|
|
|
|
|
|
CONTENTS
With Annotations
TEXT OF A PRESS CONFERENCE BY SENATOR DANIEL GBENGA ALUKO ON ALLEGATIONS LEVELLED AGAINST HIM BY THE REPORT OF THE AD HOC COMMITTEE INVESTIGATING SENATE CONTRACTS. HEARING ROOM 4 SENATE BLOCK 3/08/2000 INTRODUCTION Gentlemen and Ladies of the media, good afternoon. I have taken my time before addressing this Conference today primarily because I was hoping that the 1st Volume of the Ad Hoc Committees Reports which was to have been submitted yesterday, would have been in my possession for a thorough and complete analysis. However, as you may know, the whole process of submission and distribution to Senator's of Volume One in the Senate Chambers yesterday was completely and disgracefully bungled, by the Ad Hoc Committee Chairman, Senator Idris Kuta. A true reflection of the contents of Volume Two will be the focus of this briefing. Since Volume Two (Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations) was submitted to the Senate on the 1st of August 2000, virtually all Newspaper Reports, Television and Radio Report, the Nigerian Internet Websites and even the local Town Criers particularly, have demonized my person, along with my Senate President, Deputy Senate President, Chief Whip, APP Deputy Leader and a few of my colleagues as crooks, gangsters and petty thieves. I take it as an occupational hazard, especially on my part as a young Senator that sometimes attract deep seated envy and disguised hatred from a few of my colleagues who feel, albeit erroneously, that my profile and influence is pretty solid, particularly as it relates to my relationship with the Senate President, Senator Chuba Okadigbo. Little wonder that at various times I have been tagged as belonging to the inner caucus, 3 musketeers, 7 musketeers and most recently the 'Sole Administrator' of the Senate, a sentiment that even the Ad Hoc Committee could not resist using in their report. However, let me address the issues in the Report as they relate to me squarely and allow you to make your unbiased and fair judgment.
SENATE SERVICES COMMITTEE I must confess that Senator A.T Ahmed and myself worked closely together, constantly in consultation, and I pitied him because of the crowd that constantly besieged his office for one favor or the other. On the 18th of November, Senator Evan Enwerem was removed as the Senate President. Senator A.T Ahmed being a long time associate of Senator Enwerem was the first on the firing, and our committee was disbanded on the 2nd of December 1999 and was not reconstituted until after the recess in January/February 2000. Being a Principal Officer with the experience and insight I had with the operations of the Senate Services Committee, it was only normal for the new Senate President, Chuba Okadigbo to consult me alongside other Principal Officers like the Deputy Senate President, Chief Whip, Senate Leader, and Deputy Senate Leader on the prior commitments, processes, procedures and utilization of the 1999 budget as it relates to the Senate. It was my responsibility among the above named Principal Officers to work closely with the National Assembly Staff and make sure that the capital budget for 1999 is utilized properly for the efficient running of the senate. I became the Ag. Chairman of the Senate Services by default and served only between 2nd December 1999 to 21st December 1999, a period of 19 days before proceeding for Christmas holiday in England. The Senate resumed on the 18th of January 2000 and the new Senate Services Committee was reconstituted in February 2000. Hardly a period to wield so much powers to be labeled 'Sole Administrator'. Coincidentally, it is the same Senator Idris Kuta who first mentioned this title at a PDP Senate Caucus Meeting. Little did I know that he will be Chairman/Hangman of an Ad Hoc Committee that is as good as James Hardley Chase and Jeffrey Archer put together in writing fiction.
THE REPORT The Committee recommended that I honorably resign as Deputy Chief Whip and refund the sum of =N=35m and a further =N=39,257,598 million by which the computers and office equipment were over priced as detailed in Table 5 of the report. Pg 41.p. That is a total refund of =N=74,257,598. How preposterous! It is claimed that the balance of =N=35m from the =N=45m appropriated for the 'Renovation, Refurbishment and Improvement of Capital Assets' in the 1999 Appropriation Act was paid to me, which I refused to transfer to Senators. I find it rather amusing that a committee with supposedly experienced people will arrive at this kind of conclusion without a strand of evidence or proof whatsoever. No payment voucher, no cheque number, transfer details, signature of receipt of cash etc, but they still concluded that I am with the money. I was never asked about the whereabouts of this money during my testimony, and it is not in my place to account for Senate funds, as this falls within the purview of the Director of Finance and Accountant of the National Assembly. When my Aides indicated that the Ad Hoc Committee was asking questions in my absence about this subject, the so called missing =N=35m, I delivered a letter to the Committee on Saturday 30th July 2000 and discussed extensively with Senator Osunbor about the expenditure of this subhead and gave him documentary evidence. I was shocked that the committee completely disregarded my letter and described my claims as 'dubious' in their comments on pg 12, paragraph 3.8, Volume Two. I have asked the Director of Finance to give a breakdown of the expenditure on this particular subhead and he has replied accordingly. Appendix 1. [SEE NOTE 5 LETTER FROM DFS]. How then can I be told to pay =N=35m I never received directly or indirectly? Furthermore Table 5 which indicate the level of over expenditure and inflated prices amounting to =N=39,257,598 which I am to refund is even more laughable. First and foremost, I am asked to refund the sum of =N=11,869,645 being inflated price of a 100KVA Generator. I did not participate, recommend, process or have knowledge of this transaction whatsoever until I was investigating this so called missing =N=35m a few days ago. Documents in my possession show that the purchase of the 100KVA Generator with associated extensive electrical works was recommended by the former Chairman, Senate Services through minutes written to the CNA on a letter of 15th November 1999. The Director of Finance consequently gave approval to process a letter of award based on a renegotiated price of =N=14,157,600 to RIOK INTERNATIONAL CO. LTD. The award letter was issued on the 26th of November 1999. Even by the claims of the Ad Hoc Committee, I became 'Sole Administrator' from the 30th of November 1999. [DOCUMENTS SHOWN]. How then can I be accused of something I know nothing about and my name slandered both at home and abroad by colleagues that enter the same chambers with me everyday, talk and participate in discussions. How evil can man become!! Table 5 (a) purports that the Xerox 265 DC Copier, awarded at a price of =N=5,952,000 inclusive of VAT and Withholding Tax was over inflated by =N=1,341,545 which I am asked to refund. Let me first clarify that what was supplied is not the Xerox 265 DC but a much higher grade and specification, the Xerox 265 ST. Also, the committee states that the Xerox 214 DC of which they based their pricing and calculated refund replaces the Xerox 5815. In as much as I do not want to go into detailed specification, the Xerox 214 DC is a smaller copier that does only A4 paper while the Xerox 5815 does A3 paper and is a much higher specification copier than the Xerox 214 DC referred to by the Committee. See Xerox H.S Nigeria Ltd brochures and price list. The committee further indicates that there is strong suspicion that the 5815 Copiers were all refurbished. I have written Xerox H.S Nigeria Ltd to please confirm or otherwise the newness of their supplies and show proof by presenting the import documents and Clean Report of Finding by the overseas government appointed Inspecting Agents. I await their letter. [SEE NOTE 4 FOR THE LETTER]. The most amusing one is items c-e, the Laptops, APC UPS and the Compaq DeskPro Computers allegedly inflated. I have stated time without number that the price of the Dell Latitude Cpx is no secret and prices can be accessed over the internet or by direct telephone call to the DELL CORPORATION. Prices as at November/December last year when the supplier. Messrs TRITECH COMPUTERS imported from DELL can be got directly from the manufacturer by phone call. DELL CORPORATION is basically a mail order based corporation that accepts calls from anybody. Why can't one of you journalist, phone the company in either the United States or United Kingdom and find out the current price of the Cpx and the price as at November/December 1999. The committee however decides to go to a local and possibly non accredited DELL supplier in NICON and use that as basis. On the PC's, it is instructive to note that on page 34, it was stated that supply of 3 Nos. Computer Set for the Office of the Senate President was awarded on the 31st of August 1999 by Senator Evan Enwerem at =N=1,650,000, that is, =N=550,000 per set consisting of the Compaq DeskPro, HP DeskJet Printer, and a UPS. [Note: the set is shown.] Also note that Task System Ltd, one of the 3 suppliers we dealt with later was also the supplier. When we later negotiated for the supply of the same kind of Compaq DeskPro 10GB , HP Laser Printer (not DeskJet), APC 680 VA UPS and Surge Protector, our total price was =N=391,5000 inclusive of VAT and Withholding Tax. [Note: the set is shown.] The Committee however find it proper to accuse me of over pricing and inflated contract at a lower price and ignore a previously bought product at a higher price. What Logic! All this calculations above make up the =N=39,257,598 I am supposed refund in the imagination of the Committee. Throughout the hearing, not one contractor was called to testify, but they went ahead to draw conclusions. The payments for the Rank Xerox equipments which 11 companies were contracted to deliver, one of which it is claimed I have shares, was paid directly to FSB INTERNATIONAL BANK LTD, bankers of Xerox H.S Nigeria Limited. But the erroneous impression is being created that the Principal Officers opened up the treasury and looted the place. What nonsense! CONCLUSION Nigerians also have an unimaginable appetite for mischief, liars and misinformation. I give you an example. The Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee, Senator Idris Kuta once alleged categorically a few months ago in a caucus meeting of Senator numbering about 40 at NICON that he has a tape, given to him by Colonel Sambo Dasuki, Managing Director of the Nigerian Security and Minting Company Limited (NSPMC) clearly indicating that members of the Finance and Appropriation Committee asked him (Sambo Dasuki) to print =N=250,000,000 for them, as bribe in order for his budget to be passed. I have investigated this allegation and in fact asked Colonel Sambo Dasuki himself. There is not one ounce of truth in the allegation and Colonel Sambo has categorically denied it and was actually upset, because the implication is that he brought a secret tape into the Senate to tape the proceedings of a committee without authorization. The fact of the matter is that Colonel Sambo Dasuki never appeared before the Finance and Appropriation Committee at all during the preparation of the 2000 Budget. That is the nature of the man that we made Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee. Frivolity at its highest. A pathological liar. Finally, I wish to say that most Nigerians know that the current fictitious senate contract scam crisis is just another avenue to try and remove Senator Chuba Okadigbo as Senate President, tarnish the reputation of his associates and supporters and wish that we buckle in our spirited effort to stay by him and sustain democracy in Nigeria. We shall not relent in our support for Chuba Okadigbo, in the meantime I look forward to my day in court for malicious damage by those who have been hired to do the dirty job of hangmen. Thank you and God Bless everyone.
ANNOTATIONS NOTE 1:
Chairman: Idris Ibrahim Kuta of Niger State;
The volume two of the report (containing summary findings, conclusions and recommendations) was submitted to the Senate on August 1 and the volume one (containing verbatim report and exhibits) was submitted on August 3. NOTE 2: NOTE 3:
NOTE 4: The Xerox Letter NOTE 5: The DFC Letter
|
Guides
