Don't Miss

Subsidy fraud: How we got Arisekola’s son, others –EFCC

By on May 15, 2013

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), yesterday told a Lagos High Court sitting in Ikeja how the N1.1 billion subsidy fraud committed by Abdullahi, son of Aare Musulumi of Yorubaland, Alhaji Abdul-Azeez Arisekola-Alao and his company was detected. One of the witnesses of the anti-graft agency in the ongoing trial of Abdullahi and two other marketers, Mrs. Irene Moses told the court that the defendant did not discharge 15,000 metric tonnes as claimed.

Abdullahi, alongside two other oil marketers, Opeyemi Ajuyah and Olarenwaju Olalusi and their companies, Majope Investment Ltd. and Axenergy Ltd. are being prosecuted by the EFCC for fraudulently obtaining N1.1 billion from the Petroleum Support Fund of the Federal Government. At the resumed hearing of the case yesterday before Justice Lateefat Okunnu, Moses disclosed to the court how the fraud was detected by her company.

Led in evidence by EFCC counsel, Mr. Francis Usani, the witness, who is a staff of Oando Oil and Gas Ltd., stated that it normally took up to three to four days to discharge 15,000 metric tonnes of Premium Motor Spirit (PMS). She said they detected that the volume of fuel discharged by the defendants’ company was done within a day and some hours. She said there was no way 15,000 metric tonnes of PMS could have been delivered within a day and some hours as claimed by the defendants. Moses told the court her company had terminal supervisor who oversaw the discharge of the vessel and monitored the quantity of the vessel at the terminal.

According to her, the supervisor at the tank farm later told her that 4,700 metric tonnes of PMS was discharged instead of 15,000 metric tonnes as agreed by Majope Investment Ltd. According to her, Majope was to discharge the products at the Lister Jetty in Apapa that was being used as a tank farm by Oando before January 4, 2011. “Oando appointed a surveyor, Q and Q Control Services Ltd., to inspect the products when it was brought by Majope Investment,” she said.

Asked by the defence counsel whether the manager checked the related documents before and after the discharge of the mother vessel, the witness said the terminal manager only handled the transaction document between the two vessels. Further hearing in the matter was adjourned till May 21.


( The Sun)