2015: Nyako, legislators in survival battle 12 hours ago The crisis of confidence between the Adamawa State Governor, Murtala Nyako, and members of the State House of Assembly, involves more issues than most of the actors are willing to make public, reports JOHN ALECHENU To say that the Adamawa State Governor, Admiral Murtala Nyako (retd.) is fighting his greatest political battle yet is to state the obvious. But this was not the case less than one year ago. Precisely in October last year, the Speaker of the State House of Assembly, Alhaji Ahmadu Fintiri, and his colleagues passed a vote of confidence on the governor for providing purposeful leadership for the state. Each of the legislators, who had an opportunity to speak, commended Nyako for his leadership style. They were particularly elated by the cordial relationship which existed between the executive and the legislature. The motion to pass the vote of confidence was raised by Deputy Majority Leader, Mr. Adamu Kamale, and seconded by Alhaji Abdulsalam Jugga. However, the same House is today calling for the impeachment of the governor on the grounds of maladministration and financial recklessness dating back to 2007. There are insinuations that the turn of events was a direct product of the political realignment and scheming for the 2015 governorship election in Adamawa. Political observers have identified the acrimony generated by the governor’s defection from the Peoples Democratic Party to the All Progressives Congress and the subsequent fallout of ward, local and state congresses of the APC as the cause of the festering rift between the governor and the lawmakers. This, they argue, provided a fertile ground for the PDP-led Federal Government to take its pound of flesh from Nyako who has had a running battle with the Presidency. The legislators are said to be angry that their interests were not taken into consideration during the APC congresses. They are also said to be angry that Nyako’s first son, Abdulazeez, who is being speculated to have a governorship ambition, is now calling the shots within the state chapter of the APC. To demonstrate their anger, most of the legislators who were initially sympathetic to the APC, decided to pitch their tent with the PDP which was their original platform. As things stand, the Speaker, who comes from the same zone with the Adamawa APC Chairperson, Binta Masi-Garba, cannot vie for the party’s governorship ticket. Nyako has told all those who cared to listen that he was not in support of any of his children taking over from him in 2015. Obviously, none of the legislators believe him. Signs of trouble emerged when members of the House began to summon officials of the executive to shed light on certain financial transactions. No sooner had they done so than they began to compile a list of alleged financial misdemeanours against the Nyako-led administration. They subsequently agreed during one of their recent plenary sessions to serve Nyako and his deputy with an impeachment notice for “gross misconduct.” The impeachment motion was moved by the member representing Numan constituency, Mr. Kwamoti Laori. Laori, who is also the deputy speaker of the Assembly, reeled out 20 allegations of financial misconduct by the governor. Some of the allegations included the award of contracts of over N8bn through SNECOU Group of Companies Limited, a firm linked to one of the governor’s wives. Other charges included siphoning N300m of public funds through a company, Hydro Source Resources Ltd, in the name of construction of Mubi bypass road without mobilising to site or doing any construction; gross violation of his oath of office by “outrageous” patronage and dominance of family and friends in the discharge of government business. The allegations against Nyako also included diversion of over N400m of the N500m Federal Government intervention fund for flood victims in Adamawa State in 2011. While moving the motion for the impeachment of the deputy governor, Bala Ngilari, on the grounds of financial misconduct, Abdulkarim Umar representing Narrasawo/Binyeri Constituency, also listed six grounds of financial misconduct. He alleged that the deputy governor committed acts of gross misconduct through the diversion of public funds to the tune of N50m released by the state Ministry of Finance based on instructions from the governor. The amount in question was said to be for the acquisition of license for the exploration of solid minerals in the state. Ngillari was accused of extra-budgetary expenditure to the tune of N397, 311,559.05. Nyako was equally accused of abuse of office and violation of the law by appointing his wife, Dr. Halima H. Nyako, as the chairman Adamawa State Action Committee on AIDS, contrary to the laws guiding the State Aids Control Agency. He was also accused of strangulating local government councils and diversion of local government funds under the guise of joint projects. For the uninitiated, the face-off is a localised affair between the governor and aggrieved legislators. However, events of the last few weeks indicate otherwise. Attempts by the Kano State Governor, Rabiu Kwankwaso, a stalwart of the APC, to broker peace between the embattled governor and the legislators have so far failed to yield the desired results. Allegations that the Presidency has more than a passing interest in the crisis have refused to go away. Speculations are rife that huge funds have been deployed through a South-South governor to ensure that Nyako is disgraced out of office. The Adamawa State chapter of the APC is, however, of the opinion that the legislators are acting out a script prepared by the PDP-led Presidency. Rev. Phineas Padio, who is the state publicity secretary of the APC, said, “There is no way a House will bring something that happened in 2007 during a previous legislature as some of its allegations against the governor. It goofed.” However, the deputy majority leader of the legislature dismissed such insinuations. He explained that the issues raised in the notice in question were not contrived. According to him, such insinuations were aimed at diverting attention from the offences committed by the governor and his deputy. He said, “Allegations of inducement by external forces is a figment of the imaginations of those peddling such rumours. What should be of concern to all is whether or not these offences were committed. We were all elected by our people to represent them and if we see anything that will deny them their rights and privileges we cannot ignore it.” That 19 of the 25 members of the Assembly signed the impeachment notice is an indication that the situation cannot be glossed over. For more than a week after the House asked its clerk to serve the governor and his deputy the notice, the clerk has been unable to do so. An attempt by the House to issue the governor and his deputy the letter through legal substituted service has been futile because the court rejected their request. The state acting Chief Judge, Justice Ambrose Mammadi, citing legal authorities, dismissed the application when it was brought before him. Mammadi said, “In view of the holding of Supreme Court judgement in the case of Inikojo vs Adeleke to which I am bound, I refuse to exercise my discretions to grant the application sought by the House of Assembly. I hold that service of the notice of allegations against the respondents must be (through) personal service. I resolve the issue for determination in the negative. I refuse the application, it is accordingly dismissed.” Determined to go ahead with their impeachment plot, nine out of the 25 members of the House of Assembly sat and passed a resolution to serve the notice via substitution after which they published same in two newspapers. There is, however, a snag. Section 188 of the 1999 Constitution stipulates strict procedures for the removal of the governor or deputy governor of a state. It states, among other things, that “the House of Assembly shall, within seven days of the receipt of the notice, cause a copy of the notice to be served on the holder of the office and on each member of the House of Assembly, and shall also cause any statement made in reply to the allegation by the holder of the office, to be served on each member of the House of Assembly. Subsection 5 of the section states that “Within seven days of the passing of a motion under the foregoing provisions of this section, the Chief judge of the State shall at the request of the speaker of the House of Assembly, appoint a panel of seven persons who, in his opinion, are of unquestionable integrity, not being members of any public service, legislative house or political party, to investigate the allegation as provided in this section,” even as the subsection 6 states that, “The holder of an office, whose conduct is being investigated under this section shall have the right to defend himself in person or be represented before the panel by a legal practitioner of his own choice.” The stipulated seven days have lapsed and the governor has obtained a court order restraining the House from taking further action on the issue in contention until the determination of the suit. As things stand, the battle has shifted to the courts, where members of the public are keen on seeing who blinks first. Copyright PUNCH.
Posted on: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 11:37:03 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015