FCCPC Act Shows Tinubu May Have Breached Law in Removal of Irukera

•Falana: ex-EVC deserves commendation for getting tobacco company to pay $110 million fine to Nigeria

•Argues use of ‘dismissal’ to describe his removal libellous 

•FG: Irukera, Okoh relieved of their duties, not dismissed

Emmanuel Addeh in Abuja

A THISDAY review of the Act setting up the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) has shown that President Bola Tinubu may have erred in law in his decision to unilaterally remove the agency’s Executive Vice Chairman, Babatunde Irukera.

On Monday, Tinubu announced what he termed the “immediate dismissal” of the chief executive officer of the federal government agency. He said it was in conformity with plans to restructure and reposition critical agencies of the government towards protecting the rights of Nigerian consumers.

A statement by the presidential spokesperson, Ajuri Ngelale, said Irukera had been directed to hand over to the next most senior officer in the agency, pending the appointment of a new chief executive officer.

But THISDAY has found that the president cannot unilaterally sack the FCCPC head without resorting to the Senate, according to the Federal Protection and Competition Act, 2018, setting up the agency.

According to the section dealing with removal from office in the Act, once a good case is established against any commissioner or the head of the organisation, the exercise of the powers of the president under the relevant section must be subject to the approval of the upper chamber.

It reads, “A commissioner may resign his office by giving three months written notice to the president through the minister. A commissioner may be suspended, or removed from office by the president if he’s: found to have been unqualified for appointment as a commissioner pursuant to provision of this Act or in breach of conditions of his appointment.

“Has demonstrated inability to effectively perform the duties of his office; has been absent from five consecutive meetings of the board without the consent of the chairman, except he shows good reason for such absence, or is guilty of a serious misconduct in relation to his duties as a commissioner, and as defined under public service rules.

“In the case of a person who possessed a professional qualification, he is disqualified or suspended from practising his profession in any part of the world by an order of a competent authority  or is in a breach of the conflict of interest rules set out under section 14 of this Act.”

However, the law added, “The exercise of the powers of the president under this section shall be subject to the approval of the Senate.”

There is no evidence that the president requested the Senate’s nod before sacking the erstwhile FCCPC boss.

When THISDAY sought the opinion of renowned senior lawyer and human rights activist, Femi Falana, he noted that rather than being sacked, Irukera, who had reorganised FCCPC, should be sent a letter of commendation for turning around the agency.

Falana stated that the use of the word “dismissal” was also libellous. He explained that the president had not told anyone the offence committed by Irukera and argued that the use of “commissioner” in the law also applied to the erstwhile FCCPC boss.

Falana said, “So the removal has to go through the Senate. And what is even more embarrassing is the use of the word ‘dismissal’. You do not dismiss somebody who has not committed an offence or has not been found wanting. This is a man who has done well for the country. He did what no regulatory agency has done for the country.

“A tobacco company paid $110 million to Nigeria and to the coffers of the government. But the painful aspect, for me, is that I was just suggesting yesterday that that money be used to upgrade one of the cancer centres in Nigeria.”

Falana added, “It’s actually libellous also to announce the dismissal of a public officer who has not been found wanting or indicted for a serious misconduct. But what is important is that this is a man who should be commended by the entire country for the way and manner he organised the commission.

“This was recently demonstrated in the fine of $110 million imposed on the tobacco company, which has been paid to the coffers of the government. That company will be laughing at us. So, you cannot justify it.”

The rights activist stated that before Irukera was removed he had other such pending matters, which would have also benefitted the country.

According to him, “And upon it all, you said he has been dismissed. Dismissal? He won $110 million at a time you need foreign exchange very badly and he has similar cases pending. Nobody has run that place like this guy. The guy has reorganised the place.

“This is arguably the most effective regulatory agency in the country and you treat him so shabbily as if he has committed an offence. The president can remove any anybody per se, but to say the person has been dismissed is libellous.”

However, in a brief note last night, the federal government, through an aide to the president, Bayo Onanuga, said Irukera and Alex Okoh of the Bureau of Public Enterprises (BPE) were relieved of their duties, not dismissed.

Onanuga clarified, “The president’s directive did not intend a dismissal. The two men, who have served our country, were relieved of their duties by the president, as he scouts for their successors.

“The connotations implied in using the word dismissal were clearly not intended in the statement issued. President Tinubu thanks the two men for their services and wishes them well in their future endeavours.”