• info@ijawnation.org
  • Ekise No. 2 Quarters, Patani, Delta State, Nigeria.
 The NDDC letter

The NDDC letter

THE NATION

Due process is a vital part of integrity, and the Buhari administration should always place that under focus in its pursuit of a sound body politic and government operatives.

This is lacking in the way the presidency has handled the issue of the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) and its board.

The nation witnessed what looked like a comic drama when the presidency approved a board and sent it for the senate’s confirmation.

The various nominees stood before the legislative body and underwent rigorous screenings. The board was eventually approved, only for a new drama to unfold: presidential reluctance.

It turned out that the president had delayed the swearing-in of the board because of pressures from the Minister of Niger Delta, Godswill Akpabio, and others who ostensibly had objections to the new board.

But the president has insisted that he wanted the results of the inquest into the workings of the agency in the past because of sordid corruption tales that have enwrapped the parastatal since its founding.

The former board led by its chairman, Udoma Egba, and managing director,NisimaEkere, was dissolved and an interim one headed by Joy Nunieh was formed.

It was expected that the new board led by Pius Odudu as chairman and Bernard Okumagba as managing director would take over and replace the interim contraption.

It became the case of the solid yielding to the weak when the presidency announced that it wanted the interim arrangement to preside over the board while the forensic audit was undertaking its task to reveal the stories of sleaze behind the portal of the NDDC.

We thought it was embarrassing that the presidency could take its time to consult and select a group of citizens to run an agency and even assign them positions for executive functions only to renege.

The names were sent to the senate because the presidency thought it had done a good job, and from all indications no one had raised a slur about any of the individuals who constituted that board.

To say that the board ought to cede its place to the interim group before a new board would come on stream ought to have been thought through before sending the list to the senate. But it does not mean that that list should be recomposed.

In the letter sent to the senate, it is not clear what the presidency wants to do. Is the presidency dissolving the old board and reconstituting a new one, or is it restoring the old one while putting it on suspension until the forensic work is concluded?

According to the letter, the presidency says “in order to allow for uninterrupted process of the forensic investigation, the board appointment confirmed by the senate has to be on hold to allow the interim team continue to manage the commission pending the outcome of the forensic audit.

Therefore, anew board of the commission will be recomposed for confirmation by the senate.”

May the presidency meant to use the world “dissolve” and not “put on hold,” which means suspend. To put on hold still retains the integrity of the list.

You cannot recompose what is merely on hold. Or does the presidency want to revisit the list with a view to dissolving it?

What is clear is that the whole affair should not repeat itself as it does not show a painstaking attention to a task.

The matter has grown from a look at the forensic or the belief in good governance to a show of political muscle flexing.

The NDDC is one of the fraught institutions of Nigeria, with accounts of strong men turning our patrimony into personal fiefdoms. The presidency wants it sanitised, so should the process of doing it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *