Spokesman of the All Progressives Congress presidential campaign council, Festus Keyamo, has dragged President candidate of the leading opposition party, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar and some government agencies to court over the recent allegations of fraud.
Keyamo, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) wants the Federal High Court, Abuja to compel the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) to arrest/invite the former vice president for interrogation for alleged money laundering.
The minister who is relying on the public revelations of a whistleblower and former aide to Atiku, Mr. Michael Achimugu, jointly sued Atiku, the EFCC, ICPC and CCB.
His move followed the expiration of the 72-hour ultimatum he gave the anti-graft agencies to arrest, interrogate and prosecute the PDP flag bearer over the allegations.
The minister is praying the court to make a mandatory order compelling the anti-graft agencies to invite and/or arrest, investigate and (if found wanting) prosecute Atiku “in respect of a certain bank account belonging to a company named Marine Float and other accounts of two undisclosed companies, which information he disclosed to a certain close aide of his called Michael Achimugu, as to how the said accounts were used as ‘Special Purpose Vehicles’ to secretly divert and misappropriate public funds between 1999 and 2007 when the 1st Defendant served as Vice President of Nigeria.”
He is also asking for a mandatory order of the court to compel Atiku to make himself available to the anti-graft agencies “to aid and investigate the former Vice President on information available to him in respect of a certain bank account belonging to a company named Marine Float and other accounts of two undisclosed companies, which information he disclosed to a certain close aide of his called Michael Achimugu, as to how the said accounts were used as a “Special Purpose Vehicles” to secretly divert and misappropriate public funds between 1999 and 2007 when the 1st Defendant served as Vice President of Nigeria.”
No date has been fixed for the hearing of the suit.
Moments after filing the suit yesterday, Keyamo wrote on his Twitter handle: “I HAVE A RICH HISTORY OF SUCH BATTLES & I AM NOT STOPPING.”
He had on Monday petitioned the three agencies accusing the PDP candidate of four major infractions, and gave the agencies 72 hours to initiate arrest, investigation and possible prosecution.
He also addressed the press on the same day, saying: “Those SPVs were companies Atiku admittedly registered upon assumption of office as vice-president (with the approval of President Olusegun Obasanjo), using ‘trusted allies’ as shareholders and directors.
“The purpose was to divert government contracts to these companies as ‘consultants’ and then pay monies into these companies and use those monies to fund the PDP and their private businesses and family activities.
“We can all vividly recall that during that tenure, both President Obasanjo and Atiku Abubakar built the Bells University and American University respectively. Now, we know from where the funds came.”
He said that going by the oral account of the whistle-blower, the voice notes and all other supporting documents, Atiku had violated Sections 5, 10, 13 & 17 of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act which state as follows:
• A public officer shall not put himself in a position where his interest conflicts with his duties and responsibilities.
• A public officer shall not ask for or accept property or benefits of any kind for himself or any other person on account of anything done or omitted to be done by him in the discharge of his duties.
• For subsection (1) of this section, the receipt by a public officer of any gifts or benefits from commercial firms, business enterprises or persons who have contracts with the government shall be presumed to have been received in contravention of the said subsection (1) of this section, unless the contrary is proved.
• A public officer shall not do or direct to be done, in abuse of his office, any act prejudicial to the rights of any other person, knowing that such act is unlawful or contrary to any government policy.
• A public officer who does any act prohibited by this Act through a nominee, trustee or another agent shall be deemed ipso facto to have committed a breach of this Act.”
You must be logged in to post a comment Login