By Jeph Ajobaju, Chief Copy Editor
Senators on Wednesday passed the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON) Amendment Bill that, among other functions, empowers the corporation to seize the assets of debtors to the government.
The passage followed consideration of a report by the Banking, Insurance and Other Financial Institutions Committee chaired by Senator Uba Sani (APC, Kaduna Central).
The bill empowers AMCON to
· Take possession, manage or sell all properties traced to debtors, whether or not such assets or properties are used as security/collateral for obtaining a loan.
· Access the Special Tribunal established by the BOFIA 2020 for dealing with financial related matters.
Sani said the committee engaged with stakeholders such as AMCON, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Budget and National Planning, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and Nigeria Deposit Insurance Corporation (NDIC).
He disclosed that the stakeholders pushed for AMCON to be empowered to take possession, manage, foreclose or sell, transfer, assign or otherwise of property used as security for bank assets, among others, and “this will provide for a quicker, easier and legitimate process of assets disposal.”
Deputy Senate President, Ovie Omo-Agege (APC, Delta Central) during the clause-by-clause consideration of the bill sought to know the rationale behind the recommendation which empowers AMCON to take possession of assets besides those used as loan collateral.
He argued that “the essence of collateral is that in default, you lose that asset. What I am reading here is that in addition to seizing that asset, they (AMCON) want to go beyond that to every other asset or property that is traceable to the debtor. I think I need some clarifications to that.”
And Senator Bassey Albert Akpan (PDP, Akwa Ibom North East) insisted that “you cannot go outside the asset presented for the facility.”
But Senator Adamu Aliero explained that “during debate on this bill, Senators made it abundantly clear that these debtors are taking government money, and they are using it freely and going free, and we need stringent measures to be enforced to recover the money.”
Senate President Ahmad Lawan called for voting on the clause which was eventually adopted by the majority.
After passage of the bill, Senators Bassey Akpan and Chukwuka Utazi, while relying on a Point of Order put forward by the former, contested Lawan’s ruling by requesting for a division.
Lawan countered that “when we come to legislate, we all come here with very clear mind, that we are doing this for our country, we don’t have any interest but the national interest.
“When majority of our colleagues here in their judgment feel that this is the right thing to do, that’s the majority view, unless we have any cause to reverse ourselves.
“If the majority of senators say that this is what they feel should be done to remedy a situation that requires our attention, I think we should allow that.
“Besides, I believe we had explanations from the committee members who went through all the processes, so, I believe that we should let it go.
“Let the people go to court to test it, but our hope and desire is for AMCON to be able to recover huge sums of money – trillions that people have taken and now is on the head of Nigerians.
“And, it is criminal, really. People will consciously take money. I will advise that we stick to our decision.”
Bala Ibn Na’Allah (APC, Kebbi South) and Opeyemi Bamidele (APC, Ekiti Central) both advocated for a proviso that will give the bill precedent over any law that may be used to cite an instance of conflict.
“We have to put a clause to say, ‘not withstanding the provisions obtained in any other law to enable the law take effect,” Na’Allah suggested.
Utazi objected to the clause empowering AMCON to take possession of assets traced to debtors, saying, “most of the banks that have those bad debts colluded with the customers in doing that in the first place.”
However, Senator George Thompson Sekibo (PDP, Rivers East) explained that “it will be out of order to reconsider any specific question, upon which the Senate has come to a conclusion during the current session, except upon a substantive motion or decision.”
“All the discussion we are making on it now is of no value, they are not supposed to be recorded because we have come to a decision on it. It may be wrongly or rightly, but we have ended it.”
Lawan thereafter ruled Akpan’s call for a division out of order.
