Lawyer to suspended Acting Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, Ibrahim Magu, Wahab Shittu, has denied media reports that his client shunned an invitation of the Code of Conduct Bureau.
The CCB had invited Magu via a letter with reference number CCB/HQ/II&M/007/2093 dated November 2, 2020.
He was asked to appear before the anti-corruption agency on November 17, 2020.
The suspended EFCC boss was asked to come along with acknowledged copies of all asset declaration forms since joining the public service as well as his payslips and land documents.
It was, however, reported that Magu failed to honour the request of the CCB but wrote a letter instead explaining that he would not be able to do so.
In a statement on Sunday, Shittu said he had written two letters to the Chairman of the CBB, intimating him about the inability of Magu to have access to the relevant documents as required by the CCB.
He said, “Our attention has been drawn to certain media report where it was reported that our client, the suspended Acting Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, Mr Ibrahim Magu, shunned the invitation of the Code of Conduct Bureau. We wish to state that our client did not shun the CCB invitation as the media reportage did not reflect the true position of the narrative.
“We wish to state with high sense of responsibility that we have written two letters to the Chairman of the CBB, intimating him about the inability of our client to have access to the relevant documents as required by the CCB. The letters, which were dated November 16 and 17, 2020, were addressed to the CCB Chairman.
“The letters were titled- Re: Investigation of Activities- Letter of Invitation, Breach of Code of Conduct for Public Officers. Please note that the letters were stamped and acknowledged by the office of the CCB Chairman on the said date of November 17, 2020. We also wish to state that the said letters were copied to the Director of Intelligence, Investigation and Monitoring while the letters were also stamped and acknowledged by his office.
“Explaining the inability of our client to honour the invitation, we stated as follows: Your letter dated November 2, 2020 with reference No.-CCB/HQ/II & M/007/2093 addressed to our client has been passed unto us to respond to as follows: In the referred letter, our client was requested to appear before your distinguished body on Tuesday, November 17, 2020 at 11am prompt concerning the above subject matter.
“We have firm instructions to inform your distinguished body that our client, regrettably will not be able to honour today’s invitation in view of certain circumstances beyond his control. Our client’s inability to honour your invitation is as a result of his inability to access his office and the requested documents since his suspension from office. We wish to inform you that the documents which you requested for and other personal documents are still in his personal office where he has been denied access up to date.
“We request that the invitation to our client be extended pending the conclusion of the exercise of the mandate of the presidential Judicial Commission of Inquiry set up against our client and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission. This request has become necessary since most of the documents requested by your bureau were removed from our client’s offices by the Department of State Security Service and the request of the Judicial Commission of Inquiry in the absence of our client while our client was in detention.
“Based on the foregoing, it would be impossible for our client to answer your questions and provides those documents which are in the possession of the Judicial Commission of Inquiry and the Department of State Security Service. We therefore kindly request your distinguished body to graciously extend the invitation extended to our client pending the return of our client’s documents (which you requested).
“We further wish to inform you that we are writing a letter to the Judicial Commission of Inquiry requesting it to direct the Acting EFCC boss to allow our client access to the relevant documents. Please note that there is the need for our client to have access to the relevant documents in order to prepare for his defence to your invitation.”
SaharaReporters, New York