Prior to its recess, which is just ending, the House of Representatives, flowing from a resolution, raised an Ad hoc panel to investigate alleged cases of auction of property by some federal agencies at questionable circumstances and below-value prices. JOSHUA EGBODO writes on some discoveries so far made
The mandate
On July 6, 2023, the House of Representatives passed a resolution, to set up an Ad hoc committee, charged with the mandate to investigate the alleged illegal auctioning of federal government property, specifically by the Nigeria Ports Authority (NPA), Nigeria Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA); Nigeria Railway Corporation (NRC); River Basin Development Authorities (RBDAS) and the Nigeria Customs Service (NCS).
The committee is expected to among other things, “unravel the extent of illegal auctioning and non-remittance of revenue realised into the Consolidated Revenue Fund” between 2010 and 2022, and report back its findings within four weeks.
The resolution was sequel to a motion sponsored by Hon. Oluwole Oke from Osun state, who argued that the procedures for the auctioning of government assets were clearly spelt out in the Financial Regulations Act 2009, and the Public Procurement Act 2007, noting that for any agency of the government to auction its property, proper valuation ought to be carried out on the assets such designated by the federal ministry of works, indicating the original cost price of the property, date of acquisition and realistic value at the time of planned sale.
According to the lawmaker, NPA, NIMASA, NRC, RBDAS and NCS have been auctioning public properties “at ridiculous prices” and also without following due process, adding that partial remittance or non-remittance of revenue realised from such auctioning into the consolidated revenue fund of the country amounted to a breach of the provision of the constitution.
He warned therefore that if the alleged ongoing practices are not checked, they may affect the federal government’s drive to meeting demands for accelerated infrastructural development across the country.
Panel begins sitting
After a good waiting, the Ad hoc panel under the chairmanship of Majority Leader of the House, Prof. Julius Ihonbvere began its investigative hearing with an inaugural sitting on September 4,2023. On its focus on that day was the Federal Ministry of Water Resources, for explanations over the disposal of assets belonging to the 12 River Basin Development Authorities in 2018.
During the session, Managing Directors of the River Basin Development Authorities could hardly satisfy the committee with information it requested for, as they said the Ministry was responsible for the sale of property in 2018 because the agencies had no Governing Board at the time. They said the Ministry was responsible for the advertisement and selection of the auction firms which carried out the disposal.
Committee reacts
Chairman of the committee, Prof. Ihonbvere in reaction said the committee was not satisfied with the explanation from the Managing Directors, adding that the Committee has no choice but to invite the Ministry of Water Resources. “I want to assure you for now that we are not very satisfied and that is because you did not preside over this process.
“We are not satisfied with the disconnects in the contents in some of the documents; we will require that you come back after we deduce some of those documents directly from the ministry on behalf of your agencies. We will also invite the ministry to deal with us directly,” he said.
More summoned
The committee followed up with the invitation of some other named agencie, and these include the Nigeria Ports Authority, Nigeria Maritime Administration and Safety Agency, Nigeria Railway Corporation, Nigeria Customs Service, Anambra/Imo River Basin Development Authority, and Osun River Basin Development Authority.
The House Leader emphasised that the committee was out to investigate the alleged illegal auctioning of government property by the Nigeria Ports Authority, Nigeria Maritime Administration and Safety Agency, Nigeria Railway Corporation, River Basin Development Authority, Railway Corporation and Nigeria Customs Service, and according to him, the committee will rely on the relevant sections of the Constitution, the Standing Orders of the House and the inherent jurisdiction of the National Assembly to achieve its mandate.
Adamant agencies?
Many of the affected agencies appeared adamant as observed by followers of the development, prompting the committee to issue threats. During a resumed sitting, Chairman of the panel stated; “In the course of this work, we have written letters to all the agencies concerned requesting information on the subject matter, and many of them did not bother to respond to our letter. We hope to physically visit the agencies, examine your books and conduct a physical inspection of all public properties acquired to determine the ones sold and procedures adopted for the exercise.
“As the representatives of the Nigerian people we will deploy all constitutional means to ensure that we achieve the mandate of the House”, citing the provisions of sections 88, 98 and 65 of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria (as amended) to assert that the National Assembly has the constitutional powers to invite any person or government agency that is in charge or intended to be in charge of the administration of public funds on which the parliament has the powers to make laws.
NIMASA’s 82 vehicles for N5.8m
The most dramatic revelation in the ongoing probe, in the opinion of analysts, remained the ridiculous prices at which NIMASA admitted it auctioned some vehicles in its custody, exercises through which 82 vehicles were reportedly sold for only N5.8 million, spreading across 12 years.
Members of the committee were shocked at the revelation, and so were many Nigerians.
Executive Director of NIMASA, Chudi Offodile, who made the disclosure before the panel however, insisted that due process was followed in the disposal of the vehicles.
But the shocking details
When documents presented by NIMASA to the committee were obtained, there were seeming questionable details on prices at which the vehicles were sold out. To many analysts, the practice was not exclusive to NIMASA, as public officers have been selling off public property, using phantom auction arrangements to acquire such at ridiculous prices, far short of the possible extant market values. Such pundits pointed out that such practices were usually carried out through proxies in order to avoid any conflict of interest issues.
The documents by NIMASA showed that a Peugeot Expert Ambulance with market value of N200,000 was sold at a forced liquidation/auction value of N95,000; Honda Civic Saloon Car with market value of N170,000 was sold at N76,500; Toyota Hilux (Grounded) with market value of N300,000 was sold at N140,000; another Toyota Hilux (Accidental) with market value of N200,000 was sold at N96,000 while another Toyota Hilux (Grounded) with market value of N250,000 was sold at N115,000.
Similarly, two units of Toyota Hilux which were at the time of inspection in the custody of Carbotage Consultant in Lagos put at N1 million market value, were sold at N470,000 each liquidation/auction value; Honda Civic put at N210,000 was sold at N95,000; Honda City put at N190,000 market value was sold at N80,000; among others.
More on the list were from NIMASA office in Abuja, where a Toyota Hilux put at N500,000 market value was sold at N245,000; Toyota Avensis put at N300,000 market value was sold at N145,000; Toyota Corolla put at N300,000 market value was sold at N147,000; two units of Honda Civic put at N90,000 market value were sold at N30,000 each; among others.
In all of this, the NIMASA official, Offodile, feigned ignorance of the provisions of the Public Procurement Act, 2007 on the remittance of the funds generated from the sale of public assets, and noted that proceeds of the sales were remitted by the auction firms into the agency’s account.
Amazed panel reacts
The Committee’s chairman, Ihonvbere, expressed surprise that most of the vehicles displayed in the document presented before the panel did not appear old, or to be in bad shape to necessitate their auctioning. “Looking at them (pictures of vehicles), some of them are looking new,” he said, adding that for Nigerians, a 13 year old Toyota Hilux is not old.”
He also expressed surprise over the rationale behind the decision of NIMASA to place an advert on March 29, 2022 calling for a public auction of NIMASA vehicles and sale of all the vehicles on March 30, 2022 through forced liquidation/auction, noting that the move leaves lawmaker with the impression that it was a pre-arrangement, and that the process contravened the extant Public Procurement Act to dispose public assets within the duration of 24 hours.
Contrary information
It was obvious from the body language of the panel that there were contrary information to those presented by NIMASA on state of the vehicles at the point of sale. Prof Ihonbvere disclosed that the Ad-hoc Committee was in custody of petitions against NIMASA that the vehicles were sold to some officials and staff of the agency, saying the auctioneers engaged by the agency were merely hired to rubber stamp the fictitious insider trading.
The Committee therefore requested for a list of all the auctioneers as well as beneficiaries of the vehicles, the original cost of vehicles and invoices, letter of contract awards for auctioning of the assets to the auctioneers; relevant approvals obtained from Federal Ministry of Works & Housing as well as Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP).
NCS next
As the committee shifts focus to the Nigeria Customs Service, while awaiting further information from NIMASA, NPA and the River Basins Development Authorities earlier engaged, there have been feelings that the story may be the same, if not worse with the NCS.
The committee had last week, gave an ultimatum of five days to the NCS Comptroller General to unfailingly appear before it. The committee last Wednesday, issued the summon on acting Comptroller General of the Nigeria Customs Service, Mr Adewale Adeniyi to appear before it unfailingly, as the chairman frowned at the attitude of the CG for ignoring the parliament.
Ihonvbere lamented over how resources have been expended on repeated invitation of public office holders, who rather chose to ignore such in arrogance and abuse of power, as he warned that his committee was ready to check and prevent the trend. The waiting is therefore on.
#
