The committee has therefore summoned the
Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, Prof.
Attahiru Jega; the Attorney-General of the Federation, Mr. Mohammed
Adoke, and others to offer explanation on the issue.
Also summoned by the committee are
Nigeria’s High Commissioner to South Africa, the Permanent Secretary,
State House, and officials of the Central Bank of Nigeria.
The Chairman of the committee, Mr.
Solomon Olamilekan, said on Monday that the government officials were
summoned to establish the truth about the payment.
He said there was confusion over the exact amount of money that was actually paid for the printing of the ballot papers.
The lawmaker said two conflicting
figures of N1.015bn and N2.03bn had been separately mentioned as the
amount spent on the printing.
At a session of the committee in Abuja,
Olamilekan recalled that the printing of the fresh ballot papers became
necessary after a judgment of the Supreme Court declared that former
Vice-President, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, was qualified to contest the 2007
presidential election.
INEC had earlier barred Abubakar from contesting the election before the court delivered the judgment.
Olamilekan explained that INEC was
about to conduct the election without Atiku’s name on the first set of
ballot papers before the Supreme Court judgment came in April.
He said INEC was compelled in the circumstances to print another set of ballot papers with Atiku’s name included.
Olamilekan said available records
showed that the Central Bank of Nigeria transferred N1.015bn to the
Nigerian High Commission in South Africa to print the 65 million ballot
papers.
He also said the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation raised another cheque in the same amount.
He said, “The ballots papers were printed at the cost of N16 per copy.
“What was the exact amount paid to print the papers? Was it N1.015bn or N2.030bn?
“Was there a case of double payment? We have to establish what exactly transpired.”
The committee also
accused the Budget Office of the Federation of promoting fraud by using
the Service Wide Vote, which the project was contracted to, as “slush
funds.
No comments:
Post a Comment