Presidential Aide: Why FG Returned Some Seized Items to Owners

Presidential Aide: Why FG Returned Some Seized Items to Owners

Kemi Olaitan in Ibadan

The Executive Secretary of the Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption (PACAC), Prof. Sadiq Isah Radda, Thursday in Ibadan, Oyo State capital, gave reasons why the federal government released some seized items to their owners in the ongoing fight against graft.

Radda who set the tone for discussions at the National Orientation Agency (NOA) programme on public education/citizen enlightenment with the theme, “Value Re-Orientation and the fight against corruption”, scored President Muhammadu Buhari high on the recoveries of billions of naira and assets from ‘corrupt individuals’.

According to him, “so far we have been able to achieve some successes. A lot of recovery has been made – money, buildings, hotels, airplane, and many others, including snakes and lions that eat one ram daily.”

Speaking on the animals recovered, he said the government released them to their owners because of the expensive nature of maintaining them.

According to him, “those animals are very expensive to maintain for the government. Some of the items collected have been given back to their owners to keep in trust for the government, because they bought them; so, they are back with the owner to keep in trust for the government.

“But we have recovered a lot and many ghost workers have been weeded out of the government pay roll.

“In the past commercial banks will collect money from the government and give loan to the government. That is no more. In the past, you can open very many accounts and the government will not know what you are doing , that is no more because with the BVN initiative, you have linked those accounts with the BVN and they are today easily traceable to their owners,” Radda added.

The Oyo state NOA Director, Mrs. Dolapo Dosunmu, in her remarks, said corruption retards both the growth of the country and its people and rewards unpatriotic few in the society, adding that, “is it not better for individuals to suffer that the state flourish?”

Related Articles