More Furore Over Patience's Mysterious $175m In Skye Bank Account

The $175,750,000 found in an account liked to the former First Lady, Dame Patience Jonathan, but mysterious disappeared from the Skye Bank account has continue to generate more furore among prominent Nigerians.

Calls have gone to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to seek the forfeiture of the sum of $175,750,000 allegedly found in an account linked to former first lady, Mrs Patience Jonathan, The Nation Newspaper reports this morning.

Adding their voices to the call in different interviews yesterday were Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs), including the Chairman of the Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption (PACAC), Prof Itse Sagay, Chief Ladi Williams and Chief Gani Adetola-Kazeem, among other respondents.

How I Increase My Blokos Size & Stopped Premature Ejaculation Issues 

That Scattered My Relationship For 2years.. Click HERE for Details

They all advised the commission to trace the movement of the money after it was initially traced to an account said to belong to a company belonging to the former first lady.

The deposits were said to have been found in the account of Pluto Property and Investment Limited (PPIL), one of the firms allegedly linked to the former President Goodluck Jonathan’s wife.

PPIL was one of the four companies convicted by Justice Babs Kuewumi of the Federal High Court, Abujà on November 2 for laundering the sum of $15.5 million, which the former First Lady insists belongs to her.

Others are Seagate Property Development & Investment Company Limited; Trans Ocean Property and Investment Company Limited and Avalon Global Property Development Company Limited.

Prof Sagay told one of our correspondents yesterday that Mrs Jonathan risked losing the $175m allegedly found in the account of a company linked to her except she was able belongs to her.

He said should the former first lady fail to justify how she acquired the money, it would be forfeited to the Federal Government.

Sagay said the Independent Corrupt Practices and other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) is empowered to seize any funds suspected to be proceeds of crime.

Sagay said: “It is a straighforward matter. If you found a sum of money like that and somebody claims it but cannot establish how he or she acquired it, even under some of the sections under the ICPC law, the person will forfeit it to the state.

“That has to be applied.

“If she was not able to explain how she was able to earn that money, how she earned it, then she will lose it,” Sagay said.

Chief Williams said the former First Lady owes Nigerians an explanation on how she came about the said money.

Speaking in a telephone interview, Williams said: “The EFCC has to invite her for interrogation. She needs to explain the source of the money and must give satisfactory evidence.

“She must be able to tell us if the money was realised through some services she rendered. And if she claims this, she must be able to provide the audited account.

“If the money was got through some business transactions, she should also be able to explain.

“As a first Lady and former Permanent Secretary in Bayelsa State, she owes the nation an explanation.

On his part, Chief Adetola-Kazeem wondered how the sum of $175 million could have vanished without a trace, urging the EFCC to question the relevant bank’s staff.

He said: “If the money was indeed in the account, there’s no way it could have vanished without a trace. The bank should be able to explain how it was moved.

“It was in an account with the bank. The bank must know how it was moved, who moved it and to whom or where it was moved.

“They can always trace that. When the relevant bank staff are questioned, they should be able to disclose how and to where the money was moved.

“It’s simply a question of tracing.”

The Executive Secretary, Socio Economic and Accountability Project (SERAP), Adetokunbo Mumuni, however, advised the commission to seek an interim court order for the forfeiture of the money.

He said: “If Mrs. Patience Jonathan is contesting ownership of the money, what the EFCC should do is to seek an interim court order of forfeiture pending when the case would end.”

Mumuni expressed doubts on whether the former first lady can rationalise and explain away how she came about such a heavy amount of money when she was not an international businesswoman.

He said the money should not be released to the former first lady.

The SERAP scribe said there are provisions in the EFCC Act laying down the process the commission would have to follow to obtain the forfeiture order.

He said there was need for her to justify the source of the money, failing which she should be made to forfeit it to the federal government.

Ozekhome differs

Another Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Chief Mike Ozekhome, however, disagreed with the view that the former first lady should forfeit the said sum.

He said it behooves the state to prove every allegation against any citizen beyond reasonable doubt.

Ozekhome said: “Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution, which they have not yet succeeded in abolishing in spite of their grandstanding, presumes the innocence of a person accused of any criminal offence.

“It is the state or the accuser that should prove a crime beyond reasonable doubt. That is the Anglo-Saxon system of criminal justice which is accusatorial, unlike the French model which is inquisitorial, by which the guilt of an accused person is presumed.

“The suggestion that Mrs Jonathan will forfeit the money if she cannot prove its source is antithetical to democratic norms.

“It is bizarre, and it is illegal to tell a suspect to prove her innocence rather than the state proving that she stole the money.

“That will be turning our criminal justice system upside down. It can never and will never happen in this country, in spite of their wishes.”

IYC, kinsmen defend ex-First Lady

Ijaw youths under the aegis of the Ijaw Youth Council (IYC) Worldwide and kinsmen of former President Goodluck Jonathan, yesterday, rose in defence of allegations of corruption levelled against former First Lady, Patience Jonathan.

The President of IYC, Mr. Udengs Eradiri, said it would be an aberration to ask Mrs. Jonathan to forfeit the money she earned legitimately by virtue of her position.

Eradiri insisted that the bulk of the money under investigation was given to the ex-first lady as a gift by her well-wishers and friends of her family.

He explained that Patience attracted monetary gifts from people, especially at the time she was sick and almost died.

“We knew when she was seriously sick and she went abroad for treatment.

“People were moved, especially those who loathed the idea of the country losing another First Lady.

“They sympathised with her and donated money to enable her seek the best medical treatment.

“So, it was her goodwill that attracted such money to her. That was when the bulk of the money was given to her as a gift,” he said.

Eradiri further bemoaned attacks on the former first family saying among all the former presidents that ruled the country, only the one that came from the Niger Delta region was subjected to constant harassment.

Eradiri said: “This country has produced many presidents but the only one from the Niger Delta is constantly harassed by the machineries of state, especially the EFCC.

“We want to call on the President to please respect former President Jonathan, at least for the fact that he brought peace to this country, handed over peacefully to him.

“He didn’t go to court. He allowed him to run this country. President Buhari should please focus on leadership and stop vilifying the first family.

“Patience Jonathan is not the first First Lady in this country. A wife to former deputy governor, governor, Vice-President and President, are you expecting her to be a poor woman?

“There are other First Ladies in this country.

“In recent time, a former First Lady was awarded a university license. So, we are using this medium to send a message: leave our first family alone.

“Some people are not happy about Jonathan’s rising profile and they want to destroy it.”

Also the Ogbia clan leader of IYC, Osanya B. Osanya, said the entire Ogbia youths condemned the probe of Jonathan and his immediate family.

“We call on the EFCC and the present administration to tread with caution because the Niger Delta people are losing their patience on this hunting of our leaders.

“We call for equal rights and equity”, he said.

The umbrella body of Jonathan’s kinsmen under the auspices of Ogbia Brotherhood warned the Economic and Financial Commission (EFCC) against further victimization of Jonathan’s family.

The President of Ogbia Brotherhood, Chief Benson Agadaga, asked the EFCC to leave Jonathan’s family alone, saying the former President and his wife deserved rest.

Agadaga said: “The former first family had been in public service as deputy governor, governor, vice-president and president for a long time. They have served the country for so long. They need rest and time for their children and family matters.

#Dasukigate: We'll Probe Jonathan If... - Buhari's Panel

The Chairman, Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption, Prof. Itse Sagay, has faulted a former Minister of National Planning, Dr. Abubakar Suleiman, regarding the culpability of former President Goodluck Jonathan in the current anti-corruption cases.

Suleiman, who is the spokesperson for the Peoples Democratic Party Ministers’ Forum, had said in a Sunday PUNCH interview that Jonathan could not be held liable because no stolen funds had been traced to the ex-president’s personal bank accounts.

The ex-minister had said, “All these issues of corruption under Jonathan happened between March and April last year. It was purely an election issue. Nobody has traced any money to Jonathan’s account up till now, but money was traced to Abacha’s accounts.”

However, Sagay told one of our correspondents during an interview on Sunday that although he could not say if there was a case against Jonathan or not yet, the ex-President could be held liable if it could be established that Jonathan made illegal approvals for funds to be paid into other people’s accounts.

He said if, for instance, it could be established that Jonathan gave the Central Bank of Nigeria a directive to pay someone money and the person was not deserving of that money, then the ex-President could be indicted.

Sagay, who is a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, added, “Only the EFCC can say if Jonathan is culpable. Guilt in criminal law requires proof and there must be evidence. So, what I would say is that if a case can be established against Jonathan as regards public funds, then he has a case to answer.

“I don’t know if that has been done. I have not seen anybody who says he was given the money by Jonathan himself although one can say that instructions to any institution that public funds should be released to other people for purposes, which those funds were not designated, is in itself a criminal affair.

“So, it is not only when money is found on you that you have a case to answer. If you are a person in authority, and you issue directives to people under you, who are keeping public funds like the Governor of the Central Bank, and an illegal order is given to him for the release of funds, that, in itself, will raise a case for Jonathan to answer if in fact he issued such an order.”

Another SAN, Mr. Yusuf Ali, said it was too early to exonerate anyone as investigations into corruption that took place under the previous administration were still ongoing.

Ali stated, “The whole process is ongoing. Investigations are still ongoing. Until somebody is convicted, nothing bad can be said about such person. I believe when we get to the bridge, we shall cross it.

“There is no point for anybody to be excited or be happy for now until the whole story is in the open. Investigations are ongoing.”

On his part, a Lagos-based lawyer, Mr. Jiti Ogunye, described Suleiman’s statement as provocative and highly irresponsible.

Ogunye said the fact that a number of persons, who served under the Jonathan administration, were facing criminal trial was enough grounds to charge the former President with conspiracy.

According to Ogunye, Jonathan, as the head of the executive arm, had liability for everything done by his subordinates because the buck stopped at his table.

Ogunye said, “That statement by him is provocative and highly irresponsible. And the reason I say that is that former President Goodluck Jonathan was the head of the executive arm of government at the time he presided over the affairs of the country.

“All the officials that are being held to account and during whose trials, as we speak, Nigerians are now learning about the mind-boggling  stealing or looting of public treasury, were answerable to him; they were running his errands and therefore Nigerians expect that being the person on whose table the buck stopped as of the time he was the President, that he would be able to superintend them and ensure that those his subordinates didn’t loot the nation’s treasury.

“It’s too early in the day for any Suleiman or anybody to give the former President or any other member of that administration a clean bill of health. When you are talking about no money has been traced to former President Goodluck Jonathan, what does it mean?

“On his instruction and while he was running for office, people turned our national security vote into a bazaar and they were giving this money out to his allies and acolytes. So, whose errand were those people running when they were distributing the money? Who wanted to become the President then? And based on those revelations alone, he is culpable, contrary to the claims of Suleiman that nothing has been traced to him.

“Can’t the former President be charged with conspiracy? He can, on the basis of those revelations because for what purpose was the money given to those people? On the strength of that alone, a charge of conspiracy can be sustained against the former President.

“For anybody to be annoying Nigerians with such a statement that nothing has been traced to the former President, one wonders what he was thinking. This is not theatrics, we are talking about things that have wrecked this country and then people are engaging in ludicrous polemics.”