The House of Representatives have gone hard on the former Chairman of the<\/p>\n
House Committee on Appropriation, Hon. Abdulmumin Jibrin, calling him a
\nthief whose removal was purely based on “acts of misconduct, incompetence,
\ntotal disregard for his colleagues and abuse of the budgetary process,
\namong others.”<\/p>\n
The House accused the embattled former chairman of using his office to
\nblackmail Ministries, Agencies and organs of government for monetary
\ngains.<\/p>\n
In a Statement by Hon. Abdulrazak Namdas, Chairman of the House of
\nRepresentatives Committee on Media and Publicity, the House said at
\nseveral occasion, Hon. Jubrin have been called a “thief” by members who
\nare dissatisfied with his dealings as Chairman of the House Appropriation
\nCommittee.<\/p>\n
The Text of the House Statement reads:
\nTEXT OF PRESS CONFERENCE BY CHAIRMAN HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON
\nMEDIA & PUBLICITY, HON. ABDULRAZAK NAMDAS ON 26 JULY 2016:<\/p>\n
1.INTRODUCTION:
\nYou will recall that on Wednesday, July 20, 2016, Hon. Abdulmumin Jibrin
\nwas removed from his position as Chairman of the House Committee on
\nAppropriations and replaced by Hon. Mustapha Bala Dawaki. This was done in
\nexercise of the powers conferred on Mr. Speaker by the House Rules to
\nappoint and remove Committee Chairmen and Deputies in consultation with
\nthe House Leadership.<\/p>\n
On that occasion, the Speaker, Rt. Hon. Yakubu Dogara, had stated that
\nJibrin’s removal was a decision of the House leadership and that
\nincidentally, after that decision, Hon. Abdulmumin himself approached him
\non the floor of the House, just before he made the announcement, notifying
\nhim that the pressure on him was beyond what he could bear and that he no
\nlonger desires to continue as Chairman.<\/p>\n
Strangely, after this, Hon. Abdulmumin went into a press war in which he
\nis maligning, misrepresenting and denigrating the Speaker, the Leadership,
\nthe entire members of the House and indeed the House as an institution.<\/p>\n
It has become imperative that we clarify some of the issues he has raised
\nto set the record straight.<\/p>\n
2. SOME REASONS WHY HON. ABDULMUMIN JIBRIN WAS REMOVED:
\nHis removal was based on sundry acts of misconduct, incompetence, total
\ndisregard for his colleagues and abuse of the budgetary process, among
\nothers.<\/p>\n
a. Immaturity and lack of capacity to handle the Office of Chairman,
\nAppropriations:<\/p>\n
One of the fundamental reasons why the House Leadership removed him is
\nthat, he was found not to be fit and proper person to hold such a
\nsensitive office which exposes him to high officials of government at all
\nlevels.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, in the course of the performance of his duties as Chairman of
\nAppropriations Committee, it became evident that he does not possess the
\ntemperament and maturity required for such a high office.<\/p>\n
b. Tendency and proclivity to blackmail colleagues and high government
\nofficials and misuse and mishandle sensitive government information:<\/p>\n
He was in the habit of collating, warehousing and manipulating sensitive
\ninformation to blackmail people sometimes apparently for pecuniary
\npurposes. And by the virtue of his position as Appropriations Chairman, he
\nmeets with very high and senior public officers at all levels.<\/p>\n
The Speaker and the Leadership were inundated with complaints by heads of
\nMinistries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) over harassment from the House
\nAppropriations Chairman to engage in conduct and acts unbecoming of their
\noffices.<\/p>\n
The Leadership lunched an internal investigation into these allegations
\nand was largely satisfied that action had to be taken to remove him, in
\nthe interest of the integrity of the House.<\/p>\n
One clear example is the insertion of Funds for the so called Muhammadu
\nBuhari Film Village in his Constituency in Kano State without the consent
\nor solicitation of Mr. President. This has brought both Mr. President and
\nthe government to disrepute.<\/p>\n
Again, it was found out that he was fond of inserting projects into
\nprominent persons’ constituencies without their knowledge to curry favour
\nand possibly use it as a means of blackmail against them when necessary.<\/p>\n
One of such is the numerous projects he claimed in a Channels TV interview
\nin April 2016, to have cited in Mr. President’s home town of Daura,
\nKatsina State without Mr. President’s solicitation or knowledge, in a
\ndesperate attempt to blackmail Mr. President as an answer and
\njustification for allocation of N4.1 billion to his constituency when
\nconfronted by the interviewer.<\/p>\n
He did not stop there. Hon Abdulmumin went about soliciting Honourable
\nmembers to nominate projects for him to help them include in the Budget.
\nWhen called upon to defend his actions as Appropriation\u2019s Chairman, all he
\ndid was to be calling names of those members and the amount he helped
\ninclude for them in the Budget in an unsuccessful bid to silence them.
\nMost of the affected members took serious exceptions to his despicable
\nantics and sundry acts of blackmail and protested to the Leadership to
\nprevail on Hon Abdulmumin to expunge from the Budget what he claimed he
\nallocated to them since they did not solicit for those projects.<\/p>\n
To attempt to drag the name of Mr President, Honourable members and others
\nto his new low through sundry acts of blackmail was one of the matters the
\nHouse Leadership found off limits and totally unacceptable.<\/p>\n
c.Unacceptable Mismanagement Of The 2016 Budgetary Process:<\/p>\n
i.It was also discovered that the former Chairman, Appropriations,
\ndiscreetly and clandestinely allocated monies for projects that are not
\nclearly defined in the budget for the purposes of exploiting the
\nambiguities for personal gains.<\/p>\n
ii.Furthermore, he was found to be responsible for some bogus allocations
\nin the budget for projects that have no locations and were apparently
\nnever meant to be executed.<\/p>\n
iii.Hon. Jibrin’s mishandling of the 2016 budget process nearly fractured
\nthe otherwise cordial relationship between the Executive and the
\nLegislature and brought the National Assembly and the government to
\npublic ridicule.<\/p>\n
iv.For reasons that were not noble and not in the Public Interest, Hon
\nAbdulmumin had initially inflated the Budget by adding about N250b more to
\nthe total figure as submitted by Mr President. This, the NASS leadership
\nout rightly rejected as a form of financial recklessness and inability to
\nappreciate the dwindling resources available to government necessitating
\nthat we act prudently. He was directed therefore to make even further cuts
\nbelow Mr Presidents total figure.<\/p>\n
v.Hon Abdulmumin, in his desperation to ingratiate himself into the good
\nbooks of the Presidency, unilaterally entered into commitments on the
\nstructure of the Budget ,without the knowledge of the National Assembly
\nLeadership, in the full knowledge, not only that he had no authority to do
\nso , but dishonestly had no intentions of keeping to those commitments ,
\nhaving done the exact opposite in processing the budget details. This
\nbrought the House into disrepute as it portrayed the National Assembly and
\nits leadership as persons who couldn’t keep their word.<\/p>\n
vi.He displayed crass ineptitude and general lack of capacity to handle
\nthe work, thereby serving as a clog in the appropriations process. He
\ncontributed significantly to the delays in the passage of the
\nAppropriation Bill. No one, not even his Deputy and Members of the
\nAppropriations Committee, could reach him at certain periods during the
\nbudget process.<\/p>\n
Indeed, on the last day of the exercise, he went underground to avoid
\nbeing compelled to show areas he had hidden most of the cuts he claimed he
\nmade, an act which amounted to gross insubordination and an attempt to
\nhold captive, all involved in the budget chain to the point of entirely
\nfrustrating the passage of the Budget.<\/p>\n
The tripartite Committee of the Senate, House and Executive thus
\ncompleted the 2016 Budget without Hon Abdulmumin as he was hiding,
\nbelieving that the job could not be done without him.<\/p>\n
vii.Confirming some of the reasons for his removal and true to type, Hon
\nAbdulmumin has since after his sack, resorted to blackmail, his stock in
\ntrade. He has released documents from dubious sources in a desperate bid
\nto lure gullible members of the public to his side.<\/p>\n
Mr Speaker’s inputs to the 2016 Budget was signed and delivered to him. If
\nhe has honour, let him release the signed inputs of Mr Speaker and not
\npieces of paper that bears no acknowledged authorship. Our counsel to Hon
\nAbdulmumin is for him to be real as a man by bringing up credible,
\nauthentic and verifiable documents or stubborn facts which disclose the
\ncommission of crime on the part of any Member or Leader of the House. If
\nhe can’t, then let him go and sulk in secret over his sack.<\/p>\n
3.LOSS OF CREDIBILITY:
\na.It also came to the knowledge of Leadership that the allocations for
\nthese developmental projects meant for the Appropriations and Finance
\nCommittees’ members were neither disclosed nor properly and equitably
\ndistributed by Hon. Jibrin to them which contributed to massive
\nagitations for his removal.<\/p>\n
b.The Leadership was also in receipt of complaints about his activities as
\nChair of Finance Committee in the 7th Assembly, which had potentials to
\nembarrass the House. Investigations found that from 2011 – 2015 Hon
\nAbdulmumin domiciled with Hadejia – Jama’are River Basin Authority and few
\nother MDAs some of the allocations meant for his former Finance Committee
\nmembers. He was alleged to have aided the use of front companies that
\ncollected funds without executing most of the projects. The Projects have
\nbeen compiled and will be referred to the Anti Graft Agencies to establish
\nwhy the projects were fully paid for and not executed, who collected the
\nfunds and why has Hon Abdulmumin not raised any alarm about the non
\nexecution of the projects even now?<\/p>\n
c.Twice, in Executive Sessions, members unanimously and vehemently
\ndemanded that the Speaker remove Hon. Abdulmumin Jibrin from the
\nAppropriations Committee for gross abuse of his position as Chairman.
\nHowever, the Speaker, tried to manage the situation but members did not
\nrelent on their agitations for his removal not only for gross abuse of his
\nposition but also for the poor and incompetent handling of 2016
\nappropriation process.<\/p>\n
d.The Leadership also observed with embarrassment that since his
\nmismanagement of 2016 Budget process, every time Hon Abdulmumin gets up to
\nspeak on the floor of the House, there was spontaneous chorus of ole!
\nole,! ole! or thief! thief! thief! Barawo! Barawo! Barawo! from Hon.
\nmembers which climaxed in a motion to have him removed as Chairman,
\nAppropriations.<\/p>\n
e.It is regrettably true that Hon Abdulmumin was entrusted with critical
\naspects of the budget, but he is not the sole author of the budget as he
\nappears to be portraying himself. Every reasonable person knows that it is
\na bare faced lie. His stories without corroboration from anyone who was
\ndeeply involved in the Budget process is, mere tales by moon light, a
\nfitting story for bed time. If he has any witness, let them speak up in
\nhis support. Apparently, he doesn’t know that no one can be convicted even
\nin the court of public opinion based on the evidence of one man.<\/p>\n
4. ZONAL\/CONSTITUENCY INTERVENTION PROJECTS IS NOT PADDING:
\nZonal\/Constituency Intervention Projects have their origins in
\nconstitutional provisions as encapsulated in the Fundamental Objectives
\nand Directive Principles of State Policy requiring the government to
\nensure equitable distribution of resources and infrastructure.<\/p>\n
The idea of Zonal\/Constituency Intervention projects arose as a result of
\nthe need to carry every part of the country along in allocation of
\nprojects in the budget, and to address the imbalance in line with federal
\ncharacter principles as enshrined in the Constitution.<\/p>\n
In recent years, there has always been standing lump sum allocation for
\nthe implementation of Zonal\/Constituency Intervention Projects in every
\nbudget proposal from Mr. President including the 2016 budget, as mutually
\nagreed between the Executive and the Legislature.<\/p>\n
The entire annual budget estimates once presented by Mr. President, is
\nreferred to the Appropriations Committee for further legislative input and
\nscrutiny at the conclusion of the Second Reading.<\/p>\n
While it is prerogative of National Assembly members to decide the
\nprojects and their locations, it is the prerogative of the relevant MDAs
\nto choose the contractors, award the projects and to execute. For
\nemphasis, the general impression that monies are given to members of the
\nNational Assembly to execute projects is incorrect and unfounded.<\/p>\n
The allocation of the funds earmarked for Zonal\/Constituency intervention
\nprojects has customarily and traditionally been distributed between the
\nSenate and the House in the ratio of 40-60 as done in the 4th, 5th, 6th,
\nand 7th Assemblies.<\/p>\n
The leadership of both Chambers, including the Appropriations and Finance
\nCommittees are normally and traditionally allocated certain percentages of
\nthese funds, for inclusion in the Appropriation Bill for projects. The
\nremaining are distributed to members of the National Assembly for
\ninclusion of their preferred projects in the Budget. This has also been
\nthe established tradition over the years.<\/p>\n
For the avoidance of doubt, the 8th House of Representatives under the
\nleadership of Rt. Hon. Yakubu Dogara, has not deviated from established
\npractices, precedents and traditions in this matter.<\/p>\n
It is necessary to emphasise that these budgetary allocations are meant
\nfor developmental projects under the purview of these leaders in their
\nConstituencies and at other levels and not for their personal benefit. And
\ncertainly they are not allocations of money or contracts! These projects
\ninclude roads, bridges, water supply, electricity, schools, skill
\nacquisitions etc.<\/p>\n
It should be noted also that arising from oversight and House Resolutions
\non specific critical needs, the Leadership is obliged to accommodate some
\nprojects that may have been omitted or are not captured in Mr. President’s
\nproposal.<\/p>\n
5. POWERS OF NATIONAL ASSEMBLY ON APPROPRIATION:
\nThe powers of the National Assembly on appropriation are clearly spelt out
\nin Sections 4, 59 and 80 (4) of the 1999 Constitution.<\/p>\n
Section 4, empowers the National Assembly to make laws for good governance
\nof the federation while Section 59 confers on the Legislature final say on
\nthe budget.<\/p>\n
Section 80 (4) on the other hand, which confers on the legislature
\nabsolute power of control over public funds, states that: “No money shall
\nbe withdrawn from the Consolidated Revenue Fund or any other public fund
\nof the Federation, EXCEPT IN THE MANNER PRESCRIBED BY THE NATIONAL
\nASSEMBLY\u201d. The word MANNER confers absolute legislative discretion.<\/p>\n
When therefore, the National Assembly appropriates funds in the budget, it
\nCAN NEVER under any circumstances or guise be deemed or regarded as
\ntinkering or padding.<\/p>\n
The legislature is therefore constitutionally incapable of padding the
\nbudget.<\/p>\n
What the Executive submits are mere estimates and proposal as stipulated
\nin Section 81 (1). It is obvious that the Constitution uses the word
\nESTIMATES advisedly. Consequently, it is therefore an exhibition of crass
\nignorance, abuse of language, outright mischief and or blackmail for a
\nlegislator especially one who chaired the Appropriations Committee to use
\nthe word PADDING to describe the action of parliament on the budget.<\/p>\n
The removal, introduction of projects or the amendment of Mr. President’s
\nestimates in the Appropriation Bill CANNOT AND SHOULD NEVER BE CONSTRUED
\nAS AN ACT OF CORRUPTION OR IMPROPRIETY because it is at the core of
\nappropriation powers of the National Assembly as aptly enshrined in the
\n1999 Constitution. It is therefore clear, that no crime or wrong doing can
\nbe legitimately imputed on the actions or conduct of Mr. Speaker, the
\nLeadership or Members of the House of Representatives before, during and
\nafter the passage of the 2016 Appropriation Bill.<\/p>\n
6. CONCLUSION:
\nAfter the House Leadership reviewed all the issues raised above, it was
\nleft with no option but to respect the wishes of the overwhelming majority
\nof Hon. Members to remove Hon Abdulmumin as Chairman, Appropriations
\nCommittee of the House. It was clear to the entire Leadership that in this
\ngovernment of change, Hon Abdulmumin lacks the character and credentials
\nto chair the Committee on Appropriations.<\/p>\n
I am aware that in accordance with the Rules of the House, this matter
\nwill go to the Committee on Ethics and Privileges where Hon. Abdulmumin
\nJibrin will be afforded the opportunity of fair hearing.<\/p>\n
Hon. Abdulrazak Namdas
\nChairman,
\nHouse of Representatives Committee on on Media & Publicity<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The House of Representatives have gone hard on the former Chairman of the House Committee on Appropriation, Hon. Abdulmumin Jibrin, calling him a thief whose removal was purely based on…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":51602,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[17],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-51601","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-exclusive"],"yoast_head":"\n