Chronicles Reporters Investigates: Questions Mount Over Alleged Conflict Between Party Office and Public Employment as Contradictions Emerge Over Council Records
An investigation by Chronicles Reporters has raised serious questions about the public service status of Mr Salihu Ismaila Basna, who is identified in the materials reviewed by this newspaper as the current Secretary of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Gwagwalada Area Council, while also serving as a public servant within the council.
Documents reviewed by Chronicles Reporters reportedly show that Mr Basna deposed to an affidavit before a court in which he identified himself as a public servant working with Gwagwalada Area Council while allegedly continuing to occupy the position of APC secretary.
The development raises important questions about the compatibility of his political office with the rules governing public service employment, the accuracy of statements made under oath, and the whereabouts of official documents reportedly connected to the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC).
At the centre of the controversy is a fundamental question: Can a serving public officer lawfully combine public employment with an executive position in a political party, and what are the implications if official statements about government records contradict one another?
These are questions that demand documentary clarification, not political excuses.
The dual status attributed to Mr Basna raises questions under Nigeria’s public service rules and the constitutional framework governing public officers.
Section 40 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended, guarantees citizens the right to assemble freely and associate with others, including for political purposes. However, that constitutional freedom operates alongside applicable laws and regulations governing public employment.
The Federal Public Service Rules contain restrictions on partisan political activity by public officers. The precise provision applicable to Mr Basna would depend on his employment category, the service rules adopted by Gwagwalada Area Council, and the nature of the party office he holds.
It would therefore be premature to declare that his position is automatically illegal without establishing the specific rules applicable to his employment and the responsibilities attached to his political office.
Nevertheless, if the documents establish that Mr Basna is a serving public officer and simultaneously occupies a party executive position prohibited by the rules governing his employment, the relevant authorities would have grounds to investigate possible misconduct.
The public deserves to know whether the council has examined this question, whether Mr Basna disclosed his political position to his employer, and whether any applicable rules permit him to hold both positions.
A second issue concerns the affidavit reportedly deposed to by Mr Basna.
According to documents reviewed by Chronicles Reporters, he identified himself in the court document as a public servant working with Gwagwalada Area Council.
That declaration is significant because an affidavit is not an ordinary political statement. It is a sworn statement intended to place facts before a court or another legally authorised recipient.
Section 115 of the Evidence Act, 2011, governs affidavits and restricts the inclusion of matters that are inadmissible, argumentative or otherwise inconsistent with the requirements of affidavit evidence.
Where a person knowingly makes a false statement under oath, Section 156 of the Criminal Code Act, where applicable, provides for the offence of false evidence in specified circumstances. Section 117 of the Penal Code, where applicable, also addresses giving false evidence in judicial proceedings.
The applicability of these provisions depends on the circumstances, the jurisdiction, the nature of the statement and the evidence of the person’s knowledge and intention.
An inconsistency, by itself, does not automatically establish perjury or another criminal offence. Investigators would need to examine the complete affidavit, identify the allegedly false statement, establish the relevant facts and determine whether the legal elements of an offence have been met.
The questions for Mr Basna are straightforward: What exactly did he declare? In what capacity did he depose to the affidavit? Does the declaration accurately reflect his employment status? And what records support any statements he made about the council’s documents?
These questions deserve clear answers.
The investigation has also identified an apparent contradiction concerning documents reportedly requested from Gwagwalada Area Council.
According to the information supplied to Chronicles Reporters, Mr Basna’s position is that the documents being sought are before the ICPC and that the commission took the relevant records.
However, the newspaper understands that the current council chairman, Hon. Kasim Mohammed, established an asset-verification committee to review documents and local government assets.
The apparent tension between these accounts raises an important administrative question: If relevant documents were taken by the ICPC, what records remain in the council’s custody, and what information was made available to the asset-verification committee?
The existence of an ICPC investigation would not, on its own, establish that every relevant council record had been removed. Nor would the establishment of an asset-verification committee necessarily prove that the original documents remained in the council’s possession.
Both matters must be verified through official records.
The council should clarify whether the ICPC collected original documents, obtained certified copies, requested access to particular files or merely commenced an inquiry involving the records. It should also disclose, where legally permissible, the committee’s terms of reference, the records made available to it and any inventory documenting the transfer or retention of relevant materials.
If the council maintains that all relevant documents are with the commission, it should identify the records concerned and provide a verifiable explanation of how the asset-verification committee conducted its work.
If documents remain in the council’s possession, the council should explain why they cannot be produced in response to a lawful request.
Neither an unverified assertion that the ICPC took everything nor an unsupported claim that the council retains every document can settle the matter.
The controversy also places renewed attention on the administrative practices of the previous administration associated with Abu Giri.
If official documents from that period are now the subject of competing accounts, the public has a legitimate interest in knowing how the records were maintained, transferred, preserved and made available to subsequent administrations.
Public records are not private political property. Their custody and management must be guided by applicable laws, financial regulations, records-management procedures and lawful investigative requirements.
The current administration of Hon. Kasim Mohammed should therefore provide a transparent account of the asset-verification process, subject to legitimate restrictions involving ongoing investigations and confidential information.
Such clarification would help establish whether the problem concerns missing records, documents held by investigators, incomplete administrative handover or conflicting representations by officials.
It would also prevent the controversy from becoming a contest of political accusations in which neither the public nor the relevant authorities can establish what actually happened.
The larger issue is institutional accountability.
A public officer’s responsibilities do not disappear because of political affiliation, and a political office does not automatically establish wrongdoing. The law must be applied according to the evidence, the applicable service rules and the facts of each case.
If Mr Basna’s political position conflicts with the rules governing his employment, the appropriate administrative authority should examine the matter and take lawful action where necessary.
If any affidavit contains a knowingly false material statement, the competent authorities should investigate the circumstances and determine whether an offence has been committed.
If official records are being withheld, misrepresented or incorrectly described as being in the custody of an investigative agency, the council should establish the facts through documentary evidence.
The ICPC should not be invoked as a blanket explanation for the absence of documents without a clear account of which records the commission actually holds. Equally, no individual should be accused of misleading a court or committing a crime merely because two accounts appear inconsistent.
Accountability requires evidence, not assumptions.
QUESTIONS DEMANDING OFFICIAL ANSWERS
In the interest of transparency, Chronicles Reporters calls for clarification on the following questions:
- What is Mr Salihu Ismaila Basna’s exact employment status, designation and applicable service framework within Gwagwalada Area Council?
- Does he currently serve as APC secretary in Gwagwalada Area Council, and what rules govern his eligibility to hold that party office while in public employment?
- What does the complete affidavit he reportedly deposed to state about his employment and the council’s records?
- Which specific documents are reportedly in the custody of the ICPC, and is there an official inventory, acknowledgement or correspondence confirming their transfer?
- What records were made available to the asset-verification committee established by Hon. Kasim Mohammed?
- Has the council’s administration formally examined the apparent inconsistency between the explanation attributed to Mr Basna and the work of the asset-verification committee?
- What steps, if any, have the council’s relevant administrative authorities taken to resolve the matter?
RIGHT OF REPLY
Chronicles Reporters recognises the importance of a fair opportunity to respond to questions raised by an investigation.
Mr Salihu Ismaila Basna, the management of Gwagwalada Area Council, Hon. Kasim Mohammed’s administration, representatives of the previous administration associated with Abu Giri, and the ICPC are invited to provide relevant documents, official explanations and responses.
Any substantive response supported by verifiable evidence will be considered for publication.
THE DOCUMENTS, NOT THE POLITICS, MUST SETTLE THE MATTER
The controversy surrounding Mr Basna’s reported dual roles and statements concerning council documents raises questions that cannot responsibly be dismissed without examination.
The decisive issues are whether his political office is compatible with his public employment, whether his affidavit accurately reflects the facts, and whether the council’s account of the relevant documents can be reconciled with verifiable records.
If the evidence establishes a breach of the applicable rules or the commission of an offence, the appropriate authorities should act in accordance with the law. If the allegations are not substantiated, the records should equally make that clear.
For Chronicles Reporters, the objective is not to pronounce guilt before the evidence is tested. It is to ensure that public office, sworn declarations and government records remain subject to scrutiny.
The people of Gwagwalada deserve answers. The relevant authorities must provide them through verifiable documents, transparent procedures and the rule of law.