By O.C. Adebayo
“There is a time to tell the truth or else it
is no longer worth it. It is not for nothing that minutes before a priest
formalises a marriage, he asks anyone who has something to say to say it now or
forever hold his peace.” – Mahmud Jega
From the title of this write-up, readers will be
forgiven for concluding too early that this is another tongue-lashing for
former Chairman of House of Representatives Appropriations Committee, Abdulmumin
Jibrin, who came out last month to accuse the Speaker of the House, Yakubu
Dogara, Deputy Speaker Yusuf Lasun, Whip Alhassan Doguwa and Minority Leader
Leo Ogor of budget padding and for allocating N40 billion to themselves out of
N100 billion earmarked for all lawmakers’ constituency projects.
In his August 1st column in Daily Trust,
veteran columnist Mahmud Jega aptly opined that “if Dogara is a corrupt
budget-padding Speaker, Abdulmumin Jibrin should be the last person to say it
because he was the one that nominated Dogara for the top job and he accepted a
plum committee chairmanship as reward. He also kept quiet when allegations of
budget padding were flying all over the place. Apart from padding in N4 billion
for Bebeji/Kiru (Jibrin’s constituency), Jibrin did his best to defend House
leaders from the charges.”
In an effort to get a proper perspective of the key
concept in this brouhaha, I stumbled on an article titled “What is Padding the
Budget?” written by Danielle DeLee where she made some critical observations. I
reproduced an excerpt of that article hereunder to help place things in an
objective point of view:
“Padding the budget is a practice that some people
use in business when submitting a budget for approval. It artificially inflates
the proposed budget in order to give the project room to expand or to cover
unexpected costs. Many see budget padding as unethical, but its practitioners
defend it on the grounds of practicality … padding the budget means making the
budget proposal larger than the actual estimates for the project. This is done either
by increasing a project’s expenses or decreasing its expected revenue.”
She went on: “There is some contention over the
exact definition of padding; some contend that inflating expenses to take
expected inflation into account is responsible foresight rather than padding,
while others see any increase beyond current estimates as padding … First, they
want to account for economic factors. This is true of budget
increases that anticipate inflation or, in the case of international projects,
fluctuations in exchange rates. Second, they want to avoid red tape. If
an unexpected expense arises, the padding gives the project flexibility to
cover it that is called slack or breathing room. Finally, they fear
budget cuts. Some budget paddlers fight against cuts that they see
as unfair by anticipating them with an inflated proposal…
“Aside from the financial consequences, many people
question the acceptability of budget padding because it is a deceptive
practice. They say that it breeds a harmful corporate atmosphere. Budget
padding’s defenders cite its widespread use as a justification of its
acceptability. They also argue that unfair actions on the part of bosses, like
budget cuts, force them into pre-emptive budget inflation”.
Legally,
there is either nothing called padding or nothing wrong with padding. What
Nigerians call padding is legislators carrying out their constitutional
responsibility of appropriation. It is a usual practice in every legislative
arm of every democratic government; even in the United States it is not
strange. However, padding can be morally wrong when some things are considered.
One of these is where it is established that a Member of Parliament (MP)
because of his position in the parliament allocated or re-allocated projects in
the budget to his own constituency at the detriment of other constituencies or
in total disregard for the unity or federal character of the country.
It can also be legally wrong or become a criminal
offence where it can be established beyond reasonable doubt
(this is what the Constitution says) that a legislator included (or padded)
projects into the budget and went behind to corner the money meant for such
projects to his personal pocket. Or where it can be established beyond
reasonable doubt that a legislator was bribed to include projects into the
budget. Now, these are economic and financial crimes or corrupt practices that
law enforcement agencies like the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission
(EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences
Commission (ICPC) will be very much interested in.
In a chat with state house correspondents after a
meeting of about 30 minutes with President Muhammadu Buhari at the Villa,
Dogara not only said padding is not constitutionally/legally a crime in Nigeria
but he went further to challenge those that think it is to carry out research
and find out if padding is documented anywhere in our laws to be a crime. In
his words: “What is padding? You haven’t told me. Ask Jibrin what is padding?
For me, I studied law and I have been in the legislature and all this period I
have never heard of the word ‘padding’ being an offence under any law. If I
don’t know, you are the media, research the law and let me know.”
Many saw this as a bold approach by the Speaker
owing to the fact that some hirelings were quick to jump on his statement to
lampoon him and ask for his head on a platter of gold.
Even the Presidency, through the Senior Special
Assistant to the President on National Assembly Matters (Senate), Senator Ita
Enang, says in all his years of legislative engagement, he has never come
across the word ‘padding’. When he was asked if his comment contradicted the
statement made by Jibrin on the budget padding allegation, Enang said: “In all
our years of legislative engagement, we are yet to find, in the legislative
lexicon, the word ‘padding’. When the budget is presented before the
legislature, the legislature is to consider the budget and pass as they deem
fit. So, what the legislature passes becomes the appropriation upon assent.
Therefore, any word which is yet to crystalize in legislative lexicon, you
cannot hear us mention it.”
Most Nigerians, even among those that claim to have
legal knowledge, always succumb to emotions when analyzing issues of national
interest. Shouldn’t it be clear that morality and legality are two distinct
concepts? I remember so many had earlier called (and some are still calling) on
Senate President Bukola Saraki to resign from his position as the number three
citizen of the country because he is facing trial for alleged false and
anticipatory asset declaration at the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT). They
argue that it is “morally” wrong for him to remain in position when he is
facing trial. They want to morally strip him of the right legally conferred on
him – innocent till proven guilty.
The same puritans have already jumped on the
bandwagon to request for Dogara and the three other House leaders to resign
from their positions. Why? Because an aggrieved erstwhile Chairman of the
House’s Appropriation Committee suddenly received a vision to expose all those
that are behind Nigeria’s ills which conspicuously excludes him. Funny!
In a letter from the All Progressive Congress (APC)
to Jibrin, the party said, “Arising from the series of meetings we held with
you over the subject matter (the crisis in the House of Representatives), the
National Working Committee had decided to request you to henceforth avoid
issuing any public statement on this matter. This, however, includes statements
through social media or other means of transmitting an opinion on the matter to
the public, as the Party is now looking into it towards finding possible
solution.”
As expected, Jibrin disregarded these directives
from the party. The Deputy National Publicity Secretary of the APC, Timi Frank,
believes the lawmaker's disobedience to the APC directive has showed that he
does not have regard for the party leaders. “It is now obvious how
disrespectful, mannerless and desperate Hon. Jibrin could be even to the
leaders of our party, including the national deputy chairman north, national
secretary, national treasurer and others who have been working to ensure that
peace return to the house.
“But if Hon. Jibrin does not have respect for
Speaker Dogara as a person, it is expected of him to respect the office of the
speaker, the number four citizen of our party and the country. Jibrin should
also be told that he has clearly shown disrespect for President Muhammadu
Buhari who is the leader of our party by this singular act.”
I
have argued vigorously on other fora that totally ignoring the allegation from
anyone (even if it is from a disgruntled former associate) because of past
records will be equivalent to throwing the baby away with the bath water.
However, ascribing the title of whistle-blower or sainthood to someone with as
much blemishes just because he has the means to spill incriminating beans about
his erstwhile and estranged boss is totally unbecoming. Nigerians should wise
up and reject jumping on the bandwagon, otherwise we will continue to be taken
on a wild goose ride.
No comments:
Post a Comment