Oil Sector Probe: The Ball Is In Jonathan’s Court – Ribadu

A verbal warfare yesterday occurred in Abuja when the chairman of the Petroleum Revenue Task Force,  Mallam Nuhu Ribadu, openly attacked the deputy chairman of the task force, Mr Steve Oronsaye, for allegedly compromising his position during a national assignment.
The venue of the dramatic event was the Presidential Villa, Abuja, while the event was the presentation of three reports of the revenue task force by the Ribadu-led committee members.
In what could be termed as unprecedented, a bewildered President Goodluck Jonathan listened with rapt attention as Ribadu told him that the much – awaited report was now with him, asking him to do what is right on the grounds that certain stakeholders had opposed the presentation of the report.
But Oronsaye disagreed with Ribadu, contending vehemently that the process leading to the preparation of the report was flawed.
The development came just as Ribadu, the former Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission ,EFCC, confirmed that the report of the Petroleum Revenue Special Task Force which was leaked and widely circulated in the media was the authentic one he presented to the president yesterday.
Almost at the point of shedding tears, Ribadu, who said he weeps for Nigeria, accused Oronsaye of having been compromised.
When asked by Jonathan to respond to the allegations by Oronsaye and another member of the committee, Mr Bernard Otti, Ribadu informed the president that  the duo had compromised their positions in the committee. He added that they ought to have resigned their membership since they had accepted to be members of the board of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, NNPC.
He said, “This task force was set up in February and we started working almost immediately. Most of the members you are seeing here abandoned everything they were doing and gave everything to it. We worked almost every day for about three months.
“Steve Oronsaye never participated  even one day in the deliberation of this committee, not even for a single day; he never. The first time we saw Steve was at the end of work. When we were asking about recovery from companies he jumped in. All the members are here; they can bear witness to all I’m saying.”
On the need for the president to do what is needful over the report, Ribadu said, “Mr. President, it is your government, it is your work and, whatever it is, it’s you and nobody else. This recommendation is for you to use. You thought it wise to call people from outside to come into the industry and look at it critically and give you an honest opinion.
During the work of the committee, Oronsaye got himself appointed on the board of NNPC. The other gentleman who spoke, Otti, became the director of finance of NNPC and they decided to more or less bully everybody to take over. And they wanted us to write for them but the committee members refused.
“By the time they were appointed, the honourable thing they would have done was to resign from the committee. They refused to resign. Steve has not been in the country; he flew in this morning for him to come and do this, and I think our president deserves more respect than what you have done now.”
Oronsaye was apparently burning in an unquenchable desire to tell the president that he was receiving a flawed report  as the former permanent secretary at the State House and former head of service of the federation countered Ribadu, describing the process that produced the report as flawed.
He said, “I did not start with the committee until much later because I was busy in some other assignments. But when I joined, I made certain observations. But I want to make a general statement. No matter how elegant a house may be, if the foundation is faulty, it will collapse. In the same vein, if a process is flawed, the outcome of the process will not be sustained.
“I want to say to you Mr. President that the process that has been followed is flawed and the report that has just been submitted to the honourable minister is the immediate reaction of the president’s directive that the report be submitted. The last time this committee met was in early July when the draft report was to be considered and I raised certain pertinent issues. It was agreed and suggested and accepted at that meeting that a small group be put together to review, modify and return to the report drafting committee before presenting to the whole house.
“That did not happen. No matter how good the efforts that have been put into this exercise, as long as the process is flawed and that report is one that cannot be implemented. Let me say too that this other report which circulated was actually not accepted by members. That was the reason why the committee was to go back to modify, review and return.
Then on Wednesday, by 5pm, a notice came: there will be a meeting by 12 noon on Thursday with an attachment. With all due respect, I refused to open my mail because we had agreed that if any report is to be considered, it must be circulated with at least five clear days for members to review, make clear recommendations.
“When Mr. President gave the directive that the report be submitted today, we should have been man enough to say, it is not feasible. When I came in, I asked the secretary, where is the signature page? He said the chairman is to sign for all of us. I said certainly, I have not authorized anybody to sign on my behalf. I don’t know what the report contains. Therefore, in my view, I do not think the report should be accepted at this time. I challenge any member of this committee to take me up.’’
Throwing his full weight of support behind Oronsaye’s position that the process adopted by the committee in arriving at its report was flawed, a member of the committee, Otti, also distanced himself from the report, arguing that members did not see the report before it was submitted to the president.
But two other members of the committee, Sumaila Zubair, who is the acting secretary of the committee, and Ignatius Adegunle disagreed with Oronsaye and Oti, and maintained their ground that the duo (Oronsaye and Oti) did not participate in the meetings of the committee.
Insisting that the report was a sham, Oronsaye fired back again. “It is unfortunate that the point has been missed on the process issue. We agreed that the committee be brought to a committee of the whole. That was not done. Some of the figures that were in the draft report were un-reconciled figures and I did say in that meeting that we have institutions responsible for these figures and therefore you should work with these institutions. I do not know whether DPR and FIRS are here.
These are the people who should be talking about these figures and there were statements that were subjective. What I am saying is that the president has said come and submit the report, so what, if we are not ready, we are not ready. When I say so what, the president has spoken, we should be man enough to tell the president that we are not ready. That is the reason why you are handing over a report that is not process- driven.”
Overwhelmed by the incisive attacks by Ribadu and Oronsaye, which compelled members of the committee to express divergent views, Jonathan asked members of the committee to submit their dissenting opinions different from recommendations made in the report to him through his chief of staff or the minister of petroleum resources.
He added that the face-off between Ribadu and Oronsaye was minor and that Nigerians must ignore it and focus, instead, on the content of the committee’s report and ways of purging the petroleum industry of corrupt practices.
Appealling for calm and understanding, Jonathan said: “Any member that has any observations should write it and send to me through the chief of staff or the minister. If there are errors of calculation from the institutions it will be filtered out. You don’t need to quarrel about it. Government has no interest in hiding anything. It is not to investigate anybody in government. Becoming board members of NNPC does not disqualify them to be members; sometimes you need those in establishment to explain certain things and not to influence anybody. I don’t believe anybody can influence Ribadu negatively”.
On the authenticity of the report, Ribadu said, “What has been circulated is the same as what we submitted today. There is no difference and you can see clearly what happened. We work for our country and we work for our people and stand by what is the truth. Nothing can change that. What we said is exactly what we have produced.
Some of the things that have been going on in the last one week or so, show that when you are working with a group of people, so many people are involved; so you may not be able to control all the outcome. Possibility of leakage is there. But from what we have today, you can see the authenticity of the reports itself. Go to the report that we have given, it is the same thing. No change”.
Speaking while presenting the report to President Jonathan, Ribadu pointed areas that needed critical attention in the industry, including payment of royalties and the use of traders to sell crude oil, saying Nigeria is the only country in the world where crude oil is being stolen.
He said: “The federal government should take action on issues of outstanding royalties, petroleum revenue task, and nefarious penalties for example, gas flaring penalties. Mr. President, the companies that are operating in Nigeria today are making huge money from our country. A lot of them are going out and investing in other parts of the world.
The least that they can do is to give us our own entitlement. We have found out that so many of them, even simple things as royalties they don’t pay. We need the money. We need them here. We need them to continue to do business but also let them also look at us and give us what is certainly our own entitlement.
“Mr. President, another point I will properly highlight is the use of traders to sell our own crude oil. Look at it critically; Nigeria is the only country in the world today doing that other than Congo. I don’t think we should be comfortable in the neighborhood of Congo. We have our own crude, we can sell directly like what other countries are doing.
Mr.President increasing crude oil theft is a national tragedy and grave consequence and there is need for urgent government action. It’s one of the main reasons why we are losing people who are interested in coming to do business in Nigeria. So many countries today are discovering crude oil even within our region. Ghana, Serria Leone, Liberia. Companies do have options. We have to work hard to make our place attractive for people to come and do business with us.
“The insecurity in the Niger Delta, the theft of crude oil – Nigeria is the only country in the world where people steal crude oil. Mr. President, it is embarrassing. You have done well already, you are doing it, but you probably have to continue with it because you have to put a stop to it”.
Calling for a more stringent regulation of the sector as it borders on collection of revenue from oil companies, he said: “Mr. President, the recommendation of our task force will strengthen institutions responsible for the management of petroleum institution, increase revenue accruing to federal government of Nigeria. Mr. President our assignment is essentially to enhance government revenue in proving transparency and accountability and help you to fight corruption in this industry. Therefore in the course of the assignment, our work was extensive, our findings, details and our recommendations far-reaching in these various issues covered in our terms of reference.”
“The government will need to put in place a coherent financing solution that allows government to fund its obligation under the joint venture contract. Funding government obligation will unlock additional capital from our JV partners which will, over time, increase government revenue from the proportionate additional balance of crude oil revenues, royalties on the entire production and taxes on taxable incomes.
Reacting to the disagreement, petroleum resources minister, Diezani Allison Maduekwe urged Nigerians to downplay the disagreement between members of the committee and focus on the salient recommendations contained in the report.
Speaking to State House correspondents after the event, Ribadu said, “Well, you have seen it. There are only two of them. All the other members spoke with one voice. We are one. We stood on what we believed is the right thing and we have given the report as one committee. Two people who unfortunately have already been compromised by being given public appointment in that same industry are the ones who are trying to cause the confusion.”