For serially denying media reports on the findings and recommendations of a special committee he personally constituted to audit the accounts of the Civilian Pensions Department domiciled in the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation between 2005 and 2010 the group said Mr. Ukura was culpable of shielding government officials standing trial for graft.
Based on a 169-page report by the special committee, which indicted Mr. Oronsaye of involvement in the fraud during his tenure in office between 2009 and 2010, WE had, on September 15, 2014, published an exclusive story from the executive summary of the findings by the AuGF office.
The audit report entitled ‘Special Audit of Accounts of the Civil Pensions for the period 2005 to 2010 Financial Years’, revealed damning details of monumental graft allegedly perpetrated by Mr. Oronsaye and others.
Some of the findings include unaccounted N52 billion monthly pension payments; illegal collection of N1.03 billion kickbacks from Pensions Unions; cornering of N15.6 billion meant for settlement of death benefits of pensioners, and unauthorised transfer of N54 billion from 58 untraceable illegal accounts.
However, few days after the publication, the AuGF office issued a well-publicised disclaimer on September 19, 2014 in most national newspapers, including ThisDay, pp.28 (ii); The Nation, pp. 51; Daily Sun, pp. 60, and Daily Trust, pp. 14, to deny Mr. Oronsaye’s indictment, obviously to discredit the publication.
A follow up story by the newspaper on Monday, September 22, 2014, highlighting specific sections of the findings that indicted the former head of service, in response to the AuGF office’s disclaimer, reaffirmed the authenticity of the report.
The group said Mr. Ukura’s rebuttal and failure to forward the findings in the report to the National Assembly more than two years after it was produced, contrary to 90 days as required by the 1999 Constitution (as Amended), amounted to him encouraging corruption, by shielding corrupt government officials on trial for graft.
Section 85(5) of the 1999 Constitution demands that the Auditor-General must, within 90 days of his receipt of the Accountant-General’s financial statement, submit a report to the National Assembly for consideration by its respective committees for Public accounts, for consideration.
Following the series of publication and denials by the AuGF’s office, CSNAC said it had issued a Freedom of Information (FoI) request on September 22, 2014 in line with the provisions of the FoI Act 2011, to officially demand for a copy of the report from the Auditor General’s office.
The group said the AuGF not only failed to acknowledge the receipt of the request, but also refused to avail it with a copy of the report, in apparent flagrant violation of the extant laws spelt out in the FoI Act.
After months of serial denials by the AuGF’s office about the existence of the report, Mr. Ukura, through a letter dated June, 25, 2015 to Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), finally owned up to the existence of the audit report.
A copy of the AuGF’s letter admitting the existence of the audit report exclusively obtained by PR was tendered in Court as Exhibit 296 in the on-going corruption case against Mr. Oronsaye.
In its petition dated July 23, 2015, CSNAC urged the President to urgently remove Mr. Ukura from office and subsequently order his prosecution for attempting to conceal and protect officials accused of graft.
“Such an officer as Mr. Ukura cannot and should not be allowed to hold such sensitive position as the Auditor- General of the Federation at this critical point,” the anti-corruption group said in a statement by its Chairman, Olanrewaju Suraju.
“His (Mr. Ukura’s) actions to conceal and deny the existence of a report, clearly exposes a breach of his oath of office, cowardice, insincerity and professional misconduct,” Mr. Suraju noted.
Besides, CSNAC said the AuGF also violated the provisions of the FoI Act by ignoring its request for the copy of the Audit Report, which arose from the work of a Special Audit Team he personally constituted in May 2011.
By denying the existence of the report, the group accused Mr, Ukura of violating the provisions of Section 85(6) of the Constitution, by pandering to an authority or person(s) other than the constitution, which demands that, “in the exercise of his function under the Constitution, the Auditor-General shall not be subject to the direction or control of any other authority or person.”
No comments:
Post a Comment