria’s social and economic crises is to kill public economic and educational
institutions and institute the reign of private control of the economy and
education, whereas the Constitution of Nigeria states clearly that the
Commanding Heights of Nigeria’s economy shall be publicly owned. The President
of Nigeria in 2003, General Obasanjo told ASUU that the solution to Nigeria’s
University crisis is massive privatisation. From all indication the Minister of
Education, on behalf of the present Government, assisted without shame by NUC,
and on behalf of Government, is set to carry out in the sphere of education
what one of its predecessors did with Universities, Transcorps, and the
Airways. The way is being paved for privatisation of education. Academic staff
have a duty to defend the right of Nigerians to sound public education. To
succumb to the present threat by the Minister of Education on behalf of
Government is to give up on Nigeria. We in the academic profession have no such
intention.
We
resisted Abacha’s dictatorship. We refused to succumb to Obasanjo/IMF attempts
to weaken public in favour of private universities. We convinced Yar’Adua to
keep faith with the interests of Nigeria’s youth and desist from privatising
education. We remember Obasanjo’s position that the solution to ASUU’s
resistance is to flood Nigeria with private Universities.
In
spite of all these, stretching from ASUU’s principled resistance since the
military, we have noticed with disgust how easy it is for ministers and
governments to take refuge in political blackmail. We shall never succumb to
this. Our country is our Union’s constituency.
Nigerians
should ask the Minister of Education – why did the Government not respond to
ASUU’s letter expressing the Union’s understanding of the “Resolutions” of 4th
November 2013? Why did the Minister of Education choose to go public to accuse
ASUU of introducing new demands without first replying ASUU NEC’s response to
the letter from the Ministry of Education? Did he reply ASUU’s letter to
express objections to ASUU’s understanding of government’s position before
going to public with gross misinterpretation and ignorance of well-known trade
union laws and practices? The answer is No!, No!!, No!!!. The malice is clear.
We now invite you to look at the facts.
According
to the Needs Assessment Reports, here are the needs of Nigerian public
universities for academic staff:
•
There is a total of 37,504 teaching staff across all Nigerian Universities
• The
majority of the universities are grossly understaffed
•
Generally speaking, teaching staff distribution in the country, both by
qualification and by rank indicates that Nigeria’s university system is in
crisis of manpower. Instead of having not less than 80% of the academics with
Ph.Ds only about 43% are Ph.D holders. And instead of having about 75% of
academics to be between Senior Lecturers and Professors only about 44% are
within the bracket while the remaining 56% are not.
•
Gross inadequate number of teaching staff compared to student population
resulting in the production of ‘educated illiterates’ that lack the requisite
skills and training to bring about the much needed development in the country
as well as to take over the mantle of leadership of the country in future.
Recommendation
•
Given the inadequacy of teaching staff in the university system, it is
recommended that government shall have a deliberate policy of improving the
national teacher-student ratio to 1:20 within the next two years. Using the
present figures of students’ enrolment; this translates to increasing the
number of full-time academic staff in Nigerian universities to 50,000. This
means the recruitment of additional 23,000 lecturers on the basis of 50:50
ratio between the Federal and State universities.
Does
or does not the Minister of Education know all these? If he does not, that is
disastrous. If he does, how serious should Nigerians take a Minister who
possesses all this information yet believes he can subdue academics by threat
of sack? Where does he want to get them from? How many foreign lecturers does
he hope to recruit with the Conditions of Service in Nigeria, with the
knowledge that they can be sacked arbitrarily? ASUU will welcome Nigerians
abroad to come back and join the academic development of Nigerian universities.
This will be in fit with ASUU’s struggles to reverse the brain drain. Let the
Minister of Education find thousands of them to replace those he wants to sack.
We
shall bow only to what we as academics are convinced will serve the interest of
Nigeria and its people, no matter their ethnic, religious or class origins.
This is where we stand. We shall never be cowed.
We
call on all Nigerians who care about our country, all men and women of good
will, to prevail on government to do what is just and noble as its present
approach will only compound the deepening yet avoidable crises.
Thank
you.
Nasir
F. Isa, Ph.D
President,
for and on behalf of ASUU
2-12-2013
SHARE THIS POST
Designer: Emeka
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
0 comments: