A
former Minister of the Federal Capital Territory under the Olusegun
Obasanjo administration, Mallam Nasir el-Rufai, has said that a former
Vice-President, Abubakar Atiku, lied when he accused him of imposing
the Pentascope management contract on the defunct Nigeria
Telecommunitions Limited.
El-Rufai was the Director-General of the
Bureau for Public Enterprise when the Federal Government entered into a
contractual agreement with a Dutch firm, Pentascope, to manage the
nation’s telecommunications firm, NITEL, on the eve of the privatisation
carried out by the Obasanjo administration.
El-Rufai said that Atiku, who was
Chairman of the National Council for Privatisation, gave a written
approval to enter into a contractual agreement with Pentascope to manage
NITEL on February 21, 2003.
El Rufai whose allegations were
contained in an electronic mail on Monday, signed by his Media Advisor,
Mr. Muyiwa Adekeye, said that Atiku’s memo on the Pentascope’s
management contract with NITEL dated February 20, 2003 was raised by a
director of the BPE in charge of the duties of the Director-General at
the time.
The former minister explained further
that the Pentascope deal was made following what he described as a
competitive selective process following an earlier decision that a
management firm be engaged to prepare NITEL to operate like a private
firm in addition to preserving its assets.
He added that the terms of the contract
with Pentascope made it a duty for the BPE to set up an executive
committee to monitor the operations of the company on a daily basis.
According to him, the management
contract was terminated in 2005 because it was frustrated due to lack of
effective supervision by the BPE and other key players in the Ministry
of Communications and the NCP under Atiku’s leadership.
He said, “On Pentascope, we see the same
pattern of muddying the waters with falsehood. As chairman of the
National Council on Privatisation, Atiku gave his approval in writing on
21 February 2003 for the management contract with Pentascope to be
signed.
“The memo on which Atiku minuted his
approval, BPE/I&N/NT/MC/DG/280, is dated 20th February 2003, and was
initiated by the director of BPE that was covering the DG’s duties at
the time. By the virtue of the high office he then held, Atiku knows
that Pentascope was not foisted on NITEL but emerged from a properly
advertised and competitive selection process.
“After the failure of the first attempt
to sell NITEL, it had been decided that there was the need for a
management contractor to keep the momentum of preparing the company to
operate like a private entity and to preserve its assets. Pentascope
resumed in NITEL on 28 April 2003, shortly before el-Rufai left the BPE
to become a minister.
“The Pentascope contract terms included
obligations by the BPE to monitor the contract, and for the NITEL Board
to set up an Executive Committee to supervise day-to-day operations in
NITEL. Between the new BPE leadership that neglected its
responsibilities, the NCP which Atiku chaired and which failed to
supervise the BPE and the bureaucrats and politicians around the
Ministry of Communications, the management contract was frustrated and
terminated in 2005.”
El Rufai’s reaction followed an allegation by Atiku in an interview with Sunday PUNCH, that el-Rufai, as the DG of the BPE defied wise counsel to foist the Pentascope management contract on NITEL.
Atiku had alleged that el-Rufai ignored
public outcry against his choice of Pentascope to manage NITEL even when
it was proved that the foreign firm was financially incapable and
lacked the competence to manage the telecommunications firm.
The former VP had said, “On Pentascope,
one would have expected your paper to direct the questions to el-Rufai
himself. The Pentascope scandal was one of the issues investigated by
the National Assembly and it accused el-Rufai of ignoring wise counsel
by imposing the company on NITEL.
“Despite proven allegations that
Pentascope was not financially capable and technically competent to
handle NITEL management contract, the former Bureau of Public Enterprise
Director-General ignored public outcry and forced the Dutch company on
NITEL.
“Before the coming of Pentascope, NITEL
was making an estimated N100bn profit annually. However, as soon as
Pentascope took over, NITEL’s profits were nose-diving incredibly.
“With telecoms stakeholders, the
National Assembly and the Nigerian public insisting that the imposition
of Pentascope on NITEL was ruinous to national interest, the Federal
Government eventually cancelled the management contract against
el-Rufai’s desire.”
El-Rufai, who also commented on the
NITEL GSM contract involving Ericsson and Motorola, denied Atiku’s claim
that his brother was on the board of Motorola.
He also debunked the claim that the
contract was split, adding that it was awarded to Ericsson, “but at the
lower price submitted by Motorola, because of Atiku’s intense lobby and
smears deployed to advance Ericsson’s bid.”
He alleged that Atiku and his then ADC, Abdullahi Yari, spoke on several occasions to him to favour Ericsson in the bid.
He said that Atiku had a responsibility to explain to Nigerians why he was pushing for Ericcson to get the offer.
Punch
No comments:
Post a Comment