Connect with us

News and Report

The Villa’s Chief of Staff

Published

3 months ago

on

 

The office of the Chief of Staff to the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, has suddenly acquired a larger than life aura. The powers believed to be domicile in that office are now synonymous with that of the president himself. The progression of that office, through the window of time, started in recent years.
Rising from the backwaters of official obscurity, akin to the civil service rule of “being seen but not heard”, the office of the chief of staff to the president is now one that many people would do anything – indeed go to any length – to occupy.
Although not a constitutional creation, its functions are largely at the discretion of the president, with direct supervision of his activities, personal staff, and security details.
Since 1999, when former President Olusegun Obasanjo introduced the idea patterned after the US presidency, Aso Rock Villa, has played host to a few persons as chief of staff to successive presidents. Each of them lived their time and left their marks in the sand of time.

 

From General Abdullahi Mohammed under Olusegun Obasanjo to Gbolade Osinowo under Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, Mike Oghiadomhe and Jones Arogbofa under Goodluck Jonathan, Abba Kyari and Ibrahim Gambari under Muhammadu Buhari and now Femi Gbajabiamila, under the current president, Bola Tinubu, that office has been shaped largely by the content of the characters of the individual appointees.
Unfortunately, apart from the late Mallam Abba Kyari, who was considered “too powerful” under Buhari and thus, received constant knocks and criticisms for doing his job and taking the flaks for his principal, none other comes close to Gbajabiamila in terms of attacks and constant machination of antics designed exclusively to get rid of him.
Today, Gbajabiamila is one of the most popular persons in the country – holding office or not. This, sadly, is not on account of the fact that he was not doing his job well. But essentially, because he has in his hands what several other people desperately covet.

 

Perhaps, it comes with the job and the territory. But the recent interpretations accorded an otherwise innocuous statement by the presidency, which last week hinted at possible cabinet reshuffle was rather discrediting.
Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, while addressing State House correspondents in Abuja, said Tinubu would be aided in his decision by public opinions that have been empirically extracted.
In company with another Senior Special Assistant to the President on Digital and New Media, O’tega Ogra, Onanuga said there was no timeline to when Tinubu would reshuffle his cabinet, which he inaugurated in August, 2023.
“I don’t have any timeline. The president has expressed his desire to reshuffle his cabinet, and he will do it. I don’t know whether he’s going to do it before October 1, but he will surely do it.

 

“So that’s what I will say. He has not given us any timeline he’ll do it, but he will do it. He has expressed his plan he wants to do it,” he said.
Ogra would further shed more light on the planned exercise. He explained that the president would be guided by an empirical process, making reference to the performance indicator of everyone.
This, of course, was being coordinated by none other than the Special Adviser to the President on Policy Coordination and head of the Central Delivery Coordination Unit, Ms. Hadiza Bala Usman.
He added: “We also need to realise that the president’s decision to reshuffle is also based on empirical evidence. He said it during the retreat for the ministers that they were going to have periodic reviews, and the decisions that are extracted from these reviews will be used to make that final decision.

 

“I know he’s got a couple of reports, and as Mr. Onanuga said, when he’s ready to do that, I believe he will,” he said, adding that the president has also instructed his ministers to actively promote the accomplishments of his administration.
“The president has given an order to all his ministers at the last Federal Executive Council (FEC) meeting to go out there and speak about the activities of his administration.
“Some of them have been media shy, television shy, radio shy, and he wants them to overcome all that and go out there and speak about what they have been doing.
“Because the feeling out there is that government is not doing enough and the government has been doing a lot. It is up to them to go out there and blow their own trumpet. They should go out there and talk about what their ministries have been doing,” he added.

 

Nothing in the statement above suggested that the president had hinted at the possibility of dropping any of his appointees. At best, the statement was big on the word “reshuffle” and not “shake-up” even though they both mean changes to the cabinet.
However, while the former presupposes moving people around to improve the effectiveness of the government, the latter indicates a more chaotic situation, which suggests dropping some appointees outright, albeit for the same purpose. Still, it would not be out of place if he drops anyone as he deems fit.
But the brazen misinterpretation of facts in some of the reports, insinuating that Gbajabiamila was top on the list of those who had been penciled in to be relieved of their duties, was not only curious, but further exposed the reality of the forces that seemed to have piled up against the chief of staff since he assumed office.

 

For context, the expanded work of the chief of staff varies from president to president. Aside from the ability to exercise discretion, in addition to the rudimentary responsibilities of the office, he functions majorly at the whims of his principal.
In the case of Gbajabiamila, he had so earned his principal’s confidence that the president once deemed it expedient to come out to defend and as well reiterate his confidence in him, at the peak of the attacks against him.
This happened at one of the Federal Executive Council (FEC) meetings in October 2023, during which Tinubu also set the ground rules for those eligible to attend the meeting.
“Let me reiterate  that a lot of stories are going around about what is happening. I’ve told everyone that I can make mistakes. They’re bound to air them out and correct them.
“Perfection is of God. I have confidence in the integrity of my chief of staff. All campaigns of calumny and insinuations should stop. The buck stops here.
“If I make a mistake, I’m ready to own up to it. We’re all joining hands to fight corruption, and we want to enforce the law with you,” he explained.
Even if it was a façade (which it didn’t really seem like), the fact that the president came out to stoutly defend his chief of staff was enough to douse insinuations and quell the vacuous struggle for that office, intended to viciously pull down the current occupant, Gbajabiamila.
The office of the chief of staff is not elective, and therefore, the struggle to acquire it is not just unsightly but also dishonourable. This insatiable lust for power accentuated by poverty of ambition, has peaked in this case, sadly, with disturbing consequences on the polity and governance.
Isn’t it strange, therefore, that a chief of staff has many jobs on his hands and yet, in the same stroke, has none? Even worse, it is such a thankless call to service that earns the individual a legion of enemies as against medals. So, what about the vain struggle?
In fact, at the state level, many governors had long adopted the idea of abandoning their chief of staff to make very good use of their deputy chief of staff, for personal reasons, instead. If the chief of staff was indispensable, why would they travel that route in the first place?
It is, therefore, interesting to note how some people arrogate so much power to this office and rustle up huge imaginations about the identity of the occupant, sometimes beyond his own grasp.
For instance, how in anyone’s wildest imagination is the chief of staff responsible for the state of economy or the rising costs of living? In what capacity, beyond advisory, would a chief of staff give instructions or directive to ministers, the CBN governor, heads of parastatals and agencies outside of the personal staff of the president?
Yet, the impression created out there by the political hawks is that the chief of staff is the alternate president, a dip that could equally create a needless friction between the principal and his staff, where maturity and trust are lacking. This battle for space could even be extended to the vice-president, who might think he’d been shoved aside for the chief of staff to thrive. It’s a dangerous power gambit!
For Gbajabiamila, there’s no gainsaying that the last 17 months must be the longest in his over two decades of public service and career. He has waltzed through some of the most demeaning allegations of corruption to being tagged the most powerful man in the country, in obvious moves to pit him against his boss.
These ungodly orchestrations by the vermin in the corridors of power are enough to mess with his mental health and emotional stability, especially for a man with grownup kids, whose friends also read some of the “devastating lies” and are wont to ask relevant questions.
Unfortunately, for both his real and perceived enemies, while Gbajabiamila does not appear desperate, his fate is clearly not in their hands either, but his principal, who once publicly stood for him, based on convictions.
It also doesn’t mean they would back off if they failed in their current adventure. It is just characteristic of the filthy power play in a black society, where every approach is considered fair, so long the end justifies the means. They are likely to moot and sculpt other more devastating plots in no time.
Until the president decides what he ultimately does with his appointees, some of whom are being reportedly considered for reshuffling in the coming days, the political jobbers currently strutting the turf and fretting their hours on dead wishes, should, at least, let Gbajabiamila breathe?

 

As published today in Thisday Newspaper https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2024/10/08/the-villas-chief-of-staff/

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Advertisement

News and Report

Alleged 76bn, $31.5m Fraud: EFCC Arraigns Ex AMCON MD, Ahmed Kuru, Four Others in Lagos

Published

6 hours ago

on

January 20, 2025

By

 

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on Monday, 20 January, 2025 arraigned a former Managing Director of Assets Management Corporation of Nigeria AMCON, Ahmed Kuru and four others for allegedly defrauding Arik Airline N76 billion and $31.5 million, respectively.

 

Other defendants are former Receiver Manager of Arik Airline Ltd, Kamilu Omokide, Chief Executive Officer of the airline, Captain Roy Ilegbodu, and Super Bravo Ltd and Union Bank PLC.

 

The defendants were arraigned before Justice Mojisola Dada of the Special Offences Court sitting in Ikeja, Lagos on a six-count charge bordering on theft, abuse of office and stealing by dishonestly taking the property of another.

 

The defendants, however, pleaded not guilty to all the six-count charges when they were read to them.

 

Count one reads: “That you, Union Bank Nigeria Plc, sometime in 2011 or thereabouts, in Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, with the intention of causing and/or inducing unwarranted sale of Arik Air loans and bank guarantees with Union Bank, made false statements to the Assets Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON), regarding Arik Air Limited’s performing loans, following which you transferred a bogus figure of N71,000,000,000.00 (Seventy-One Billion Naira) to AMCON.”

 

Count two reads: “That you, Ahmed Lawal Kuru, Kamilu Alaba Omokide as Receiver Manager of Arik Air Limited, and Captain Roy Ilegbodu, Chief Executive Officer of Arik Air Limited in Receivership, sometime in 2022 or thereabout, in Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this honourable court, fraudulently converted to the use of NG Eagle Limited the total sum of N4,900,000,000.00 (Four Billion Nine Hundred Million Naira only), property of Arik Air Limited”.

 

Count five reads: “That you, Kamilu Alaba Omokide, Ahmed Lawal Kuru and Capt. Roy Ilegbodu, on the 12th day of February, 2022 or thereabout, in Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, being public officers, directed to be done in abuse of the authority of your office and with intention of obtaining undue advantage for yourself and cronies an arbitrary act, to wit: intentionally authorizing the tear down and destruction of 5N-JEA with Serial No. 15058 valued at $31.5million (Thirty One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars), an arbitrary act, which act is prejudicial to the economic stability of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and Arik Air Limited”.

 

The counsel to the first and third defendants, Prof Taiwo Osipitan, SAN, informed the court of a motion for bail application dated November 28, 2024 and November 29, 2024 for the two defendants.

 

Osipitan prayed the court that the defendants be granted bail on liberal terms.  According to him, the first defendant had no criminal records and that the EFCC granted him administration bail  which he didn’t jump.  “We pray the court grants bail to the two defendants on the same liberal terms given to them by EFCC,” he said.

 

EFCC Counsel, Wahab Shittu SAN, filed counter-affidavits dated December 2, 2024 against the first defendant and also another counter affidavits dated December 22, 2024 against the third defendant.  Shittu prayed the court to dismiss their bail applications.

 

According to him, the two defendants are facing serious offences of economic sabotage. However, he agreed with the second and third defence counsel that they are presumed innocent pending the determination of the court. Shittu , however, added that the temptation of the defendants leaving the country was very high. He thereafter prayed that accelerated hearing be granted and the defendants’ international passports be seized by the court.

 

“But if my lord decides to be magnanimous to grant them bail, we shall be praying for stringent conditions because we are particular about their attendance in court. “We urge that they should submit their international passports with the court in order to ensure that they come for trial,” he said.

 

The counsel to the second defendant, Olasupo Shasore, SAN in his motion for bail dated December 6, 2024 and filed on the same day, urged the court to also grant bail to his client on self recognition.

 

The prosecuting counsel in his counter affidavits dated January 17, 2025, opposed the bail application of the second defendant.

 

He said the application for bail was incompetent and should be struck out. Shittu cited relevance laws to buttress his argument. “My lord, the record of this court is to the effect that the second defendant, at one point, absconded in which your lordship had to issue a bench warrant. “The learned silk for the second defendant is not the defendant on trial and it is very unhealthy for a counsel to stand as a surety for a defendant.

 

“I urge my lord, in exercising his discretion, to take all this into consideration because our concern is the appearance of the second defendant in court so that he does not abscond.”

 

After listening to the arguments from all the parties, Justice Dada granted bail to the defendants in the sum of N20 million Naira each with two sureties in like sum.   The sureties must be gainfully employed and deposed to means of identification.

 

She also directed that the defendants must submit their international passports with the registrar of the court.

 

Justice Dada adjourned the matter till March 17, 18, and 19, 2025 for commencement of trial.

Continue Reading

News and Report

Absence Of Oba Otudeko, Bisi Onasanya, Others Stalls Arraignment Over N12.3Billion Fraud As Otudeko’s Lawyer Protests In Court

Published

9 hours ago

on

January 20, 2025

By

The counsel for Oba Otudeko, Chairman of Honeywell Group, who is facing charges of a N12.3 billion fraud, appeared before a Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday to protest the charge.

Mr. Bode Olanipekun (SAN) informed the court that he was protesting because the charge had not been served on Otudeko or the two other individuals charged alongside him, the News Agency of Nigeria reports.

Olanipekun informed the court that, despite not being served with the charge, the defendants were shocked to learn about the planned arraignment through the media when the story broke last Thursday.

The 13-count charge was filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) against Oba Otudeko, former Managing Director of FirstBank Plc. Olabisi Onasanya, and former Honeywell board member Soji Akintayo.

Olanipekun is the counsel for the three defendants.

They were charged alongside the company, Anchorage Leisure Ltd.

 

The EFCC alleges that the defendants obtained the sum under false pretenses.

 

According to the EFCC, the four committed the fraud in tranches of N5.2billion, N6.2billion, N6.150billion, N1.5billion and N500million, between 2013 and 2014 in Lagos.

 

The 13-count charge, filed by EFCC counsel, Bilikisu Buhari, on January 16, 2025, further claimed that the defendants used forged documents to deceive the bank.

Specifically, count 1 accused the defendants of conspiring “to obtain the sum of N12.3Billion from First Bank Limited on the pretence that the said sum represented credit facilities applied for by V-TECH DYNAMIC LINKS LIMITED and Stallion Nigeria Limited, which representation you know to be false.”

 

In Count 2, it was alleged that the defendants, on or about 26th day of November, 2013 in Lagos, “obtained the sum of N5.2 billion from First Bank Limited on the pretence that the said sum represented credit facilities applied for by V TECH DYNAMIC LINKS LIMITED which representation you know to be false.”

 

The 3rd count alleged that the defendants, between 2013 and 2014 in Lagos, obtained N6.2billion from First Bank Limited on the pretence that the said sum represented credit facilities applied for and disbursed to Stallion Nigeria Limited, which representation you know to be false.”

 

In the 4th count, they were accused of conspiring to spend the N6.15billion, out of the monies.

According to the Commission, the offences contravened Section 8(a) of Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act 2006 and was punishable under Section 1(3) of the same Act.

Counts 5 reads: “That you, Chief Oba Otudeko, Stephen Olabisi Onasanya, Soji Akintayo and Anchorage Leisure Limited on or about 11th day of December, 2013 in Lagos, procured Honeywell Flour Mills Plc to retain the sum of N1.5 billion, which sum you reasonably ought to have known forms part of proceeds of your unlawful activities to wit: Obtaining by False Pretense and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 18(c), 15 (2) (d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 (as amended) and punishable under Section 15(3) of the same Act.”

Meanwhile, Otudeko had reportedly fled Nigeria ahead of his scheduled arraignment on fraud charges.

 

According to TheCable Newspaper, Otudeko’s exit from the country is linked to the mounting legal pressures and financial disputes he is facing.

The newspaper reported that the businessman left the country via one of the land borders.

Continue Reading

News and Report

Loan controversy: Bisi Onasanya’s lawyer condemns media trial….Judge adjourns case to February 13

Published

10 hours ago

on

January 20, 2025

By

In line with his resolve to defend himself and clear his name, Dr. Bisi Onasanya through his lawyer, Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika, SAN, at a session at the Federal High Court Lagos on Monday, January 20, 2025, demanded the service of proof of evidence and summons.

Onasanya, a chartered accountant and a former Group Managing Director of First Bank is defending himself against a controversial loan that allegedly occurred at First Bank 12 years ago. The retired banker is refuting the allegations alongside three others namely former Chairman of the bank, Chief Oba Otudeko, a former board member of Honeywell, Soji Akintayo, and a firm, Anchorage Leisure Ltd.

At a hearing at the Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday, Fusika condemned the media trial his client had been subjected to, saying he was not formally invited by the EFCC or served a notice of the charge.

He expressed surprise at seeing news stories in major newspapers linking Dr Onasanya to a trial on loan controversy during his time as First Bank Group Managing Director without prior notification.

“My Lord, it is concerning that my client has been unduly exposed to media trial without being formally served. This is a procedural anomaly that undermines his right to a fair hearing and personal dignity,” Olumide-Fusika said.

The prosecuting counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo, denied any involvement by the EFCC in the media coverage of the case.

He stated that the commission had not issued a press statement and suggested that journalists may have obtained information through other means.

“My Lord, we disassociate ourselves from any media reports,” Oyedepo said.

The EFCC also applied for an ex parte motion to issue a bench warrant for the defenders’ arrest and sought permission to serve them through substituted means, alleging they had evaded service.

Olumide-Fusika opposed the motion, arguing that his client had always been available and had not evaded service. Demonstrating his determination to clear his name, the senior lawyer prayed to the court to have the EFCC serve the charge and the proof of evidence in the open court.

“This application is unwarranted and speculative. My client has neither avoided service nor absented himself from this matter. The claims of the prosecution are baseless. Since I am here and my client is ready to go ahead with this case, I ask to be served the charge and the proof of evidence here in the court,” Olumide-Fusika argued.

Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke, who presided over the case, dismissed the EFCC’s motion for substituted service on Onasanya since he has accepted to be served in the open court.

The judge consequently ordered that the EFCC serve Olumide-Fusika the charge and proof of evidence in open court.

The EFCC complied with the directive, and Olumide-Fusika who confirmed the receipt of the document extracted a confirmation from the prosecution counsel that the proof of evidence submitted is exhaustive and there wouldn’t be an addendum. The defence counsel said EFCC’s confirmation should be on record, insisting that his client was ready to defend himself and clear his name.

Justice Aneke adjourned the case to February 13, 2025.

It will be recalled that Onasanya, through his Communication Advisor, Mr Michael Osunnuyi, had earlier dismissed allegations, describing the claims as baseless and an attempt to tarnish Onasanya’s stellar reputation for professionalism, integrity and humaneness.

Continue Reading

Trending