Dauda not Reinstated as Director General, NIA Clarifies

Dauda not Reinstated as Director General, NIA Clarifies

The National Intelligence Agency has denied reports that its former Director General, Mohammed Dauda, has been reinstated.

The agency said Dauda was never a substantive Director General of the National Intelligence Agency, adding that he only acted in that capacity after the tenure of Ayo Oke.

The NIA said Ahmed Abubakar is the substantive DG of the agency.

In a statement on Friday by the Head of Legal Department, Mr. A.H Wakili, NIA said the matter decided by the National Industrial Court and the Court of Appeal related to the dismissal of Mohammed Dauda as a Director of NIA for several infractions and breaches.

He noted that the certified copy of the judgement of the Court of Appeal “is being awaited to be studied for informed further action.”

The memo read: “Our attention has been drawn to false and misleading reports circulating online regarding Ambassador Mohammed Dauda’s reinstatement as Director General of the National Intelligence Agency by the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division.

“It is important to clarify that Mohammed Dauda was never a substantive Director General of the National Intelligence Agency. He only acted in that capacity temporarily, after the tenure of Ambassador Ayo OKE, and a brief acting stint by Ambassador Arab Yadam, until Ambassador Ahmed Rufai Abubakar, CFR, was appointed substantive Director General by President Muhammadu Buhari.

“The matter decided by the National Industrial Court and the Court of Appeal related to the dismissal of Mohammed Dauda as a Director of NIA for several infractions and breaches.

“The substance of the present appeal for which judgement has been passed relates only to procedural matters in respect of the dismissal. The case in respect of the infractions and breaches is still pending for adjudication.

“This false and misleading story was planted by Ambassador Mohammed Dauda and his cohorts to mislead the public. Meanwhile, a true certified copy of the judgement of the Court of Appeal is being awaited, to be studied for informed further action.”

Related Articles