NIMASA: EFCC faults Omatseye’s persecution claims
Adetokunbo Fakeye
Nigeria anti-graft agency, Economic and. Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC on Monday faulted claims of persecution made by a former Director- General of Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency, NIMASA, Mr. Raymond Temisan Omatseye against former Attorney- General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. Mohammed Adoke, in his trial at a Federal High Court sitting in Lagos. Counsel to the agency, Mr. Godwin Obla, SAN, told the court, presided over by Justice Rita- Ofili Ajumogobia that no petition was addressed to the EFCC by Adoke or his office against Omatseye.
Besides, Obla disclosed that the purported matter between NIMASA and the Nigeria Liquified Natural Gas, NLNG, which Omatseye said was the basis for his prosecution, was erroneous as the case is still on-going in another court.
It would be recalled that, Omatseye, in his testimony-in-chief on May 19, 2015, told the court that Adoke called him on phone to drop the case between NIMASA and NLNG, a request he allegedly turned down and which formed the basis of his arrest.
It would be recalled that, Omatseye, in his testimony-in-chief on May 19, 2015, told the court that Adoke called him on phone to drop the case between NIMASA and NLNG, a request he allegedly turned down and which formed the basis of his arrest.
However, in a cross- examination on Monday, Obla posed questions to him as follows: “Would you be surprised to know that the NIMASA and NLNG matter is still ongoing and the current Director General of NIMASA is not on trial in any court for that? Did you see or were you told of any petition that was signed by the AGF against you?”. Omatseye responded that he did not see any.Obla also informed the court that contrary to the claim of Omatseye that one Omorodion’s report was the basis for his interrogation by the EFCC, there was no mention of such a report by the EFCC’s witness that gave evidence in court.
To buttress his position, Obla asked Omatseye: “Was there any mention of any Omorodion report by the EFCC’s witness who gave evidence in court?. Omatseye again responded that there was no mention of the report by the prosecution.
In another round of submission before the court, Obla stressed that a subsidiary legislation of 2010, made pursuant to the Public Procurement Act of 2007, gave a Director General an approval threshold of less than N1 million.
Besides, he faulted Omatseye’s claim that he had two approval authorities, stressing that his approval authority was only limited to his authority as Director General while the other approval authority rested with the Chairman of the Board. Obla also called for exhibits Pw16 a-y which were all award letters of various contracts for supplies. He raised several issues contained in the exhibits and asked questions: “Please look at those documents one after the other, and tell the court if the body of those memos made reference to ‘install’ or ‘installation? And in any of these transactions, is there any report by a Quantity Surveyor, any architectural drawing or civil engineer’s report? Any building, excavation, breaking of any wall, any demolition, repair or renovation of any building, site preparation, drilling, mapping or satellite photo?”. Omatseye told the court that “there is no reference to installation my Lord, and the documents before me did not indicate any of those”.
Justice Ajumogobia then adjourned the matter to Tuesday, June 2, 2015, for the continuation of cross- examination by the prosecution.
