The Presidency has said that Vice-President Atiku Abubakar remains indicted for his roles in the alleged mismanagement of the Petroleum Technology Development Fund accounts.


The declaration by the Presidency on Wednesday was against the backdrop of the nullification on Tuesday of the reports of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission and Administrative Panel of Inquiry on the PTDF by a Lagos High Court.


A businessman, Chief Oyewole Fasawe, who was indicted alongside Abubakar, had on October 13, 2006 asked the court to void the reports.


The respondents to the suit were the Attorney-General of the Federation; the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission; the State Security Service and the Inspector-General of Police.


Although Fasawe filed an ex-parte motion, the court ordered him to put the respondents on notice.


The AGF and the EFCC, however, filed separate objections to the suit.


The trial judge, Justice Inumidun Akande, consolidated the three motions, including the one by Fasawe, and ruled that her court had jurisdiction to hear the matter.


The court also on October 20 issued an order which restrained the EFCC from arresting, detaining or harassing Fasawe.


In her judgment, Akande said President Olusegun Obasanjo erred in his decision to receive the reports of the EFCC and an Administrative Panel of Inquiry on the PTDF accounts.


The judgment, however, caused political ripples in the country, leading to different interpretations on the purported clearance of the VP.


But the Special Assistant to the President on Public Affairs, Mallam Uba Sani, said in a statement that the VP ought not rejoice over the ruling because he was not a party to the suit by Fasawe.


Sani, who reminded Abubakar that his case at a Federal High Court, Abuja was yet to be concluded, added that the Lagos High Court lacked the authority to handle the case.


He argued that the suit should have been brought before a Federal High Court since the EFCC was a federal agency.


Sani said that it was wrong to accept conclusions in the media that Abubakar had, by virtue of the Lagos High Court ruling, been cleared of his alleged wrongdoings.


The statement by Sani reads, ”We deem it as necessary to react to the Lagos State High Court ruling declaring as null and void the reports of the EFCC and the Bayo Ojo Administrative Panel which indicted Chief Oyewole Fasawe over the PTDF account.


“In the national dailies of Wednesday, November 29 2006, the vice-president was also said to have, by extension, been cleared of his indictment by the EFCC and the Ojo panel.


“We wish to state as follows:


“Fasawe approached the Lagos High Court for the enforcement of his fundamental rights. The vice-president was not a party to the suit. He cannot, therefore, appropriate what he did not ask for.


“The vice-president‘s case is still before the Federal High Court in Abuja. Until the case is determined, the vice-president remains indicted by both the EFCC and the Ojo panel.


“The Lagos State High Court lacks the jurisdiction to handle a case involving the EFCC because the EFCC is a federal agency. Therefore, Fasawe‘s suit ought to have been filed before a Federal High Court, not a state high court. The EFCC has already filed an appeal challenging the ruling of the Lagos State High Court.


“We urge Nigerians to beware of mischief makers. We must remain vigilant. We must not sacrifice the war against corruption on the altar of political expediency.”


When contacted on the telephone by one of our correspondents on Wednesday, Ojo said he was awaiting a copy of the Lagos High Court ruling.


Ojo said, “I have applied for a copy of the judgment. I will call you back as soon as I get and read it.”


On its part, the EFCC said it had filed an appeal against the judgment of the Lagos High Court at the Court of Appeal in Lagos.


The commission’s counsel, Mr. Rotimi Jacobs, told our correpondent in Lagos, that the nation had not heard the last words on the matter.


He said, “It is laughable that some people will link the Vice-President with a matter in which he was not a party. Fasawe was the one that filed the suit and there was no time during the pendency of the suit that the VP‘s name ever featured.


“And that was why my client was surprised on Tuesday when some media reports implied that the matter involved the VP. That is not true. The position of the law is that Fasawe had gone to court, seeking the leave of the court to enforce his fundamental human rights.”


He said the EFCC had filed a notice of appeal at the Court of Appeal in Lagos.


He said the EFCC was complaining that Akande had erred in her judgment delivered on Tuesday.


The notice of appeal, based on eight grounds, was dated November 29 and it was filed by Jacobs.


Our correspondentS also gathered that the commission had concluded plans to file a stay of execution of the lower court‘s decision, pending the determination of its complaints at the appellate court.


The EFCC had in some of its grounds of appeal, claimed that the lower court wrongly assumed jurisdiction over the suit.


It said that the commission, the AGF and the Inspector-General of Police were protected by the Public Officers Protection Act.


The commission also faulted the lower court‘s verdict in setting aside its report, adding that its report on the PTDF was not final.


It insisted that Fasawe was yet to be arraigned, tried or convicted in respect of the report.


It added that it was wrong for the lower court to hold that it had no right to detain Fasawe, saying that detention was inherent in the investigative powers of the EFCC.


The anti-graft body also reminded the lower court that Fasawe’s right to liberty was not absolute.


The EFCC also claimed that it was wrong of the lower court to grant an order of perpetual injunction, restraining it from arresting Fasawe.


It said that the judgment by Akande violated the EFCC’s constitutional and statutory powers to investigate and prosecute offenders in court.


It added that what the judge granted was an order of perpetual injunction to shield Fasawe from criminal prosecution.


No date has been fixed for the hearing of the matter.


Meanwhile, loyalists of the VP have asked Ojo to resign from office for misleading Obasanjo.


The call was contained in a statement on Wednesday by the National Director of Publicity of the Turaki Vanguard, a pro-Atiku Abubakar group, Mr. Chukwuemeka Eze.


The statement read in part, “We the members of Turaki Vanguard consider this monumental and historic judgment as justification of the axiom that the judiciary is the last hope of the common man.


“In this case, the last hope of our democracy being bastardised by President Olusegun Obasanjo and the PDP leadership.


“This judgment demonstrates the supremacy of the judiciary over despotism and tyranny exhibited by Obasanjo and his clique.”


The statement said that Ojo; the Chairman of the EFCC, Malam Nuhu Ribadu; and the Minister in the Presidency, Malam Nasir el-Rufai, should all resign for heating up the polity.


It noted that the conduct and utterances of these public officers were laced with hatred and abuse of office.

Mobinga:


WHAT THA HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU

sley4life:

2 enemies. If OBJ knew Atiku was a disguise he wuld have picked a better vp. Both men are criminals

Mobinga:


WHAT THA HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU