By Emman Ovuakporie & Johnbosco Agbakwuru
ABUJA — The House of Representatives Committee on Basic Education, yesterday indicted President Muhammadu Buhari and Head of Service of the Federation, Mrs Winifred Oyo-Ita, over tenure elongation for Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Education, Mrs Jamila Shuara.

Jemila Shuara

This is even as the House directed the Committee on Public Procurement to investigate alleged abuse, breach and violation of the Public Procurement Act by the Federal Inland Revenue Service, FIRS, and report back within six weeks for further legislative action.

The lawmakers in their resolution on the tenure extension matter, declared that Buhari had no such powers under Section 171 and other existing laws to extend the tenure of permanent secretary whose tenure had expired by time or age.

Recall that Mrs Shuara’s tenure which was elongated by one year in 2015 after service, was again extended in 2016 via a letter purportedly written by the Presidency.

The committee members after holding a closed door session for almost two hours before appearing before the Head of Service team, did not mince words when they reeled out their recommendations after patiently listening to the weak defence of the HoS, Mrs Winifred Oyo-Ita.

The lawmakers had recommended that the President had no power under Section 171(2)(c) of the constitution or any other existing law to extend or elongate the tenure of permanent secretary whose tenure has expired by time or age.

They also asked the HoS to invoke the relevant rules to recover all the emoluments paid to Mrs Jamila Shuara for the period of the extension, and asked government to ensure that civil service rules and procedures were strictly followed.

The lawmakers also directed the HoS to ensure compliance to this subject matter and report to the House in four weeks.

But before reeling out the recommendations, the HoS was given the opportunity to defend herself.

She said: “I did not write any letter dated March 17, 2016, with Ref.N0.HCSF/1013/1 on the tenure of Dr Mrs Jamila Shuara as Permanent Secretary, rather the last letter I wrote on this matter was to Chief of Staff to the President.

“I’ve sought Mr President’s permission to release a copy to the committee and I’m waiting for His Excellency’s response.”

“On the extant laws and rules guiding appointment, extension or replacement.   Section 171(2)(d) of the 1999 Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria(as amended) vests the President with power to appoint and remove.

‘’Federal Permanent Secretaries and by virtue of Section 11(1)(a)(c) (I) of the interpretation Act Cap. 123 Laws of the Federation,2004, whoever has the power to appoint can reappoint or reinstate.

“It’s instructive to note the personal files of all civil servants employed into the Federal Civil Service Commission, I’ve requested for her personal file.’’

After reading her line of defence, the lawmakers became more infuriated and more than   six lawmakers raised their hands to ask the HoS questions.

They asked her to read verbatim content of Section 171 which she did and they reiterated the fact that the President had no such powers.

Chairman of the committee, Mohammed Zakari, was mandated to read out the committee’s recommendations.

The HoS was given four weeks to deliver all relevant documents to the committee’s secretariat.

Meanwhile, the House directed the Committee on Public Procurement to investigate alleged abuse, breach and violation of the Public Procurement Act by the Federal Inland Revenue Service, FIRS, and report back within six weeks for further legislative action.

The House in a motion sponsored by the Deputy Minority Leader, Chukwuka Onyema, recalled that on March 9, 2017, a motion with the same title was moved but was short down.

He said:  “Soon thereafter, fresh facts were made available which would have influenced the House to pass the motion if they had been available then.

“All agencies of the Federal Government are obliged to comply with the provisions of the Public Procurement Act 2007 in their procurement of goods, works and services.

“Section 16(6)(d) and (8)(d) of the Public Procurement Act provides as follows: “(6) All bidders in addition to requirements contained in any solicitation documents shall: (d) have fulfilled all

its obligations to pay taxes, pensions and social security contributions. (8) Whenever it is established by a procuring entity or the Bureau that any or a combination of situations set out exist, a bidder may have its bid or tender excluded from any particular procurement proceeding if.”

Besides, the lawmaker noted that Section 6(3) of the Industrial Training Fund (ITF) Act 2011, provided that “any supplier, contractor or consultant bidding or soliciting contracts, businesses, goods and services from any Federal Government Ministry, Department, Agency, commercial, industrial and private entity shall fulfill statutory obligations of its employees with respect to payment of training contribution to the fund.”

He said that on December 7, 2016, the FIRS awarded a contract to Active Solutions Integrated Synergy Limited, ASISL, for the deployment of revenue monitoring solutions on telecommunication companies, specifically for International voice, internet and other Value Added Network Services for the FIRS.

He expressed concern that the FIRS allegedly awarded the contract to ASISL notwithstanding the fact that the company was incorporated at the Corporate Affairs Commission on  December 2, 2016.

He said just two working days before the award was made, which he said was indicative of the fact that the provisions of the Public Procurement Act, 2007 and other subsidiary legislations were not complied with.

He also alleged that the FIRS recently engaged the services of 100 tax consultants to conduct tax audit and assessment on companies in Lagos, Abuja and Port-Harcourt, adding that the engagement process was not made public and not competitive as required by law;

He said:  “The current anti-corruption war will be frustrated, if statutory breaches like these are allowed to continue unchecked and that it will promote mediocrity, cronyism and may undermine the purpose of in-built checks in the procurement system.”