•Former Aviation Minister Sirika
A HIgh Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) heard today that a firm linked with Jalal Sule Hamma – the son-in-law of the immediate past Minister of Aviation, Senator Hadi Sirika – was paid 100 percent of the contracts sum before the execution of the contracts awarded in relation to the Katsina Airport.
Sirika is being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for among others, allegedly facilitating the award of contracts to a company – Al Buraq Global Investment Limited – in which his daughter, Fatima Hadi Sirika and son-in-law, Jalal Sule Hamma have interests, reports The Nation.
This was made public today by a former Director, Procurement at Ministry of Aviation, Musa Odiniyan, who resumed his testimony as the fifth prosecution witness in the ongoing trial of Sirika, Fatima, Jalal and Al Buraq Global on a six-count charge bordering on corrupt practices.
The prosecution alleged among others, that Sirika used his “position to confer unfair advantage upon Al Buraq Global Investment Limited, whose alter ego, Fatima Hadi Sirika and Jalal Sule Hamma, are your daughter and son-in-law, respectively, by using your position to influence the award to them, the contract for the Apron Extension at Katsina Airport for the sum of N1,498,300,750.”
Fatima is said to be a staff of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Ltd, while Jalal Sule Hamma is described as an employee of the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission.
Today, Odiniyan was cross examined by the lawyer to Sirika and Al Buraq – Michael Numa SAN.
The witness told the court that Sirika’s son-in-law’s firm was paid 100 percent fee for the project with the belief that it would be commissioned before the immediate past President, Muhammadu Buhari left government.
Odiniyan said: “The time of issuing the contract letter to the company (Al Buraq) was at the twilight of the Buhari administration. That was why the contract has a period of six months.
“I learnt that both former President Buhari and the first defendant (Sirika) are from Katsina State.
“The reason for the prompt payment (for the contract) was for it to be completed and inaugurated before the exit of the Buhari administration and not for the purpose of variation,” he said.
Odiniyan added that the Ministerial Tenders Board (MTB) of the Aviation ministry considered the Katsina airport terminal building and the apron projects (which were the two contracts awarded Al Buraq) as critical.
He also explained that such projects were considered as safety projects by the ministry.
The witness claimed that Al Buraq may not have qualified to be awarded contracts by the ministry since it (ministry) had a number of criteria for companies to qualify for award of contract.
He said that the Permanent Secretary of the ministry at the time, gave him (witness) a document, on which he claimed, the then minister (Sirika) minuted on (in red biro), based on which he (the witness) prepared the letter of award of contract to the company.
He claimed that although Al Buraq funded the bond for the project, it was allegedly varied by the Director, Legal in the ministry.
He told the court that he had retired before the delivery period for the contracts, adding that as such, he could not confirm if the ministry sued any company for breach of contracts.
While being cross examined by lawyer to the second defendant, Efut Okoi, Odiniyan said Sirika was neither a member of the ministry’s tenders board nor procurement unit, but the Chief Executive of the Ministry.
He said, as a director in the ministry, he did not have direct access to the minister, adding that his relation was with the permanent secretary of the ministry.
The witness further told the court that he did not receive any memo from Sirika but the permanent secretary gave him a memo and told him (witness) that it was from the minister.
On whether he confirmed from the minister if the memo was truly from him (Sirika), the witness said, “We were guided by the Procurement Act and civil service rules. By civil service rules, I did not confirm from the minister if the memo was from him.”
He added that it was not done in the civil service for a director to bypass his permanent secretary to meet the minister.
The witness further told the court that Al Buraq was invited for the project as a result of the permanent secretary’s directive.
He added that the permanent secretary was the chairman of the ministerial tenders board of the ministry.
Justice Sylva Oriji adjourned till February 10 for the continuation of trial.
