Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Nigerian Investment Promotion Council (NIPC), Yewande Sadiku
The immediate-past executive secretary of the Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission (NIPC), Yewande Sadiku, has been cleared of all corruption and fraud allegations levelled against her during her time in office.
The Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission (ICPC) initially cleared her of all but one of the allegations in a letter dated October 21, 2021.
The anti-corruption agency issued her the final clearance in December, ending its years-long investigations, after a court struck out a suit accusing her of receiving illegal foreign leave allowance.
“Upon investigations, none of these allegations was established and the striking out of suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/249/2019 by his lordship, Justice A. R. Mohammed of the Federal High Court of Nigeria, Abuja Division, brings the investigation to a close,” ICPC’s Director of Operations, Akeem Lawal, said in the later letter dated December 16, 2021 and addressed to Ms Sadiku.
The outcome of the anti-graft agency’s investigation tallies with PREMIUM TIMES’ findings earlier in August showing the allegations were not backed by evidence.
PREMIUM TIMES had detailed how Ms Sadiku, 49, who left her top banking job to pick up the NIPC appointment with a pay cut in 2016, became a target of various allegations peddled by antagonists of her reform-driven leadership at the agency.
Poised to make NIPC a transparent, effective and result-oriented agency, Ms Sadiku faced widespread allegations of corruption, lawsuits, repeated strike actions by union members and attacks by some members of the agency’s governing board.
Duplicate petitions levelling various allegations of fraud and corruption against her were sent to various anti-corruption agencies including the ICPC and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
EFCC interrogated her over the same set of allegations in August 2021. It remains unclear if the EFCC, which rarely gives suspects progress update on ongoing investigations, had similarly closed its probe into the matter like the ICPC has done.
Ms Sadiku’s tenure ended in September last year. The investment banker turned down government’s persuasion to be re-appointed to the position.
In one of the anonymous petitions against her, the author accused Ms Sadiku of expending N600million “on travels to several countries on a fortnightly basis, purportedly for official purposes, when in truth the ES (executive secretary) merely expends public funds without any for om of due process”.
In the letter of complaint dated August 20, 2019, the petitioner said, that, although, the foreign trips were sponsored with public funds, they were “actually an avenue for the ES to perpetuate her business with no benefit accruing to the country”.
“Unfortunately, this practice has become the norm, so much so that the ES travels to Lagos every other week for personal reasons, whereas the NIPC has no office in Lagos, yet the fares and duty tour allowance are charged to the NIPC,” the petition read in part.
It also alleged that Ms Sadiku “draws a dubious ‘foreign lave allowance’ accounting for something in the range of $23,100 in addition to two business class tickets for the ES and her spouse and economy tickets for four children annually purportedly approved by a past governing council.”
She had drawn the funds for the years 2017 and 2018, and had, as of August 20, 2019, received the allowance for 2019, the petitioner said.
On why the petition was sent anonymously, the document stated, “I have decided to withhold my identity so that your investigation into this matter is not tainted by my subjective judgement.”
But curiously, the anonymous petition bore the same title verbatim with a later one dated January 13, 2020 authored by Ali Sani, member of the governing council of NIPC.
The title, ‘COMPLAINT AGAINST THE FRAUDULENT ABUSE, WASTE AND MISMANAGEMENT OF PUBLIC FUNDS BY THE EXECUTIVE SECRTARY OF THE NIGERIAN INVESTMNT PROMOTION COMMISSION,’ appeared in capitalised forms in both petitions.
A part of the allegation in the two petitions also surfaced in a Freedom of Information (FoI) request by a lawyer, Auta Maisamari, who sent a letter dated February 18, 2019 to Ms Sadiku, demanding information regarding the foreign leave allowance payments to her.
The letter was also sent to Mr Sani, a member of the governing council, who authored a petition to the ICPC against the executive secretary.
Mr Maisamari would later sue Ms Sadiku in her personal and official capacity as the NIPC boss, and others, over the matter.
Sued alongside Ms Sadiku are the governing council of the commission, the chairman and individual members of the council, including Mr Sani, the governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).
The permanent secretaries of seven federal ministries, including the commission’s supervisory ministry, the Ministry of Industry, Trade and Investment, were also sued as co-defendants.
The lawyer, in his suit filed at the Federal High Court in Abuja on March 4, 2019 and marked FHC/ABJ/249/2019, prayed for among others, an order compelling Ms Sadiku to provide him the information regarding the “approval of the governing council” of the commission for a remuneration package for her ‘Foreign Leave Allowance’ as earlier requested in his letter dated February 18, 2019.
In his affidavit filed in support of the suit, Mr Maisamari alleged that Ms Sadiku acknowledged his FoI letter in a reply dated February 25, 2019, but “refused to supply the needed information within the period of seven days directed by the Freedom of Information Act, 2011”.
But Mr Sani, sued as the sixth defendant in the suit, “graciously gave me some documents that have assisted me in filing this suit,” the plaintiff said, referencing a January 3, 2019 letter written by the governing council member, with the title, ‘Clarification of Foreign Leave Allowance of the Executive Secretary of the NIPC’.
Relying on Mr Sani’s letter, the plaintiff said Ms Sadiku received “a foreign annual leave allowance” in United States dollars translating to about N8.4million on November 24, 2017, and $23,100 for the same purpose on August 23, 2018.
The plaintiff also cited another of Mr Sani’s lettger dated January 21, 2019 demanding that Ms Sadiku refund the money paid to her as foreign annual leave allowances.
Mr Sani, in another letter dated February 11, 2019, sent to Ms Sadiku also requested her to refund the sums of money which he argued were illegally approved for her office by the governing council.
The plaintiff prayed in his suit for an order compelling Ms Sadiku to provide information regarding the approval of the NIPC’s governing council for the allowances.
Insisting that the NIPC’s governing council lacked the power to approve the annual foreign leave allowance for the commission’s executive secretary, as argued by Mr Sani, he urged the court to order Ms Sadiku to refund to the federal government, “funds purportedly drawn” by her “purportedly in compliance with the approval of the governing council for a remuneration package for her called ‘Foreign Leave Allowance’.
The plaintiff also prayed for the award of N10million to be paid by Ms Sadiku to cover the cost of prosecuting the case.
He also filed a separate application urging the court to order Ms Sadiku to “temporarily step aside/vacate the office” as the executive secretary of NIPC pending the hearing and determination of the main suit.
Ms Sadiku has consistently denied any wrongdoing in a series of correspondences she exchanged with Mr Sani and during interrogations by law enforcement agencies.
Following her request for update in September 2021, the ICPC informed her in an October 2021 reply that none of the allegations against her was established, but the probe could not be concluded yet due to the pending suit accusing her of receiving illegal foreign leave allowances.
“The commission initiated investigation on the underlisted allegations of corruption against the Executive Secretary of the NIPC and some other officials of the commission,” the reply, signed by ICPC’s director of operations, Mr Lawal, read in part.
It listed the allegations to include fraudulent abuse of office, waste and mismanagement of public funds through incessant tours and travels within and outside Nigeria without adding value to the commission.
The ICPC also investigated the allegation that Ms Sadiku embarked on foreign trips without express approval of the governing council of the commission and that she used the commission’s funds to repair her damaged personal vehicle.
“Investigation has been conducted on all the allegations except that of receiving foreign leave allowances which has been stalled by a pending litigation in Suit No. FCT/ABJ/CS/249/2019,” ICPC said.
“All other allegations were not established,” the anti-corruption agency added, but explained further that a final investigation report could not be issued yet, “until after the conclusion of investigation on the allegation unlawfully receiving foreign leave allowance now before the court.”
On August 3, 2021, the Federal High Court in Abuja struck out the pending suit filed by Mr Maisamari following an affidavit filed by a lawyer in his law firm notifying the court of the plaintiff’s death.
This paved the way for the ICPC to issue Ms Sadiku a final clearance in a December 16, 2021 letter reiterating that “none of these allegations was established,” and that the striking out of the suit by the judge, Ahmed Mohammed of the Federal High Court in Abuja, “brings the investigation to a close.”
The foreign leave allowance paid to the executive secretary turned out to be the central issue in the gamut of allegations levelled against her.
With Mr Sani, the governing council member, being the leading figure pushing for the refund of the paid allowances, a series of correspondences were exchanged between him and Ms Sadiku, consistently denying any wrongdoing.
Mr Ali advised Ms Sadiku to refund a total sum of N40 Million he claimed she had received in foreign leave allowance to the federal government’s coffers, arguing that the governing council lacked the power to approve the payment of such to her.
In her reply to one of Mr Ali’s letters, also filed by Mr Maisamari as an exhibit, Ms Sadiku cited section 7(2) of the NIPC Act to contradict his claim that the NIPC governing council lacked the power to approve the payment of foreign leave allowance for the executive secretary as it did as far back as 2005.
“The terms and conditions of service (including terms and conditions as to remuneration, allowances, pensions, gratuities and other benefits) of the persons employed by the commission shall be as determined by the council, from time to time,” Ms Sadiku quoted the legal provision in her reply to one of Mr Sani’s letters.
She recalled that the payment of foreign leave allowance to the executive secretary of the commission dated back to 2005, following the governing council’s approval on August 17, 2005.
She also confirmed as stated in Mr Maisamari’s suit that the renumeration package as approved in 2005 by the governing council included a foreign leave allowance for the executive secretary, spouse and four children for 28 days.
She added that it included “flight tickets for the family of six (two business class tickets for the ES, and spouse and four economy tickets for the children).”
A total of $18,200 was approved as the executive secretary’s foreign leave allowance and it took effect from 2005, Ms Sadiku said.
She added that on March 27, 2018, the then Minister of Industry, Trade and Investment, in the absence of the governing council of the commission, reviewed the foreign leave allowance upward by 50 per cent, raising it from $18,200 to $27,300.
She said the approved allowances had been paid annually to the executive secretaries before her since 2005.
Ms Sadiku insisted that the allowances paid to her in November 2017 and August 2018 following her assumption of office in November 2016 “are therefore not unusual”.
She said in the letter that the 2005 approval for the executive secretary’s foreign leave allowance was akin to the approval of the introduction of three new allowances for NIPC staff by the council at an October 11, 2018 meeting, at which she noted, Mr Sani was present.
The Ministry of Justice has also given “a legal interpretation of the NIPC Act” in a letter dated August 31, 2021, affirming that the power of the NIPC governing council “to create allowances” without recourse to any other ministry, department or agency, Ms Sadiku added.
She noted that although the denomination of the allowances approved by the council for the foreign leave allowance was in U.S. dollars, the payments so far made to her since 2017 “were effected in naira by debiting NIPC’s Treasury Single Account at the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN)”.
She insisted the payments neither violated the CBN circulars nor the Treasury Single Account policies as alleged by Mr Ali.
Mr insisted on the illegality of the payments of the foreign leave allowance and the subsequent upward review by the minister, insisting that neither the governing council nor the minister had the power to either approve or increase the allowance.
He argued in his reply dated January 21, 2019, that section 7(2) of the NIPC Act cited by Ms Sadiku to justify the governing council’s approval of foreign leave allowance for the executive secretary, only covered “the terms and conditions” of service of persons “employed by the commission”.
As he would later reiterate in another letter dated February 18, 2019, Mr Sani said the executive secretary is not a staff member of the commission, adding that “every person engaged at the commission who is not appointed by the governing council is not a staff member of the commission”.
According to him, the executive secretary of the commission is rather a member of the governing council, who “can be said to fall under section 3(3) of the NIPC Act,” and as such, “the governing council cannot approve renumeration for the executive secretary”.
Mr Sani also maintained that “the term, ‘foreign leave allowance’ is not a term found anywhere in the nomenclature or categories of leave allowance as are known to the public and civil service of the federation”.
The ‘Certain Political, Public and Judicial Office Holders (Salaries and Allowances, etc.) (Amendment) Acts 2008,’ which he said is the law applicable to the remuneration of the executive secretary and the governing council members, only refers to “leave allowance” and does not anywhere refer to “foreign leave allowance”
“The grounds upon which the charade of a ‘foreign leave allowance’ is built has neither any legal nor moral support, and as such, the upward review approved by the Honourable Minister of Industry, Trade and Investment on March 27, 2013, cannot stand; you cannot put a thing on the top of nothing and expect it to stand,” he argued.
Ms Sadiku further justified the governing council’s approval of the foreign leave allowance in a rebuttal to Mr Sani’s letter demanding a refund of the payments.
Citing Part III of the NIPC Act devoted to ‘Staff of the Commission’ Ms Sadiku faulted Mr Sani’s argument that the executive secretary of the commission’s remuneration does not come under section 7(2) of the NIPC Act.
Donate
TEXT AD: To advertise here . Call Willie +2347088095401…
Enter your email address and receive notifications of news by email.
Join 1,689,715 other subscribers.
All content is Copyrighted © 2020 The Premium Times, Nigeria
All content is Copyrighted © 2020 The Premium Times, Nigeria
