By Emeka Mamah
The People’s Democratic Party (PDP) screening committee in Kaduna recently disqualified a popular gubernatorial aspirant, Alhaji Suleiman Othman Hunkuyi, from contesting the gubernatorial primaries a development which may pave the way for Governor Patrick Ibrahim Yakowa, to emerge winner since Hunkuyi was said to be Yakowa’s problem. But in this interview, Hunkuyi says his disqualification is a massive injustice.

You were disqualified from contesting the PDP governorship primaries in Kaduna state on the ground of incomplete tax clearance. What really happened?

I do not know what they meant by that. This tax certificate has three columns. The first is their assessment, the actual to be taxed; the second column is the tax raised by the relevant tax authority which was paid. The third column is the receipt number for the tax paid and collected by the relevant tax authority. The last column is the date the collection was made. Payment as and when due is there on the tax clearance certificate and this document as far as a Payee of tax is concerned is the final document.

That is why the guideline made reference to a tax clearance and not a receipt and on the top right corner of the certificate is a reference number of the file of the payee on which tax matter and non tax matters are dealt with as information concerning the Payee. So, if there is any ambiguity, it is not with me. All the dates of payment are there. I did not write this, the tax authority wrote this.

But there are insinuations that you were not able to answer some of the questions on this matter which paved the way for your disqualification. What were those questions they asked you?

I do not know. I do not know what incomplete tax clearance is. So, how can I answer a question I do not know. The guideline said I should present a valid tax clearance which I did. So, if anybody says it is incomplete, I do not understand what is incomplete about my tax clearance and so, I cannot answer a question I do not understand.

There is no column on this tax clearance that is not duly filled and so, I am not the proper person to answer that question. It is the tax people at the Board of Internal Revenue who are in a position to answer if there is anything incomplete. But as far as I know, I have attended screening committees. I had served as Chairman and member of screening committees and indeed, all the people that presented their papers are not more valid than this tax clearance. So, why is Hunkuyi’s own incomplete? No explanation was given to me.

There are allegations that the Vice President had threate3ned to deal with you. Is it possible that is what is playing out right now?

I have no doubt about the fact that that is the issue. What you have said, thousands of people heard it over the air, live that Hunkuyi would be dealt with and I believe this is what they meant by dealing with Hunkuyi by raising a non-existent issue. That is why I feet that I have been wronged.

Is it true that when you raised the issue of a receipt, you brought an affidavit in place of a receipt?

They raised an issue over receipt and I told them that the guidelines did not ask an aspirant to come with payment receipt. It says tax clearance certificate or evidence of payment. It says or evidence of payment. The second is an option to the first and the first is the priority and the priority is the tax clearance certificate which I produced before them. They have the option of cross checking.

How did the issue of affidavit come in?

The issue of affidavit came in because they raised a non-existent issue. They were asking for tax receipt of payment for three years which is 2007, 2008 and 2009. It is nonexistent because the guideline did not say so. It says tax clearance certificate or evidence of payment and so, I insisted that what I am holding is what the guidelines say I should bring and I have produced before them. They insisted that I must produce the receipt of payment which is not a condition.

But because I found myself with no option, I went back, scrutinized my documents and came up with five payment receipts; 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008 and 2009, with one missing receipt of 2007. They harped on that saying where is the receipt for 2007 and I told them that it is not a condition, but you insisted and I have gone through my documents and have been able to come up with not only the three you need, but five, but one is missing. They said I should I should go and do an affidavit of the missing 2007 receipt which I did. I came back with the original and photocopy, gave them the photocopy and they cited the original.

But as I said, it is a non existing requirement. Even at that, we are not lawyers, but go and check; under the condition of the law, an affidavit unless proven wrong after being sworn to before the right officer of the law cannot be wished away, but they wished it away. I did not bring that under focus because a receipt is not a requirement under the guidelines.

We are talking of the law existing today under the guidelines. Hunkuyi is not supposed to answer whether truly, the assessment that is made here or whether the tax clearance is authentic or not, the onus is on them to go and find out from the tax authority whether they made the assessment and whether I paid and if the tax clearance was issued by them and whether it is valid. Hunkuyi cannot answer those questions because I do not work for the Board of Internal Revenue. The collectors are there and it is a statutory body and so, if anybody has doubt about the clearance, he has right to enquire through the reference number which will lead to my file existing in the board of internal revenue.

Are you aware whether the committee demanded tax receipts from any other aspirants?

Most of the aspirants were not asked for their tax receipts. I met one who told me that he was asked for his tax receipt. That is unofficial and I cannot confirm that here. It is not a requirement and so, they didn’t ask for it. Even if they asked for  it, why are they insisting on that of Hunkuyi and why should you insist on a non existing requirement? Why don’t you insist on the guideline requirement for fair play, equity and justice. That is why the guidelines are drawn so that you don’t add another burden on one person and remove a burden from another aspirant. There is no equity and justice there.

This issue is like presenting a certificate after graduating from an institution and somebody come and say, you read English, what did you score in English, go and bring the script. A certificate is the last document being issued by the statutory authority in question and if anybody has any issue arising from that, they should question the statutory authority because I cannot answer questions on how the assessment is made and why I was taxed a particular amount and why I paid on a particular date. They should not ask me that because the tax authority holds the law of assessment and the appropriate law to apply and that is why at the end, the payee is issues with a tax clearance certificate.

Are you going to challenge this in court?

You see, the issue is beyond Hunkuyi as an individual. Yes, I am pained and so what? It is an inconsequential issue. But you see that there is injustice and I might decide to take legal action for so many reasons. But one of the most prominent reason is that; I was assessed, taxed N722,000 for the preceding year and I paid and collected a tax clearance and somebody says I have an incomplete paper?

Is it not painful? Is it not the highest form of injustice in our society? Should I allow my name to be dented that you becloud the vision and understanding of people that I have incomplete documentation on tax as if I under declared or I did not pay or I forged a certificate or I even appeared without a certificate? The ambiguity is too wide and the injustice too grave. The tax authority did not call me to come and pay tax. I submitted myself and my file is there at the Board of Internal Revenue.

I submitted myself; they did their assessment and came up with a figure which I paid. You may be shocked to find that a
lot of people higher than me in income pay a lot less than what I have paid and yet, I carry this burden. It is because of this that I may not be able to carry this burden without recourse to legal action. Even if for nothing, I may leave things to God, who has bestowed on me the name I have today. I headed that ministry where the Board is located before and for somebody to come and becloud my name. I cannot say that I may not contemplate to clear my name.