Why I would not honour House’s invitation – Alison-madueke

Allison-Madueke126 May 2014, Lagos – The Minister of Petroleum Resources, Mrs. Diezani Alison-Madueke, has given reasons why she would not honour the invitation by the House of Representatives Committee on Public Accounts, stating that the committee is yet to fulfill the conditions precedent for inviting public officers.

One of such conditions Alison-Madueke is insisting is that both chambers of the National Assembly are constitutionally required to show that they have passed a resolution duly published in their journal (Hansard) or in the official gazette of the Government of the Federation.

This and more conditions were contained in the new suit filed on behalf of the minister and the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) seeking to stop the House from probing the allegation that the corporation expended N10 billion leasing a private aircraft for the personal use of the minister and her family.

In an accompanying affidavit, the applicants (the minister and NNPC) stated: “The respondents have not in any, or all their invitations to the applicants, shown or displayed any such evidence of prior publication of any such resolution, if there was any.”

The minister and the NNPC stated further that they would not honour the invitation sent to them and other officials of agencies under them by the National Assembly because the legislature was yet to meet the conditions precedent to their honouring the invitation and producing the materials the lawmakers had requested.

They also asked the National Assembly to first seek and obtain the permission of President Goodluck Jonathan before proceeding with its planned investigation of the allegation that NNPC expended about N10 billion on hiring aircraft for Alison-Madueke’s use.

She argued that neither the National Assembly nor the various committees of the two chambers of the legislature could invite her and agencies under her ministry to produce unpublished documents and records without the prior consent of the president.

The minister also argued that it was not within the powers of the National Assembly to personally conduct investigations into criminal allegations relating to corruption or fraud in public offices, and that the lawmakers’ frequent invitation to public officers on spurious grounds was a distraction.

She contended that the lawmakers are only empowered under the constitution to exercise oversight functions over her ministry and agencies under its supervision “with respect to public funds, through their various committees so set up, which oversight is only for the purpose of enabling them to make laws and correct defects in existing laws.”

The minister added that where, in the course of performing their oversight functions, the lawmakers stumble on suspicious dealings by public officers, “they are constitutionally permitted to ‘direct or cause to be directed’, the appropriate authority or government agency to carry out the said investigation, and not to personally or physically carry same out as lawmakers.”

The minister said the various committees so set up by the respondents had since 1999, been engaged in the habit of inviting the applicants to attend one probe or investigation or the other, for purposes not remotely connected with the exercise of their oversight functions when they lack the constitutional powers to so do personally or physically by themselves.

She said: “By law, the respondents are enjoined to seek the consent of the president before ordering the applicants to tender the official unpublished papers, books, and records.

“All the documents being requested of the applicants by the respondents are unpublished official records, and the respondents in all their invitations have never shown to the applicants, any such evidence of presidential consent, after numerous demands made by the applicants that they do so.

“Under the thin guise of exercising their oversight functions, the respondents’ committees probe or conduct of investigations into matters exclusively pertaining to the applicants and agencies under them, that are not in any way remotely connected with the purpose of enabling the respondents make laws, or correct any defect in existing laws, or expose any inefficiency or corruption.

“Some of the invitations to the applicants and agencies under them relate to matters such as recruitment exercises carried out by the applicants, petitions by persons whose fathers’ pension or gratuity are alleged not to have been paid, petitions by persons or companies who lost out in contract biding processes and sometimes to matters as mundane as inviting the officials of the applicants to simply brief the respondents or their committees on the daily activities of the applicants.

“The applicants are therefore forced to spend time, energy, resources and materials appearing before the respondents and their committees, serially, indiscriminately in such a way that they are left with little or no time and energy to perform their statutory functions.

“The respondents are neither skilled nor legally empowered to conduct investigations into alleged criminal matters or alleged fraud or corruption, but have so far serially intimidated, brow-beaten and harassed the applicants under the thin guise of carrying out oversight functions.

“On a regular basis, too numerous to recount, the respondents equally investigate allegations of corrupt practices, fraud and other crimes, as well as issuing resolutions and reports pronouncing guilt on alleged offenders, as if the respondents were courts of law or security agencies, mandated to do so.”

Alison-Madeuke and NNPC asked the court to restrain the National Assembly and their agents from summoning them or any agencies under their supervision for the purpose of giving evidence and producing documents, which relate to the unpublished official records of the applicants, without the respondents first obtaining the consent of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

The minister and NNPC are also seeking a perpetual injunction restraining the respondents and their agents from further conducting direct personal or physical probes, inquiries and/or investigations into any alleged fraud, corruption or other criminal activities in the agencies under the applicant’s supervision or control.

They further asked for a declaration that by virtue of the provisions of the constitution, particularly Sections 88, 89 and 214 thereof, the respondents or any of their committees are not legally and constitutionally empowered and/or competent to probe or conduct investigations into allegations of fraud, corruption or other criminal activities said to have occurred in the agencies under the applicants’ control, when there exist agencies that are legally and constitutionally empowered to carry out or conduct such investigations into alleged fraud or other criminal conducts and prosecute offenders upon conclusion of their investigation.

However, the constitution, in Section 89 (d) permits the National Assembly to issue a warrant of arrest to anyone or group of persons who refuses to honour its invitation.



– This Day

About the Author