Azubuike Okorie, an Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) witness in the trial of former Aviation Minister Hadi Sirika, has told a Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court that under the Procurement Act, only the Permanent Secretary of the ministry is responsible for ensuring compliance with the Act.
The witness, a retired Director of Procurement in the ministry and a special assistant to the former minister, stated this while testifying as the second prosecution witness (PW2) in the corruption case against the former minister, who served during the administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari.
Sirika was brought before Justice Suleiman Belgore, sitting in Garki, Abuja, by the EFCC, along with his brother, Ahmad Abubakar Sirika, and two companies, Enginos Nigeria Limited, said to be owned by the former Minister’s brother, and Alburaq Limited.
They are being prosecuted by the EFCC on a 10-count charge bordering on abuse of office, criminal breach of trust and use of position for gratification.
The anti-graft commission alleged that the former minister awarded various contracts to his younger brother to the tune of about N19.4 billion without following due process of law.
The EFCC claimed that Sirika gave an unfair advantage to Enginos Nigeria Limited, whose alter ego is his biological brother, Ahmad, by using his position to influence the award of a contract for the construction of a terminal building at Katsina Airport for N1,345,586,500.
The anti-graft agency also claimed that the former minister used his position to influence the award of the contract for the establishment of a Fire Truck Maintenance and Refurbishment Centre at Katsina Airport for N3,811,497,685.
It also claimed, among other things, that Ahmad and Enginos Nigeria Limited possessed the sum of N2,337,840,674.16, which they knew was the indirect proceeds of the former minister’s criminal conduct.
The offences, according to EFCC, were committed in Abuja between August, 2022 and May, 2023.
The prosecution said that the offences are contrary to the provisions of Sections 12 and 19 of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000; Section 17(b) of the EFCC (Establishment) Act, 2004 as well as Section 315 of the Penal Code Act, Cap 532, Acts of the Federal Capital Territory and punishable under the same Acts.
The defendants, however, have pleaded not guilty to the charges.
At the resumed trial on Thursday, the witness, while being cross-examined by the former minister’s counsel, Kanu Agabi, SAN, told the court that the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Aviation was the ministry’s accounting officer and was responsible for all contracts awarded.
According to him, Sirika was not a member of the ministry’s ministerial tender board, and contracts were awarded based on memoranda presented by the contract secretariat, which was led by the ministry’s Director of Procurement.
Okorie stated that the Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP) was in charge of issuing no objection certificates to contracts, and that the Bureau had issued a certificate of no objection for the contract under consideration in court.
“There was a certificate of no objection to this particular contract, but I was not present in the procurement department at the time. “The certificate of no objection means the contractor is eligible,” he informed the court.
He stated that the BPP was solely responsible for determining eligibility, and that the former Minister’s role was limited to concurrence when the tender board made an award.
He explained that he gave a statement to the EFCC after its operatives searched his car and discovered some documents, and they later labeled him a suspect.
According to him, “I don’t know what they suspected me for. Yes, I signed but this suspicious thing was not there when I did.”
He told the court that he did not notify the former minister when he removed the documents from his (Sirika’s) office that the EFCC discovered in his car and tendered as Exhibit B in court, and that there was no record of the document removal in the Minister’s office.
The witness had previously stated in his evidence-in-chief that he obtained Exhibit B and other documents from Sirika’s office, made photocopies, and kept some for himself while forwarding others to the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry and the Director of Procurement.
He stated that when he saw the folder containing the documents, there was a label attached to it directing that the documents be delivered to the permanent secretary and director of procurement.
He told the court that he met Enginos Nigeria Limited while serving as chairman of the implementation committee as special assistant to the former minister. The members of the committee visited Katsina and invited all contractors.
He confirmed that he knew the founder of Enginos Nigeria Limited, Ahmad Abubakar Sirika, the case’s second defendant.
When asked if he knew the former minister’s relationship with the second defendant, the witness said, “Based on his name, I believe he is his brother.” This made everyone in the courtroom laugh.
He did, however, state that he was unaware of the second defendant’s status as a federal government civil servant.
Following the former minister’s cross examination, Justice Belgore adjourned the case to November 12-14 for the continuation of cross examination by counsel for the other defendants, as well as the continuation of trial.
