Again, some lawmakers in the National Assembly have set up a bribery scheme targeting federal universities and other tertiary institutions in the country.
Lawmakers are using intimidation and threats to force the heads of universities to pay N8 million each to approve their allocations in the 2025 budgets, reports PREMIUM TIMES.
This newspaper’s investigation revealed that the extortion scheme involves senators and members of the House of Representatives. The lawmakers, operating through the Senate Committee on Tertiary Education and TETFund and the House Committee on University Education, are demanding money from universities to approve their budgets.
Using an elaborate and complex system created by the lawmakers, 60 federal university Vice Chancellors are required to pay N8 million each (N4 million each to Senate and House Committees).
The lawmakers are expecting N480 million from the extortion, and they have assigned two vice chancellors from the North Central and North West geopolitical zones to coordinate the payments to avoid detection.
In December 2024, President Bola Tinubu presented the federal budget to a joint session of the National Assembly. Committees of the National Assembly are currently conducting budget defence sessions, with various ministries, departments, and agencies appearing before the relevant committees to justify their proposals.
Over the years, there have been consistent allegations of bribery involving lawmakers and the insertion of projects into the budget.
For many university vice chancellors who have appeared before the two committees, the experience has been the same: lawmakers brazenly demand bribes in exchange for budget approval. Vice chancellors who refuse to comply are threatened with probes or the non-passage of their institutions’ budgets.
It was gathered that the House Committee, chaired by Hassan Fulata (APC, Jigawa), set the extortion scheme in motion on 16 January during a meeting with some vice chancellors. At the meeting, the VCs were given clear and firm instructions about what was expected of them.
Initially scheduled for 10 a.m. that day, the meeting was delayed until 3 p.m. due to behind-the-scenes discussions between lawmakers and some vice chancellors.
Speaking anonymously for fear of being victimised, one of the vice chancellors said the lawmakers were explicit in their demands.
The source revealed that the lawmakers criticised the vice chancellors for not cooperating, unlike other institutions that comply without resistance. At one point, the tone of the meeting became more threatening. Sources at the meeting said the committee members “cajoled, threatened, and even humiliated” some vice chancellors.
“They threatened us with probes if we failed to play ball with them,” one attendee told our correspondent. He added, “Most other agencies are not grumbling like the VCs”.
The majority of the vice chancellors reportedly grumbled and complained about the lawmakers’ demands, expressing frustration over the repeated extortion. However, the more they complained, the more aggressive the lawmakers became, escalating their threats of probes.
One vice chancellor raised concerns about the possibility of facing further investigations by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), citing a similar experience they had with other house committees exposed by a our investigation.
In 2023, this paper uncovered how a committee of the house established an extortion scheme targeting universities, colleges of education, and polytechnics.
In that report, this paper exposed how the lawmakers used a Bureau De Change operator to collect their illicit funds. The investigation eventually led to an ICPC probe, but not much has been heard about the exercise.
Responding to the concerns raised about the ICPC, one of the lawmakers reportedly remarked, “Even the ICPC appears before us to defend its budget. The same goes for the Inspector General of Police (IGP).”
Our correspondent contacted the ICPC spokesperson, Demola Bakare, by phone to react to the insinuation of compromise against the anti-graft agency. He laughed off the claim that the ICPC had paid money to any committee.
“You can see that I’m laughing. I’m hearing this for the first time. I will need to check if we are aware of anything like that,” Mr Bakare said. He promised to return to this reporter with the ICPC’s official position. However, he did not revert as promised.
To avoid tracing the transactions to the lawmakers, the committee assigned one of its officials to coordinate the flow of money through numerous accounts, making tracking almost impossible. This has complicated efforts by our correspondent to confirm compliance with the directive or the amounts paid into the accounts.
The investigation revealed that using multiple bank accounts collected through proxies reduces the chances of transferring money to any specific account.
Many vice chancellors appear more reluctant this time, with several sources expressing concerns about the lawmakers’ unending demands for money. In some instances, the vice chancellors have had to contend with multiple standing committees of the Senate and the House and several ad hoc committees.
Earlier on Wednesday, the vice chancellors met with the Senate Committee on Tertiary Institutions and TETFund. However, the meeting was reportedly less confrontational than in the House.
Last year, this paper reported that lawmakers demanded N5 million from universities to pass the 2024 budget. However, the current demand of N8 million appears to have further strained the vice chancellors.
Targeting a stubborn VC
The Vice Chancellor of the Federal University of Gusau, Muazu Gusau, appears to have become a particular target for lawmakers. During the January 16 meeting, the lawmakers threatened to “deal with” Mr Gusau for being “stubborn.”
Sources said the lawmakers criticised Mr Gusau for defying their demands and accused him of not cooperating like other vice chancellors.
“It is unclear what Mr Gusau has done to incur the lawmakers’ wrath, but it seems he has refused to comply with their demands. Perhaps he has rejected previous requests from the lawmakers, as they are always demanding money,” a source, who requested anonymity, said.
The lawmakers reportedly did not specify how they planned to “deal with” Mr Gusau. However, they have a history of using the threat of probes to ensure compliance.
In previous cases, committees have initiated investigations solely to intimidate or humiliate individuals. This paper has reported extensively on lawmakers’ use of such tactics to pressure agencies into submission.
Closed-door sessions have become an effective tool for lawmakers to negotiate bribes and coerce ministries, departments, and agencies (MDAs). Furthermore, the House Committee on University Education has a reputation for excluding the House Press Corps from its proceedings, limiting transparency.
When our correspondent contacted Mr Fulata, the chairman of the House Committee on University Education, he did not return calls or messages seeking his comments on the allegations.
