Sacked Special Investigator to the Special Presidential Investigation Panel on Recovery of Public Property, Evang. Victor Uwajeh, has accused President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration of bias in its anti-corruption crusade.
In a statement issued yesterday in Abuja, Uwajeh said he was specifically detailed to trace the assets of the wife of former President Goodluck Jonathan, Patience, Senate President, Bukola Saraki, his deputy, Ike Ekweremadu, former Vice President, Atiku Abubakar, and many others.
His statement Reads:
“It was the procedure of the panel to courier documents to me from Nigeria for dispatch to various agencies in the United Kingdom and worldwide. Soon after I realised that the panel had a mindset towards certain individuals and groups by the documents it sent to me.
“Documents sent to me from Abuja to dispatch to the Serious Fraud Office and Home Office, Metropolitan Police, FBI and EUROPOL had the names of the following senators: Senate President, Abubakar Bukola Saraki, Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu, Sen. Albert Bassey Akpan and Sen. Stella Adaeze Oduah.
“I was also given a list which includes former Vice President, Atiku Abubakar, Femi Fani- Kayode, Sen. James Manager, Governor Nyesom Wike, Senator Jonah Jang, and Patience Jonathan, among others.
Meanwhile, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, yesterday, chided Uwajeh, for claiming that the federal government relieved him of his job because he refused to take on highly placed government ‘opponents’.
Malami said: “In the first place, the federal government of Nigeria did not even need the services of the suspect since we have a lot of institutions and personnel who can effectively handle such an assignment.
“Uwajeh suppressed the fact that he was a suspect standing trial apparently to impress the panel to engage him. This was unfortunate.
“But if Uwajeh wants to impress the world with the story he is now bearing, the fundamental question he should answer is whether indeed, he was being prosecuted by the office of the AGF for fraud, impersonation and forgery long before now.
“We cannot use a suspect of fraud to do investigation of those who have been accused of fraudulent activities. It would be wrong and unreasonable to do so.
“The investigator should also tell the world if he did at any time disclose to anyone on the panel before and after his engagement about the pendency of his forgery and fraud case in court.”
“So, the idea of leaving established institutions of government and law to engage a private investigator does not arise just as the disingenuous claim that he was disengaged because he refused to implicate certain persons does not hold water.’’