News
Outrage As FG Plans To Pay $100 Million Abacha Loot To Bagudu
There was a general feeling of indignation across the country on Friday over a report of alleged attempts by the Federal Government to hand over about $100 million that was stolen by a former Head of State, Gen. Sani Abacha, to Kebbi State Governor, Abubakar Bagudu, a top member of the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC.
A Bloomberg report said that a commitment by Nigeria to transfer the funds to Bagudu appeared to undermine President Muhammadu Buhari’s pledge to check corruption in the country.
It quoted the U.S. Department of Justice as saying that Bagudu was involved in corruption with Abacha, and contended that the Nigerian government is hindering U.S. efforts to recover allegedly laundered money it says was traced to Bagudu.
It added that the Buhari administration says a 17-year-old agreement entitles Bagudu to the funds and prevents Nigeria from assisting the U.S., according to recent filings from the District Court for the District of Columbia in Washington.
The disagreement, according to Bloomberg, may hamper future cooperation between Nigeria and the U.S. to recover money moved abroad by Abacha.
“This case illustrates how complex and contentious repatriating stolen assets to Nigeria can be,” Bloomberg quoted Matthew Page, an associate fellow at London-based Chatham House and former Nigeria Expert for U.S. intelligence agencies, as saying.
“Instead of welcoming U.S. efforts, Nigeria’s Lawyers appear to be supporting the interests of one of the country’s most powerful families,” he added.
Successive governments had made efforts to recover money looted by Abacha. In the case involving Bagudu, the U.S. in 2013 initiated a forfeiture action against a host of assets, including four investment portfolios held in London in trust for him and his family, according to the district court filings.
The U.S. Department of Justice said in a February 3 statement that Bagudu, 58, was part of a network controlled by Abacha that “embezzled, misappropriated and extorted billions from the government of Nigeria”.
According to the report, despite the forfeiture action being initiated following a request in 2012, the Buhari administration says it can’t assist the U.S. because it was bound by a settlement Bagudu reached with the administration of then-President Olusegun Obasanjo in 2003, according to the court filings.
Under the terms of that accord, which was approved by a U.K. court, Bagudu returned $163 million of allegedly laundered money to the Nigerian authorities, which in exchange dropped all outstanding civil and criminal claims against him “stemming from his involvement in government corruption,” according to a December 23 memorandum opinion by District Judge John D. Bates in Washington D.C.
That implies that Nigeria renounced any interest whatsoever in Bagudu’s trust assets, including those the U.S. is attempting to recover for the country, the report added.
Bagudu returned to Nigeria after concluding the settlement and was elected Senator in 2009. Six years later, he was voted Kebbi State Governor.
After Bagudu successfully sued Nigeria for violating the 2003 settlement, Buhari’s administration reached a new agreement with him in October 2018, according to the court filings. That would result in the transfer of ownership of the investment portfolios, worth 141 million euros ($155 million) to the Nigerian State, which would then pay 98.5 million euros to Bagudu and his affiliates, according to Bates’ Dec. 23 opinion. The funds are currently restrained by the U.K. at the request of the U.S.
Nigeria’s government claims the updated 2018 agreement with the Kebbi Governor, which requires court approval in the U.K., will curtail and mitigate its looming exposure” from the judgment in Bagudu’s favor.
The Buhari administration later submitted the 2018 deal to the U.K. Court in September to support its application to unfreeze the assets so they can be sent to Nigeria, according to the report, but the court has yet to make a decision.
Reacting to the development, Kebbi State Governor Abubakar Bagudu denied any wrong doing, saying he believed that the report was aimed at using the media to sensationalise the case while the U.S. authorities were using it as a ploy to confiscate recovery of the money by the Nigerian government, adding that the money was frozen in the UK and not the U.S.
He added that his name is only joined as an associate of the Abacha Government and though he signed an agreement with the Federal Government under former President Olusegun Obasanjo in 2003, up to 2013 none of his assets was frozen in Nigeria, and therefore he did not admit criminal liability.
According to a copy of the agreement obtained it says if at any stage Bagudu returned to Nigeria he would not be arrested and in case of any mistaken arrest unconditional bail would be granted him in respect of the Abuja proceedings, the amended Abuja proceedings, the delegated proceedings or any criminal proceedings existing or future relating to the resolved matters as in the principal agreement. The agreement was accompanied by a Presidential statement in respect of Global Settlements between Bagudu and his affiliates and the Federal Republic of Nigeria signed by former President, Olusegun Obasanjo, on August 18, 2003.
The letter listed Bagudu’s affiliates as David Liewellyn Jones, Smith and Tyres Limited, Robinson International, and AB’s wife, children, brothers and sisters. affiliates as David Liewellyn Jones, Smith and Tyres Limited, Robinson International, and AB’s wife, children, brothers and sisters.
The Presidency in a reaction to the report advised against any action that would complicate ongoing efforts to recover more money from abroad.
The Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media and Publicity, Garba Shehu, when contacted said the Embassy of the United States might be approached for any clarification on the agreement already reached by the three parties.
Shehu, in a text message said: “We have a lot more money to recover oversees and no one has the right to complicate things for the government of our country.
“The U.S. and the British crown dependency of Jersey have agreed with the President and government of Nigeria to repatriate $308 million connected to General Sani Abacha, the three governments said.
“By a decision of this government, the entire sum will be paid to the Nigerian Sovereign Investment Authority, NSIA, and will be used in expediting the construction of the three major infrastructure projects across Nigeria – namely Lagos – Ibadan Expressway, Abuja – Kano Expressway and the Second Niger Bridge.
“The position of the Buhari administration is still the same on this. The Embassy of the U.S. may be approached for any clarification on the agreement already reached by the three parties.”
The Executive Director, Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre, CISLAC, and the Nigeria Coordinator of Transparency International, TI, Auwal Musa Rafsanjani, said that it was a well-established fact that Bagudu assisted late General Abacha and his son to embezzle, misappropriate and extort billions from the government of Nigeria and others.
He said CISLAC is frustrated that the Nigerian government seemed to use a legal obstruction based on a 17-year-old agreement that entitles Bagudu to the funds and prevents Nigeria from assisting the U.S.
“It is scandalous that Buhari’s government refuses to assist the U.S. because it’s bound by a settlement Bagudu reached with the administration of then-President Olusegun Obasanjo in 2003, according to US court filings. If this case is not settled and Mr. Bagudu is allowed to enjoy his political privileges stemming from his prominent APC membership, the current administration will lose any credibility to demand the return of stolen assets from abroad.
“This whole episode confirms the political nature of the anti-corruption fight. US court filings reveal the extent and role of the current elite in the looting of Nigeria by Sani Abacha.
“Recovery of stolen assets abroad is potentially a windfall of much needed revenues for the stricken economy and unparalleled poverty. The government of Nigeria claims that international partners do not cooperate in investigation and repatriation of stolen assets,” Rafsanjani said.
According to him, the Bagudu case provides a reason for this lack of cooperation as the basic precondition of the preclusion of the benefit of offenders, or enjoying the looted funds by those that stole the assets, is not guaranteed in Nigeria.
He added that if no drastic action is taken, Nigerian government will sacrifice repatriation of potentially billions of dollars to maintain political protégés.
He said: “We therefore call on the government of Nigeria to further clarity this issue and clear doubt. Also government should ensure that we have a legal framework that will manage recovered assets and utility it for the benefit of Nigerians.”
On his part, the Executive Director, YIAGA Africa, Samson Itodo, a Lawyer, said that the Federal government’s action is double standard.
“It raises questions on the fight against corruption. It’s obvious there are separate rules for different category of persons. Once you have access to the President or in the President’s party you are shielded from prosecution.
“Actions like this not only ridicule us in the international community but it affirms the beliefs that Nigeria thrives on corruption and you can’t eradicate corruption in this country,” Itodo said.
Also, Oluwadare Kolawole, Deputy Director, Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, SERAP, said: “The Federal Government’s position, if true, will be inconsistent with its avowed commitment to fight corruption and recover all looted funds”.
The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) governorship candidate in the 2024 Edo election, Asue Ighodalo, has threatened to sue the state chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Jarrett Tenebe, over alleged defamation.
In a letter from the legal firm Banwo & Ighodalo, the PDP gubernatorial candidate accused Tenebe of making false and damaging statements in a widely circulated video against him.
Gatekeeper recalls that Tenebe, while reacting to the gaffe of Governor Monday Okpebholo during the presentation of the 2025 budget to the state assembly, had accused Ighodalo of stealing billions.
Governor Okpebholo, who appeared before the Edo State House of Assembly on Tuesday, had struggled to read the total sums of the state budget estimate.
The governor, after several attempts to pronounce the figure, said it was confusing him, a comment that drew laughter.
The governor’s gaffe subsequently trended on social media platforms, with many users expressing diverse opinions.
In the video Tenebe released about the incident, he said Obaseki and Ighodalo would not have made such a mistake because they had stolen billions before.
Responding to the circulated video, Ighodalo gave Tenebe seven days to issue a full retraction, a public apology, and assurances that no further defamatory comments would be made.
Activist politician, Omoyele Sowore on Friday described Nigeria as a paradise for thieves.
Sowore was commenting on the reaction within the courtroom of the Federal High Court in Abuja, after former Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Bello, was granted bail.
The Abuja Federal High Court had granted Bello bail in the sum of N500 million with two sureties in like sum.
This was after Bello pleaded not guilty to the 19-count charge brought against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC.
Bello has been slammed with an N80 billion money laundering charge.
When the case was called for hearing, EFCC’s counsel, Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, notified the court of the intention of the prosecution to withdraw an earlier application for abridgement of the earlier date fixed for arraignment.
He said the application had been overtaken by events. Bello’s counsel, Joseph Daudu, SAN, did not object and Justice Emeka Nwite accordingly granted the request.
After Bello had taken his plea, Daudu made clarifications on the reasons he had not been in court during the previous hearings.
Eventually, Justice Nwite granted the former governor bail in the sum of N500 million.
Reacting, Sowore lamented that Bello became a hero within the courtroom after the judge granted him bail.
Posting on X, Sowore wrote: “Yahaya Bello is granted bail and is the instant hero in the courtroom! Just loot enough to bankrupt the poor and enrich the elites; you then become the hero of the poor and the rich. NIGERIA is a paradise for thieves.”
President Bola Tinubu, Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, and Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, have been dragged before a Federal High Court in Abuja over the alleged unlawful removal of Justice Danladi Umar as Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).
The President and 10 others were sued by two civil society groups, Community Rescue Initiative and Toro Concerned Citizens Relief Foundation, as well as an Abuja based lawyer, Comrade Nasir Bala.
The three plaintiffs are praying the court to restrain the Clerk of the National Assembly from transmitting to Tinubu, the concurrent resolution of the Senate and House of Representatives which removed Umar as Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal.
They are also praying the court to stop the President from giving effect to the resolution of the two chambers of the National Assembly, on the grounds that clear provisions of the law, especially the 1999 Constitution, were not followed in the purported removal of the CCT boss.
Among others, the plaintiffs are seeking seven declarative reliefs against the President and the other defendants.
The suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1796/2024, was instituted on behalf of the plaintiffs by Mahmoud M. Maidoki Esq., A.G Salisu Esq., Jibrin S. Jibrin Baq., and Abubakar S. Idris Bag.
In faulting the action of the National Assembly, the plaintiffs asked the Federal High Court to determine the following:
“Whether by virtue of the provisions of Sections 1(1) and (3) , 6(5), 153 (1) (e) & (i) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) as well as Paragraph 13 (a) (vii) and (b) of the Third Schedule thereof, the purported removal of the chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal by the 4th Defendant is illegal, void, unconstitutional and of no effect whatsoever same having been made pursuant to the provisions of section 157 (1) of the 1999 Constitution or any other law for that matter.
“Whether by virtue of the provisions of Sections 1(1) and (3) , 6(5), 153 (1) (e) & (i) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) as well as Paragraph 13 (a) (vii) and (b) of the Third Schedule thereof, the purported concurrence by the 6” Defendant with the decision/resolution of the 4 Defendant purportedly removing the chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal taken at 4th Defendant’s plenary of the 20th November 2024 or any other date for that matter which said concurrence was taken at the 6th Defendant’s Plenary of 26th November 2024 is illegal, void, unconstitutional and of no effect whatsoever same having been founded on a faulty legal foundation and in breach/violation of section 22 (3) of the Code of Conduct Bureau & Tribunal Act and paragraph 17 (3) of the 5th Schedule of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).
“Whether by virtue of the provisions of Paragraph 17 (1) of the 5th Schedule to the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), Section 20 (1) and (4) of the Code of Conduct Bureau & Tribunal Act and the subsistence of the occupation of the office of the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal by Hon. Justice Danladi Yakubu Umar, the purported appointment and subsequent confirmation of the 10th or 11th Defendants into the same office by the 1st and 4th Defendants, respectively, is illegal, void, unconstitutional and of no effect same having been done in clear breach of the applicable provisions of the 1999 Constitution (Supra) and the Code of Conduct and Tribunal Act (Supra).
“Whether the purported removal of the chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal in the person of Hon. Justice Danladi Yakubu Umar as done by the 4th Defendant based on the motion and submission founded by distinguished Senator Opeyemi Bamidele during its plenary of 20th November 2024 and the subsequent concurrence by the 6th Defendant on 26th November, 2024 at its plenary has occasioned/amounted to a breach of Section 36(1) and Section 6 (5) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) as the allegations of misconduct among others which formed the basis of the resolution/decision in issue has not been proved/established in the manner prescribed by law.”
The plaintiffs noted that if the above questions are answered in the affirmative, the court should declare
that by virtue of the provisions of Sections 1(1) and (3), 6(6), 153 (1) (e) & (i) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) as well as Paragraph 13 (a) (vii) and (b) of the Third Schedule thereof, the purported removal of the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal by the 4th Defendant is illegal, void, unconstitutional and of no effect whatsoever, same having been made pursuant to the provisions of section 157 (1) of the 1999 Constitution or any other law for that matter.
Other declarations and orders sought by the plaintiffs are:
“A DECLARATION that by virtue of the provisions of Sections 1(1) and (3), 6(6), 153 (1) (e) & (i) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) as well as Paragraph 13 (a) (vii) and (b) of the Third – Schedule thereof, the purported concurrence by the 6th Defendant with the decision/resolution of the 4th Defendant purportedly removing the chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal taken at 4tj Defendant’s plenary of the 20th November 2024 or any other date for that matter which said concurrence was taken at the 6th Defendant’s Plenary of 26th November 2024 is illegal, void, unconstitutional and of no effect whatsoever same having been founded on a faulty legal foundation and in breach/violation of section 22 (3) of the Code of Conduct Bureau & Tribunal Act and paragraph 17 (3) of the 5® Schedule of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).
“A DECLARATION that by virtue of the provisions of Paragraph 17 (1) of the 5th Schedule to the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), Section 20 (1) and (4) of the Code of Conduct Bureau & Tribunal Act and the subsistence of the occupation of the office of the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal by Hon. Justice Danladi Yakubu Umar, the purported appointment and subsequent confirmation of the 10th or 11th Defendants into the same office by the 1st and 4th Defendants, respectively, is illegal, void, unconstitutional and of no effect same having been done in clear breach of the applicable provisions of the 1999 Constitution (Supra) and the Code of Conduct and Tribunal Act (Supra).
“A DECLARATION that the purported removal of the chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal in the person of Hon. Justice Danladi Yakubu Umar as done by the 4’th Defendant based on the motion and submission founded by distinguished Senator Opeyemi Bamidele during its plenary of 20th November 2024 and the subsequent concurrence by the 6th Defendant on 26th November, 2024 at its plenary has occasioned/amounted to a breach of Section 36(1) and Section 6 (6) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) as the allegations of misconduct among others which formed the basis of the resolution/decision in issue has not been proved/established in the manner prescribed by law.
“AN ORDER restraining the 7th Defendant from communicating the resolution’ of the 4th and 6th Defendants removing the chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal in person of Hon. Justice Danladi Yakubu Umar to the 1st Defendant the removal having been done without following the due process of law.
“AN ORDER restraining the 8th and 9th Defendants from considering any person including the 10th or 11th Defendant for appointment by the 1st Defendant and subsequent confirmation by the 4th and 6th Defendants during, the subsistence of term of office of Hon. Justice Danladi Yakubu Umar.”
Meanwhile Justice James Omotosho, who is to adjudicate in the matter, has ordered that the process in respect be served by substituted means through pasting at the notice board of the court, the APC secretariat and Office of Secretary to the Government of the Federation.
The court further adjourned the suit to January 14, 2025, for hearing.
Alleged defamation: Ighodalo threatens to sue Edo APC Chairman
Yahaya Bello: Nigeria a paradise of thieves – Sowore
Tinubu, AGF, Akpabio dragged to court over removal of CCT chair, Danladi Umar
-
Politics1 week ago
Those indicted for attacks on Rivers LG secretariats won’t go free – Fubara vows
-
News1 week agoAlleged fraud: Pastor Tobi Adegboyega won’t be deported to Nigeria, not indicted – UK lawyer
-
Sports1 week agoEPL: Why Man Utd lost 2-0 to Arsenal – Amorim
-
Entertainment1 week agoAsake ranked most streamed Nigerian artiste on Spotify
-
Business4 days agoWhy Naira is appreciating massively against dollar – CPPE
-
Opinions1 week ago10 ways the Tax Bills will make states richer
-
News2 days agoUS issues new visa directive for immigrant visa applicants
-
News4 days ago‘Do not increase rents’ – Gov Sanwo-Olu tells Lagos landlords