Reps, NNPC Differ On Revenue Remittance - News at its peak

News at its peak

....Information Carrier online magazine is a platform to disseminate breaking stories as well the mouthpiece globally.

Access Bank

Access Bank
Access Bank

Post Top Ad

Responsive Ads Here

Reps, NNPC Differ On Revenue Remittance

Share This

House of Representatives Committee on Public Accounts and the Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) on Tuesday differed over the under-remittance of oil revenue, from the coffers of the agency to the Federation account.

Chairman of the House Committee, Wole Oke and other lawmakers, at an investigative hearing, quizzed the NNPC boss, Mele Kyari and other officials of the agency on the report of the Auditor-General of the Federation.

They expressed concerns that the NNPC had in 2015 generated over N2.4 trillion and deducted over N865.4 billion as stated in the audit queries by the Auditor-General of the Federation.

Kyari, in his response, said the actions of the Corporation were backed by provisions of the law, which allowed it to make deductions of running costs from the source.

“What we do is backed by the provisions of the law. First, the NNPC Act is very clear that we should submit revenues net of our cost.

“There is also an informed decision of the Supreme Court and also the Attorney General of the Federation, that the position is correct and supported by the provisions of the law,” he said.

Oke further stressed the need to come up with a bill that would make money available for the running cost of the agency while remitting everything generated to the government.

“We need to read the provisions of the NNPC Act along with sections 80 and 81 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to be able to decide which is superior and which we are to follow.

“We will set up a sub-committee of legal-minded members to read through the judgment of the Supreme Court on this matter vis-a-vis the letter from the office of the Attorney General.

“We need to make an informed position of the matter. If the Supreme Court has taken a position, we need to be mindful of such.

“If we are in disagreement, the best option we have is to go into legislation, because it means the court has clearly interpreted the provisions of the law. Sources of law are judicial precedents.

“That is the way we can come up with an enactment, amendment, or repeal. So I want to suggest that we reserve ruling on the query bordering on deductions at source,” he said.

He said the committee would rule on the matter after a critical study of the law books and Supreme Court ruling.

No comments:

Post a Comment