The article by the former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, CBN and the new Emir of Kano, Alhaji Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, published last week in the Financial Times, made fascinating reading not least because of his amazing ability to reach conclusions totally at variance with those reached by the writers of the forensic report themselves, Pricewaterhouse Coopers. This is a trait that has sadly followed the former Governor of the CBN.
During the time of the whistle-blowing, public opinion was summarised on a television breakfast programme in February 2014, by two leading Nigerian lawyers. Liborous Oshomah was of the opinion that the government fell out of favour with Sanusi because the suspended governor’s tenure was characterised by crisis and inconsistencies.
Oshomah stressed that many of the decisions taken by Sanusi, while in office, were controversial. He mentioned the issue of the banking crisis which resulted in several banks folding up and thousands of workers being laid off, stressing that banks are still unable to recover from it. While commenting on the controversies exposed by Sanusi, Oshomah said the suspended governor waited until the near end of his tenure to hit the government he was a part and parcel of.
On his part, Kenneth Odidika described Sanusi as a “very brilliant man who seemed not to appreciate the enormity of the responsibilities of the office he occupied.” Odidika went ahead to label the suspended governor a ‘talkative’ whose good diction and spoken English and “musical voice” is mere theatrics from Hollywood. He said: For a Central Bank governor to be in every forum, talking both about the economy and all things that are not related to the economy, was unbecoming of a Central Bank Governor.”
He added: “It is rare to see a Central Bank governor, anywhere in the world, speak as inconsistently as Mr. Sanusi.”
Entitled, “Questions on Nigeria’s stolen billions,” Sanusi was his usual pompous, prescriptive self: praising his personal efforts at blowing the whistle on the alleged $20 billion scam at the NNPC, rewriting history and acting as prosecutor, judge and jury.
“Nigerians did not vote for an amnesty for anyone. The lines of investigation suggested by this audit need to be pursued. Any officials found responsible for involvement in this apparent breach of trust must be charged,” he said.
He was wrong
One hopes that his royal highness is also ready to face the truth, as he also cannot hide under amnesty. The truth is that he was wrong when he first wrote his letter to the Presidency insisting that $49 billion was missing. He was wrong when he reversed the figure to $12 billion and he was certainly wrong with his insistence that $20 billion was not remitted to the Federation Account.
Every panel that has investigated this matter had reached a different conclusion than that reached by Mr. Sanusi, yet he clings to his rather unsupported allegations.
The inter-ministerial committee that first tried to unravel the mystery noted a few discrepancies but said no fraud was involved. The Senate committee chaired by Senator Ahmed Makarfi discovered no wrong doings and concluded after exhaustive sessions that money was not stolen. Needless to say, that report was wholly adopted by the upper legislative chamber.
However, when Mr. Sanusi and other conspiracy theorists wouldn’t let the matter lie, one of the leading auditors in the world, Pricewaterhouse Coopers, were contracted to investigate.
What the report says
So what did the report say? In an analysis by Edward Owono on May 11, 2015 in the Tribune, PwC found that there was indeed a shortfall between the amount ($69.34billion) the NNPC received from crude oil lifting and total cash ($50.81 billion) that the NNPC remitted to the Federation Account for the period January 2012 to July 2013.
However, the report then goes on to state clearly that the “NNPC has provided information on the difference leading to potential excess remittance of $0.74billion”. In other words, NNPC actually paid more, NOT LESS, than what was due from it into the Federation Account!
The report showed that NNPC ran its expenses from the money it received from crude oil and remitted the balance to the Federation Account in accordance with the law which set it up. PwC found that the expenses NNPC actually ran were more than it had deducted from crude oil receipts. So on that ground, it was the FGN that owed NNPC money and not vice versa.
During the time of the whistle-blowing, public opinion was summarised on a television breakfast programme in February 2014, by two leading Nigerian lawyers. Liborous Oshomah was of the opinion that the government fell out of favour with Sanusi because the suspended governor’s tenure was characterised by crisis and inconsistencies.
Oshomah stressed that many of the decisions taken by Sanusi, while in office, were controversial. He mentioned the issue of the banking crisis which resulted in several banks folding up and thousands of workers being laid off, stressing that banks are still unable to recover from it. While commenting on the controversies exposed by Sanusi, Oshomah said the suspended governor waited until the near end of his tenure to hit the government he was a part and parcel of.
On his part, Kenneth Odidika described Sanusi as a “very brilliant man who seemed not to appreciate the enormity of the responsibilities of the office he occupied.” Odidika went ahead to label the suspended governor a ‘talkative’ whose good diction and spoken English and “musical voice” is mere theatrics from Hollywood. He said: For a Central Bank governor to be in every forum, talking both about the economy and all things that are not related to the economy, was unbecoming of a Central Bank Governor.”
He added: “It is rare to see a Central Bank governor, anywhere in the world, speak as inconsistently as Mr. Sanusi.”
Entitled, “Questions on Nigeria’s stolen billions,” Sanusi was his usual pompous, prescriptive self: praising his personal efforts at blowing the whistle on the alleged $20 billion scam at the NNPC, rewriting history and acting as prosecutor, judge and jury.
“Nigerians did not vote for an amnesty for anyone. The lines of investigation suggested by this audit need to be pursued. Any officials found responsible for involvement in this apparent breach of trust must be charged,” he said.
He was wrong
One hopes that his royal highness is also ready to face the truth, as he also cannot hide under amnesty. The truth is that he was wrong when he first wrote his letter to the Presidency insisting that $49 billion was missing. He was wrong when he reversed the figure to $12 billion and he was certainly wrong with his insistence that $20 billion was not remitted to the Federation Account.
Every panel that has investigated this matter had reached a different conclusion than that reached by Mr. Sanusi, yet he clings to his rather unsupported allegations.
The inter-ministerial committee that first tried to unravel the mystery noted a few discrepancies but said no fraud was involved. The Senate committee chaired by Senator Ahmed Makarfi discovered no wrong doings and concluded after exhaustive sessions that money was not stolen. Needless to say, that report was wholly adopted by the upper legislative chamber.
However, when Mr. Sanusi and other conspiracy theorists wouldn’t let the matter lie, one of the leading auditors in the world, Pricewaterhouse Coopers, were contracted to investigate.
What the report says
So what did the report say? In an analysis by Edward Owono on May 11, 2015 in the Tribune, PwC found that there was indeed a shortfall between the amount ($69.34billion) the NNPC received from crude oil lifting and total cash ($50.81 billion) that the NNPC remitted to the Federation Account for the period January 2012 to July 2013.
However, the report then goes on to state clearly that the “NNPC has provided information on the difference leading to potential excess remittance of $0.74billion”. In other words, NNPC actually paid more, NOT LESS, than what was due from it into the Federation Account!
The report showed that NNPC ran its expenses from the money it received from crude oil and remitted the balance to the Federation Account in accordance with the law which set it up. PwC found that the expenses NNPC actually ran were more than it had deducted from crude oil receipts. So on that ground, it was the FGN that owed NNPC money and not vice versa.
No comments:
Post a Comment