Former First Lady, Dame Patience Jonathan has been under investigation after the exit of her husband and immediate former President, Goodluck Jonathan, following the outcome of 2015 general elections.
But can the House of Representatives provide her needed succour? JOSHUA EGBODO asks.
Beyond the investigation of alleged grafts, which leading anti-corruption agency, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is reportedly carrying out, resulting in the freezing of her bank accounts, there are also other on non-graft related suspicions.
Th e perceived plethora of investigations especially her accounts, and her relatives’ inability to, through the courts of law, secure the needed leave of access to funds in their bank accounts prompted the former First Lady to approach the House of Representatives, through its committee on public petitions for intervention.
Mrs Jonathan in the petition through Granville Abibo (SAN) & Co, her legal representative said there have been “persistent, consistent and unwarranted attacks and harassments” on her, naming the EFCC, National Drugs Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA), the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), and the Nigeria Police, as the culprit agencies.
During its fi rst sitting on the case on 26 July, 2017, the Public Petitions committee led by Hon.
Uzor NkemAbonta, directed the NDLEA, which reportedly raided an Abuja house belonging to Mrs.
Jonathan, following alleged tip-off that the premises was being used for drug related activities, to furnish it with identities of informants.
Th is was because the NDLEA, represented by a director in the agency, Femi Oloruntoba, explanations that his agency got a tipoff from sources he could not name, before raiding the property located at Igbeti Rock Street, Maitama Abuja.
“Based on the information, eight offi cers of my agency visited the premises, after surveillance was conducted on the premises”, he stated, but when queried on how the agency remedies its action where it breaks into a premises as alleged, and do not fi nd anything incriminating, Oloruntoba only explained that the agency never knew that the premises belonged to the former First Lady, arguing however that NDLEA can by law, carry out raid in premises using personnel’s identity cards as warrants.
At the resumed hearing just before the House was back in session, the NDLEA however argued that due to security reasons, it could not oblige the committee’s demand by providing certain details in the public glare, a submission the committee agreed to, and opted to get the details in-camera.
Th e committee, which listened to some commercial banks named in the petition which have frozen the former First Lady’s accounts on the directive of the EFCC at the resumed hearing, also directed them to immediately unfreeze accounts belonging to former First Lady.
But the directive has no specifi c restriction orders from any competent court of law.
Mr.
Ayodeji Adedipe, who led a team of lawyers from the Granville Abibo (SAN) & Co law fi rm to represent the former First Lady, told the committee that the banks, including Ecobank, Union Bank, First Bank, Diamond and Fidelity Bank, had frozen accounts belonging to Mrs.
Jonathan, her NGO and even some belonging to her relatives without court orders to that eff ect.
A representative of the Union Bank, Kenneth Otowo, told the committee that the bank placed Mrs Jonathan’s account under a ‘precautionary restriction’ following a directive by the EFCC.
“We received a communication from EFCC to put a precautionary restriction on the account.
Th e letter was dated March 21, 2016, so we had to act based on that,” he said.
Earlier, Adedipe had informed the committee that Mrs Jonathan’s personal salary account, as employee of the Bayelsa State government with Ecobank was frozen under similar circumstances, an allegation the bank’s representative also could not satisfactorily defend before the panel.
Th e committee was thus of the opinion that the banks could only take such decision if the EFCC proved that it has obtained a court order for such to be eff ected.
It was also not satisfi ed with responses from the other banks, which had no proof of court directives to freeze accounts with them.
“I want to order all other banks that all the accounts that you have no specifi c pending order from the courts or EFCC, please release them.
“Until EFCC proves otherwise, I’ll ask you to remove the precautionary restriction on the account.
Let me tell you, whatever you do, you must follow the law.
A bank can’t hold a legal entity to ransom”, Nkem-Abonta directed the banks as he ruled on their submissions.
Mrs.
Jonathan’s lawyers, had accused the EFCC of waging a media trial against her, and had stressed in the petition that “of all the former First Ladies of this country, only the NGOs of our client have been singled out for emasculation by the EFCC, with repetitive raids on the offi ces of the NGOs, and unwarranted freezing of their accounts, even without any lawful court order(s)” has not through its personnel or legal representative, appear before the committee.
Th e committee directed the FIRS, which the petitioner accused of raiding Aridolf Jo Resort Wellness and SPA Limited on May 3, 2017 over tax indebtedness, to meet with the management, and reconcile the books for amicable resolution, and to report the progress made back to the committee.
A dramatic dimension was however added, with Majority Leader of the House, Hon.
Femi Gbajabiamila’s reaction to the ruling of the committee, directing the banks to unfreeze Mrs.
Jonathan’s accounts, saying it cannot stand as position of the House.
Gbajabiamila through his Twitter account; @femigbaja argued that that the House will debate report of the committee at resumption from its annual recess.
“Contrary to reports, the House has not made a decision defreezing of bank accounts.
Th e committee report will be debated on resumption,” he wrote on Twitter.
While the committee’s report on the petition is being awaited by the larger House, many followers of the development said it may face a lot of resistance on the fl oor, especially with the position already taken by the Majority Leader.
Th e committee over time, has helped in addressing issues of public interests, and enjoyed the patronage of many aggrieved Nigerians, owing mainly to its speedy dispensation of cases before it, as against the snail-speed nature of the nation’s conventional courts, but to many, it is doubtful if it can in this case, rescue the former First Lady, especially in the face of the current regime’s stance in the fight against corruption.
