The Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mr. Ibrahim Magu, has begun the process of restoring absolute discipline and professionalism to the foremost anti-graft agency, with the arrest of a director of the commission.
New Telegraph’s investigation revealed that, apart from the arrest of the director, some senior and other lower cadre officials of the commission have also been taken into custody, over cases of alleged unethical practices.
Specifically, the senior management staff and others are alleged to have been involved in “unauthorised leakages of official information” and such other unethical tendencies. The action of the officials, New Telegraph gathered, which is said to offend their oath of allegiance, was said to have led to damaging reports against the commission, in the past.
It was further learnt that a dismissed operative is also in custody.
According to a source at the EFCC, “Facts available show that those taken in (allegedly) operated as a syndicate, with a motive. “In fact, investigation is still ongoing, and there is the possibility that more arrests of those found wanting, may be effected,” the source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said. Magu, known as a stickler for discipline and professionalism, was appointed on November 9 by President Muhammadu Buhari, to replace Mr. Ibrahim Lamorde, who has since proceeded on terminal leave.
An Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP), Magu was the Head of the Economic Governance Unit (EGU) of the EFCC. Also, the immediate past chairman of the EFCC, Mr. Ibrahim Lamorde, has sued the Senate and three others at the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja over the summons issued on him to appear before the Senate over alleged corruption.
In a suit filed through his counsel, Festus Keyamo, Lamorde joined Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Peti-tion, the Inspector General of Police and the Director General, Department of State Services (DSS) as 2nd to 4th defendants. In the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/934/15, the plaintiff is seeking for a declaration that in view of the provisions of sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), the 1st and 2nd Defendants, their officers, members, agents or privies cannot “invite” the plaintiff to appear before them as a person whose conduct of affairs is being investigated by them in relation to issues concerning office(s) he has already vacated.
He also wants the court to declare that in view of the provisions of sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), the 1st and 2nd Defendants, their officers, members, agents or privies cannot request the plaintiff to appear before them by merely writing an invitation letter to him and not issuing a summons.
In addition, the plaintiff wants the court to declare that in view of the provisions of sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), the 1st and 2nd Defendants, their officers, members, agents or privies cannot issue a warrant against the plaintiff without first serving him a summons.
Also, the plaintiff is seeking the court’s declaration that in view of the provisions of sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), the 3rd and 4th Defendants, their officers, members, agents or privies cannot execute any warrant issued by the 1st and 2nd defendants against the plaintiff and which was issued without first issuing a summons to the plaintiff.
Lamorde also wants the court to declare that by virtue of section 36(1) of the provisions of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) it is unconstitutional for the 2nd Defendant to prevent counsel to the plaintiff from appearing on the plaintiff’s behalf only for the purpose of raising objection to procedural defects in the invitation to the plaintiff to appear before the second defendant.
He, therefore, prays for an order of injunction against the 3rd and 4th Defendants restraining them from executing any warrant issued by the 1st and 2nd Defendants against the plaintiff and which was issued without first issuing a summons to the plaintiff.
He also wants the court to grant an order setting aside all letters of invitation issued against the plaintiff by the 1st and 2nd Defendants to appear before them as a person being investigated by them in relation to issues concerning his stewardship of office(s) he has already vacated.
The plaintiff is also seeking for an order of injunction against the 1st and 2nd Defendants restraining them from issuing any warrant for the arrest of the plaintiff without first issuing a summons to the plaintiff. No date has been fix for hearing. Meanwhile, the Senate will soon commence the probe of allegations of fraud, bribery and inflation of contracts preferred against the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), Justice Danladi Umar.
The probe of Umar will be predicated upon a petition presented to the Senate yesterday by a member of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions, Senator Obinna Ogba. The President of the Senate, Bukola Saraki, is currently standing trial before Umar’s panel on a 13-count charge of alleged false declaration of assets which was contained in the form he filled as Governor of Kwara State, at the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB), in 2003.
Speaking to journalists after plenary, Ogba explained that the petition was signed by one Ajaso. I. Ajaso on behalf of a group, the Anti Corruption Network. He also said that the petitioners had not sought judicial remedy against Umar, but seeking Senate’s intervention to probe the corrupt allegations contained in the document.
After Ogba laid the petition before the Senate, Saraki, accordingly, referred it to the Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions and asked the chairman, Senator Samuel Anyanwu, to investigate the allegations and report back to the chamber in two weeks. When contacted after plenary, to get details of the petition, the Chairman of the investigative committee said that it had already started receiving legislative action.
