Anxiety as Reps c’ttee summons Jonathan over $1bn Malibu oil deal

Anxiety is now trailing the controversial Oil Prospecting Licence (OPL) 245 as the House of Representatives ad hoc committee investigating the Malabu Oil ) OPL 245) deal has invited former President Goodluck Jonathan to appear before it to give account of his role in the $1billion oil deal.

But the committee has said that the former President is at liberty to give written evidence.

The resolution to summon the former President was disclosed on Wednesday by the Chairman of the ad hoc committee investigating the alleged corruption, malpractices, breach of due process in the award of Oil Prospecting Licence (OPL) 245, Hon Rasak Atunwa (APC/Kwara).

Speaking to reporters on the outcome of the investigation conducted by the committee, Rep. Atunwa said that summoning the ex-President would enable the committee determine the next step to be taken in discharging its mandate.

An earlier attempt by the House committee on April 17 to summon the former president was resisted by Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) lawmakers who viewed it an affront to summon the former president.

However, Jonathan through his media aide, Ikechukwu Eze, had denied allegations that he received a bribe of $200 million as proceeds from the Malabu oil deal and that he never received any summons letter from the ad hoc committee.

But, Atunwa said yesterday that Jonathan is being invited in the interest of thoroughness, natural justice and fair play, adding that the committee had conducted extensive investigation into the OPL 245 saga.

He said, “The committee is of the view that in the interest of thoroughness, natural justice and fair play, it is imperative that evidence should be taken from former President Goodluck Jonathan.

“In arriving at this decision, the committee took account of the following facts: Mr. Jonathan was the President at the material time the ministers brokered the so-called resolution agreement that led to the allegation of $1 billion diversion of funds.

“Mr. Jonathan’s name featured in the proceedings initiated by the Public Prosecutor of Milan in Italy. A UK court judgement in relation to an application to return part of the money being restrained, castigated the Jonathan administration as not having acted in the best interest of Nigeria in relation to the deal.

“The attorney-general of the federation (AGF) at the material time, Mr Mohammed Bello Adoke (SAN), who of course has been charged in relation to the case by the EFCC, has recently instituted proceedings in court wherein he pleads that all his actions were as instructed by former President Jonathan.

“Accordingly, pursuant to the provisions of the constitution, the committee has decided to request that former President Jonathan give evidence to the committee, as to his role in the matter. The secretariat will write to him asking for his response and submissions.”

Responding to questions from reporters, Atunwa added that the former President is at liberty to make a written submission to the committee or otherwise, declaring that his response will determine the next line of action to be taken by the ad hoc committee.

Expanding on the options open to the former President, the lawmaker said, “The proper thing is that the committee has taking a decision that he must give evidence.

“Section 89 of the constitution requires that we ask for the evidence; we’ve asked him for evidence and he must give evidence. We have asked him to give his response and submission.

“The matter is entirely for him, he may desire to send us a written submission and we will consider every written submission. We will take it one step at a time.

“The normal procedure for a committee hearing investigating such a matter is to take a written submission and whatever comes out of that will have to be decided at the committee level.

“Let’s follow the procedure and the way we’ve been operating. Let’s get his response first, let’s get his written submission. Whatever comes out of that will be decided at the committee level.

“At this time, to discuss this will be hypothetical of the modalities of how we take it further, so let’s get his response, let’s get his submission if he so wishes and then we take it from there.”