The Minister of Niger Delta Affairs, Senator Godsiwll Akpabio, has explained the circumstances surrounding his visit to the headquarters of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission twice in a day and the report he offered the Chairman of the anti-graft agency, Abdulrasheed Bawa, a bribe of $350,000.
Akpabio spoke in a statement by his spokesman, Anietie Ekong, on Saturday.
There had been reports that the former Governor of Akwa Ibom State was detained by the EFCC over issues surrounding the Niger Delta Development Commission, which his Ministry supervises, and an attempt to bribe the EFCC Chairman.
Akpabio, however, denied being detained by the EFCC.
He said he was the one who actually sought audience with the EFCC to discuss issues surrounding the transfer of funds belonging to the NDDC.
He described the online article, entitled: “How EFCC detained Godswill Akpabio for two hours for attempting to bribe the new EFCC chairman, Abdulrasheed Bawa with 350,000 dollars,” as defamatory.
He said the article was fabricated and that there was no reason for him to bribe the EFCC boss as alleged.
Ekong explained that on April 14, Akpabio sought audience with the EFCC Chairman to discuss the transfer of funds belonging to the NDDC.
This, he said, was in respect of the 3 per cent statutory remittances from oil and gas companies in the custody of the EFCC.
He said President Muhammadu Buhari had approved the transfer of monies earlier paid by the International Oil Companies into the Central Bank of Nigeria and EFCC accounts since December 2020.
He added: “The EFCC chairman granted the request and the two officials met.
“They had a robust discussion and the minister received very intelligent and useful input from the EFCC chairman on the on-going NDDC forensic audit.
“However, the discussion was inconclusive since the minister needed to attend a security meeting with select South-South and South-East leaders and governors at the office of the National Security Adviser on the same day.”
The duo, the statement said, agreed to reconvene later on the same day to conclude their interaction.
They did, with the meeting wounding up after more than one hour.
Ekong stated that there was no issue of detention, adding that Akpabio could not have taken $350,000 into the office of Bawa as he went there without a bag or a container.
He said the EFCC boss gave useful and intelligent advice on the methodology of achieving success in the ongoing NDDC forensic audit.
He added that the Minister also sought the cooperation of the EFCC to actualise recoveries of further 3 per cent levies due to the NDDC, but still being owed by some oil and gas companies.
Ekong also debunked the part of the online report that the meeting was arranged by the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami.
He added: “For the umpteenth time, Akpabio did not bribe the Attorney-General with five million dollars as alleged to get Mr Effiong Akwa elevated to the position of the Interim Administrator of the NDDC.”
He recalled that the appointment of Akwa was duly made by Buhari in obedience to an ex-parte order of the Federal High Court, Abuja.
He explained that the court had restrained named members of the Interim Management of the NDDC from carrying out their duties until the application for an order of Mandamus was argued and disposed of.
He said: “In that suit, the court had ordered that the headship of the NDDC be handed over to the most senior Director pending the conclusion of the suit.
“The most senior director at that time happened to be Akwa, who months earlier had replaced the deceased Executive Director of Finance and Administration, Chief Bassey Etang, who passed on in May 2020 after a brief illness.”
Ekong added that the originators of the suit did not replace the deceased Etang with Akwa as a party in the suit, hence his emergence as the Interim Administrator.
He expressed dismay at the dragging of Malami’s office and name into the appointment of NDDC interim administrator that was clearly a child of circumstance.
Ekong expressed the hope that his explanations would disabuse the minds of the general public against the falsehood peddled by the authors of the false and malicious publication.
He advised the general public to discountenance the said publication, adding that it was propelled by persons whose stock in trade was politics of blackmail.