P
ProfRem
Guest
Some associates of the Minister of State, Dr. Ibe Kachikwu, on Tuesday, took a swipe on the Group Managing Director of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), Dr. Maikanti Baru over his responses to the allegations raised.
Kachikwu wrote to President Muhammadu Buhari, alleging that Baru awarded $25billion contracts unilaterally; ran a “bravado” management; and made appointments without consultations.
Baru denied it all. He said no money was involved in the contracts and that the NNPC Tenders Board had no business reporting to Kachikwu and the corporation’s Board. The Presidency backed his position.
But Kachikwu’s “loyalists” have described Baru’s response as a potpourri of contradictions and distortions. To them, Baru’s and NNPC’s defence is “unconvincing”.
The loyalists of the Minister raised six posers for Baru and NNPC to answer.
The six posers, based on the 1999 Constitution, according to The Nation report, the NNPC Act and the Public Procurement Act, are as follows:
1.What becomes of Section 130(2), Section 148(1) of the 1999 Constitution and Section 1(1) of the NNPC Act if Baru said he did not have to consult the Minister and NNPC Board?
2. How can the NNPC Tenders Board appointed by Baru be responsible for approving contracts in the light of Section 20(1) of the Public Procurement Act?
3. What is the proof that Kachikwu as NNPC GMD did the same things that Baru is doing?
4. How can NNPC Board oversee budget without information?
5. Why was Baru silent on the controversial appointments he made without briefing the board?
Did the silence confirm that the appointments were irregular or wrong?
6. Are there standards of transparency and due process when NNPC awarded contracts of that magnitude without carrying NNPC Board along?
Kachikwu wrote to President Muhammadu Buhari, alleging that Baru awarded $25billion contracts unilaterally; ran a “bravado” management; and made appointments without consultations.
Baru denied it all. He said no money was involved in the contracts and that the NNPC Tenders Board had no business reporting to Kachikwu and the corporation’s Board. The Presidency backed his position.
But Kachikwu’s “loyalists” have described Baru’s response as a potpourri of contradictions and distortions. To them, Baru’s and NNPC’s defence is “unconvincing”.
The loyalists of the Minister raised six posers for Baru and NNPC to answer.
The six posers, based on the 1999 Constitution, according to The Nation report, the NNPC Act and the Public Procurement Act, are as follows:
1.What becomes of Section 130(2), Section 148(1) of the 1999 Constitution and Section 1(1) of the NNPC Act if Baru said he did not have to consult the Minister and NNPC Board?
2. How can the NNPC Tenders Board appointed by Baru be responsible for approving contracts in the light of Section 20(1) of the Public Procurement Act?
3. What is the proof that Kachikwu as NNPC GMD did the same things that Baru is doing?
4. How can NNPC Board oversee budget without information?
5. Why was Baru silent on the controversial appointments he made without briefing the board?
Did the silence confirm that the appointments were irregular or wrong?
6. Are there standards of transparency and due process when NNPC awarded contracts of that magnitude without carrying NNPC Board along?
