Vice President Atiku Abubakar Has Done No Wrong With Regards To The PTDF Funds

By

Jide Ayobolu

jideayobolu@yahoo.co.uk

 

 

 

In testimony that completely agrees with an earlier one by the Vice President Atiku Abubakar, the Petroleum Technology Development Fund (PTDF) has insisted that it did not lose money through investment deposits in banks. Its officials, who appeared before the Senate Review Panel on PTDF, the Executive Secretary, Kabir Mohammed and the Assistant General Manager (AGM) Finance and Administration, Areyinka Jolomi, also said there is no need for federal executive council approval before any PTDF funds can be invested. They said the only PTDF money that was lost was due to the restructuring waiver, which was approved by President Olusegun Obasanjo. Their testimony confirms Atiku’s oral presentation to the earlier Senate Ad-hoc committee and would appear to have exonerated the Vice President of any blame in the matter.

 

Jolomi said no money was lost through bank deposits and the money deposited in Trans International Bank, now Spring Bank is being recovered with a monthly re-payment of $2 million to the PTDF. According to him, out of the $23.75 million held in Spring Bank, PTDF  had received $5.75 million refund by the bank. The only loss to PTDF, he claimed, was $315,000 being the forfeiture of the interest accruable to the fund from the deposit in the bank through restructuring and renegotiation of transactions, a waiver that was approved by President Obasanjo. Stressing that the PTDF was not aware of the inflow and outflow of money in the PTDF Reserve Account, the team also told the panel that President Obasanjo breached the law setting up PTDF with the policy of paying 25 per cent of signature bonuses subject to a maximum of $100 million yearly, an illegal act.

 

According to the Executive Secretary, Kabir Mohammed, since the PTDF Act did not anticipate the magnitude of signature bonuses coming in, the 25 per cent or maximum of $100 million policy as presently operated is against the law until the Act is amended. The team also insisted that once the Accountant-General of the Federation (AGF) approved any bank for investment deposits, the placement of funds in commercial banks is the prerogative of the PTDF management, as it doesn’t need any Federal Executive Council’s (FEC) approval. With the nature of the PTDF projects, the team explained that it has been policy to invest the agency’s funds in banks to yield interest rather than keep the money even when payment on the projects is not due.

 

On the allegedly illegality committed by the Presidency, Mohammed said: “ there is a serious problem on this issue…contrary to the law, a decision was taken in 2006 that there should be a cap on the funding , because in 2005, there was a lot of bidding rounds that were never anticipated. It was discovered that we had over $1 billion in what we called the Reserve Account because the President decided to put a cap- 25 per cent of the proceeds or a maximum of $100 million per year and that was in June 2006”. “…But the law had not been amended. The law says pay everything to the PTDF account, whatever the percentage. Even then, the $100 million was not forthcoming. So, even on the basis of funding approval, nothing has been given yet to the PTDF. Why I am saying all these is that I know that the purpose of this investigation is to make the PTDF a better organization to serve the nation, all we have to do is to bring these things to your table so that it will assist your committee in making your recommendations”. He further explained that, “what happens is that when the signature bonuses are collected by Department of Petroleum Resources (DPR), they are being paid into what they called Reserve Account. That Reserve Account was being maintained by the Accountant-General of the Federation. Now when the money was paid into that account, the PTDF will now have to make a request probably to the President through the Minister in charge of petroleum, to get the money”.

 

Raising questions as to possible diversion or mismanagement of  PTDF funds by the President and federal officials, they said, “ in most cases, you discovered that the money will not even be there because we don’t know what is due to us and what is not due to us. That is why if you look at the records we gave to the other committee, you discover that after 2003, no money was given to the PTDF except the N10 billion that was given in 2006, and what was supposed to be given was N20 billion. Till date, the balance of that N20 billion has not been released to the PTDF”.

 

On the PTDF’s choice of banks, Jolomi said: “ The AGF approved the list of banks we can use. Once the bank we are making deposit falls within the list, we don’t need FEC approvals to make placements”. He stated that the PTDF Naira investment account with the CBN has a nil balance and that the fund opted for commercial banks because the interested rates offer are higher than those given by the apex bank.

 

Again, one of the principal actors in the controversial PTDF saga, Otunba Oyewole Fasawe admitted funding the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) from his private bank account since 1999. Testifying before the Senate ad-hoc committee set up to review the report of Senator Victor Ndoma-Egba committee that investigated the PTDF, Fasawe also admitted that when his account became overdrawn, President Obasanjo reimbursed him with N700 million through Hallmark Bank.

 

The money that was kept in ETB yielded profit and has since been returned to the coffers of the government. Hence, no money was lost in the PTDF fund scandal, much more importantly and he did not benefit directly or indirectly from the transactions. But the same cannot be said of President Obasanjo.  If anybody must be hold responsible for mismanaging PTDF funds, it is General Obasanjo, he is sole responsible for the endemic rot in the PTDF. However, it is germane to point out that, Obasanjo has been using the instrumentality of the EFCC that has done a very shoddy job, in term of its investigation of the PTDF funds to cover his tracks. This is certainly, not how to fight corruption. EFCC’S double standard and deliberate misrepresentation of facts is indeed a corrupt act, punishable under the law. To this end therefore, the Court of Appeal should be allowed to decide the validity and constitutionality of the EFCC so-called indictment and the Attorney-General’s Administrative Panel’s Report predicated on it. Nigeria is a country ruled by law, and nothing must be done to impede or pre-empt the judicial process.

 

By

 

Jide Ayobolu

Garki 2

Abuja

Nigeria