It’s not anymore news that on 18th
April 2016, upon request by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC),
the former Senior Special Assistant (SSA) to ex-President Goodluck Jonathan on
Domestic Affairs in the person of Mr. Waripamowei Dudafa was arrested at the
Murtala Mohammed International Airport Lagos State by the Nigerian Security
Operatives – DSS, over alleged Money Laundering, while attempting to travel out
of the country, having evaded arrest on several occasions.
It was
gathered that the aide was on the anti-graft agency’s wanted-list for his
alleged involvement in the sharing of #10 billion to delegates during the
December 2014 presidential primaries of the then ruling People’s Democratic
Party (PDP). Mr. Dudafa allegedly converted the money into US dollars,
amounting to $47 million, and distributed it among delegates from the 36 states
alongside the Federal Capital Territory (FCT). Investigations revealed that the
fund was part of the alleged $2 billion meant for the purchase of arms but
which authorities said was shared as slush funds by politicians via the office
of the former National Security Adviser (NSA), Sambo Dasuki. It’s noteworthy
that the case in question is currently being entertained by the Federal High
Court in Lagos State.
Thereafter, in July, some discovered alleged
fraudulent bank accounts worth $31.4 million, linked to the defendant, were
frozen by the EFCC, upon court’s directive as claimed by the commission.
However, the former First lady Mrs. Patience Jonathan has claimed ownership of
the frozen accounts, stating that she was the sole signatory to the affected
accounts. On 6th September, she consequently, through her counsel,
demanded a court declaration that the respondents have breached her fundamental
human rights as a citizen of the Federal Republic of Nigeria by placing a No
Debit/Freezing Order on the accounts ‘without any court order’, or ‘serving any
prior notice’ to her, thus prayed for #200 million compensation.
In response to her fascinating claim, the
EFCC stated thus, ‘We did not know that the accounts belonged to Patience
Jonathan at the time we froze them. The accounts do not bear her name neither
do they carry her Bank Verification Number (BVN). So, how can she accuse us of
harassment?’ It would interest, perhaps shock you to acknowledge that the four
accounts in question, lodged with Skye Bank Plc, are reportedly in the name of
four different companies namely, Pluto Property and Investment Company Ltd.;
Seagate Property Development and Investment Company Ltd.; Trans Ocean Property
and Investment Company Ltd.; as well as Avalon Global Integrated Service Ltd.
Intriguingly, Mrs. Jonathan had since
2010 been reportedly using the credit cards of the accounts and operating them
without any hitch. According to the report, even in May, June and July 2016
respectively, she travelled abroad for medical treatment and was using the
cards over there, up till July 7 or thereabouts when the cards cease to
function, probably owing to the No Debit Order issued on the accounts.
Nevertheless, we have reliably learnt that the claimer has written the EFCC
amidst the ongoing court proceedings, precisely on 14th September
2016, ‘begging’ for the ban to be lifted, saying that $15 million out of the
$31.4 million in the controversial accounts were for the medical bills she
incurred in London, UK in 2013. Amazing; isn’t it?
Well, it’s worth noting that there are
fundamental matters arising from the ongoing melodrama scripted by the EFCC and
the ex-First Lady. First; why were the accounts opened in those companies’
names? Since it is claimed that the accounts possess a sole signatory, why then
were they opened with misleading names? Funnily enough, we have learnt that the
aforementioned firms lacked addresses; suffice it to say that their localities
were not tendered to the bank. We are not unaware that on no ground would a
domiciliary corporate account be opened without tendering tangible addresses.
So, how do we reconcile this?
Another pertinent inquiry is: why did
the claimer wait for over one month before filing a claim in the law court?
According to records, the accounts were frozen in the first week of July, but
she filed the claim in the Lagos High Court on September 6; the interval was
almost two months, or more, if I’m not mistaken. No matter the degree of the
consultations that were made prior to putting up the claim, the duration ought
not to have lasted so long, because such issue involving finance required an
urgent attention.
Among all, why would the claimer plead
with the EFCC to lift the ban/order while the court is still hearing her
appeal, thereby contradicting the ongoing prosecution? Besides, what kind of
medical treatment(s) would result to such amount of money? Though I’m just
thinking aloud, all the parties involved really need to look into this
complicating angle critically.
As much as I owe the ex-First Lady an explicit
respect, I would as well like her to comprehend fully that all eyes are on her
person as long as this melodrama lingers. I am strongly convinced that she’s
surrounded by many astute legal luminaries, hence I expect her to realize the
best comment to make at any given time, and how best to present it. That is one
of the rudimentary obligations of one’s lawyer, and not just filing cases at
the court of law on his/her behalf and awaiting a victory.
The EFCC, on its part, must equally be
very careful on how it handles the issue. Any sensitive matter in the public
domain requires not only experienced hands, but tactical and convincing
approach. We must note that Nigerians are keenly and dispassionately watching
the melodrama; and I bet you, they are willing to observe till the end. Think
about it!
Comr Fred Doc Nwaozor
(TheMediaAmbassador)-Public Affairs analyst & Civil Rights activist-
Chief Executive Director, Centre for Counselling, Research
& Career Development - Owerri
_____________________________________
frednwaozor@gmail.com
Twitter: @mediambassador 
No comments:
Post a Comment