The witness, Isaiah Yesufu, a Director of Certification, Compliance and Monitoring at the Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP), made this known while giving evidence before Justice Suleiman Belgore in the trial of former Aviation Minister, Hadi Sirika.
Yesufu told the court that N800 million was budgeted for the construction of terminal building and apron expansion at the Katsina airport as a single project but was eventually awarded for N2.7 billion as two separate projects.
The EFCC charged Sirika alongside his brother, Ahmad Abubakar and two companies, Al-Buraq Limited and Enginos Nigeria Limited with 10 counts bordering on abuse of office, criminal breach of trust, use of position for gratification.
The anti-graft commission alleged that the former minister awarded various contracts to his younger brother to the tune of about N19.4 billion.
The anti-corruption commission had alleged that Sirika did confer unfair advantage upon Enginos Nigeria Limited whose alter ego is his biological brother, Ahmad, by using his position to influence the award of contract for the construction of a terminal building at Katsina Airport for the sum of N1,345,586,500.
The EFCC further alleged that the former minister used his position to influence the award of contract for the establishment of Fire Truck Maintenance and Refurbishment Centre at Katsina Airport for the sum of N3,811,497,685.
It also, among others, alleged that Ahmad and Enginos Nigeria Limited had possession of the aggregate sum of N2,337,840,674.16 which they knew indirectly represented the proceeds of criminal conducts of the former minister.
The defendants however, pleaded not guilty to the charge preferred against them.
Led in evidence by the prosecution counsel, Rotimi Jacobs SAN, Yesufu told the court that he became aware that the single project the BPP approved was eventually awarded as two separate projects by the Ministry of Aviation at the EFCC headquarters.
The projects , according to him were construction of terminal building at the Katsina airport, awarded to Enginos Nigeria Limited at about N1.3 billion, while the expansion of the apron at the airport was awarded to Al-Buraq at the cost of N1.4 billion.
He told the court that the aviation ministry made a request of no objection for the construction of terminal building and apron expansion to BPP as a single request.
“The request by the ministry was in writing. It was two requests. The reply was also in writing,” Yesufu said..
The prosecution counsel tendered the two separate request from the ministry and the BPP’s response as exhibits, which were admitted and marked as exhibits in the case.
Asked to read from the requests for certificate of no objection from the ministry to BPP, Yesufu narrated thus;
” The ministry requested for the no objection for terminal building and apron expansion at Katsina airport, adding that five companies, including, Enginos Nigeria Limited, were listed for participation in the selected bidding process.”
He added that N800 million was budgeted for the single project of construction of terminal building and apron expansion at the airport.
The witness told the court that for a contract that was above the approval threshold of the ministerial tenders board, the ministry ought to require the BPP to review what it (ministry) had done and a certificate of no objection would then be issued by the Bureau.
“For a contract that is up to N2.7billion, it will require the bureau to review what the ministry has done and issue a certificate of no objection.
“This will enable the ministry to proceed to the Federal Executive Council to approve such project because it is above the power of the ministerial tenders board of the ministry.
” The approval limit of the tenders board is anything less than N1.5billion” he said.
He then told the court that the aviation ministry did not request for a certificate of no objection in respect of the construction of terminal building and apron expansion and the Bureau did not issue a certificate of no objection (for the project).”
He further told the court that the political head of the ministry was the minister.
He added that in line with the Public Procurement Act, 2007 as amended by the Finance Act, 2020, the approval of the tendersboard was subject “to the confirmation of the political head provided he is not a member of the tenders board”.
He explained that a public servant is not allowed to bid for any contract.
After his evidence, Justice Belgore, on the request of the defendants, adjourned until June 3 for cross examination of the PW3.(NAN)
