The Commandant of the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC) in Akwa Ibom State, Geraldine Sixtus Abetiambe, has been redeployed from the state command to the Corps’ Zonal Headquarters in Port Harcourt, Rivers State, amid fresh allegations surrounding the implementation of controversial personnel transfers approved under her administration.
According to SaharaReporters, Abetiambe’s redeployment followed complaints concerning her administration, with the Minister of Interior, Olubunmi Tunji-Ojo, reportedly ordering her removal from the Akwa Ibom Command.
A source familiar with the development said the commandant had been directed to address the entitlements of personnel affected by the controversial transfers.
However, the source alleged that despite receiving her redeployment letter, Abetiambe instructed the Head of Administration, DCC Nkoyo Asim, to prepare and backdate release letters for officers affected by the transfers and bring them to her residence for her signature before the newly appointed commandant assumes duty.
The source alleged that the move was intended to ensure that the transfers were implemented before the incoming commandant could review, suspend or otherwise reconsider them.
“She has ordered the Head of Administration, DCC Nkoyo Asim, to type the release letters, backdate them and send them to her house for her to sign before the new commandant, who has been issued a letter of redeployment to Akwa Ibom Command, assumes duty,” the source alleged.
According to the source, several of the affected officers had completed their clearance but were awaiting further directives concerning transfer allowances after their initial redeployment letters stated that the transfers would attract no financial benefits.
The source alleged that Abetiambe was determined to implement the transfers before leaving the command.
“She is bent on transferring all those affected despite her removal from Akwa Ibom,” the source said.
The source further alleged that the timing of the release letters was intended to make it difficult for the incoming commandant to suspend or review the transfers after assuming office.
“Most of those affected did their clearance but were waiting for directives concerning their transfer allowances since the initial letter of redeployment stated no financial benefits,” the source said.
“But the outgoing Commandant, Geraldine Sixtus Abetiambe, instructed the Head of Administration to quickly type the release letters, backdate them and bring them to her house for her signature so that by the time the new commandant resumes, he won’t be able to stand down or stop them due to lack of manpower.”
The development has also triggered allegations that the transfers amounted to targeted victimisation of officers from Akwa Ibom State.
“This is targeted victimisation of officers of Akwa Ibom origin. She initiated the transfers without the knowledge of the CG. This is not a nationwide exercise reshuffling personnel across state commands. Our names were selected alongside those of other officers who have served in the command for more than 15 years,” the source alleged.
The source also questioned the operational implications of transferring officers familiar with the local environment to distant states without financial assistance.
“NSCDC is a grassroots security agency whose effectiveness depends in part on having indigenes make up the majority of its personnel in each of the 36 states and the FCT.
“How can an officer who does not understand the local language or terrain function effectively, especially amid insurgency and banditry in the North? Given the current economic situation, how can officers afford to travel to Sokoto, Gombe, Kebbi and other states without a travel allowance?”
Another source claimed that an incoming commandant could review or suspend a transfer initiated by a predecessor where operational considerations, including manpower requirements, warranted such action.
“She was in Abuja to get her letter of redeployment. She has arrived in Uyo from Abuja but cannot come to the office. She wants all the letters brought to her house so that she can quickly sign and issue them before the new commandant arrives,” the source alleged.
However, the NSCDC National Public Relations Officer, Assistant Commandant of Corps (ACC) Babawale Afolabi, confirmed Abetiambe’s redeployment but rejected the suggestion that the controversial transfers could be reversed.
“You know, the way we do things here is that no Commandant can remain permanently in one state. As I’m talking to you now, some new Commandants have just been redeployed to other states,” he said.
“They are here and, as part of our tradition, they will go through some kind of orientation before they are given their letters. I’m quite sure that the new Commandant to report to Akwa Ibom State is here. So, by next week, they will all be in their new states.
“So, there is nothing like somebody reversing a transfer or anything. Definitely, I’m aware that she’s been transferred. She’s been redeployed here.”
Regarding the allegation that Abetiambe was backdating the controversial transfer letters and directing that they be brought to her residence for signature, Afolabi dismissed the claim.
“I don’t think so. No, I don’t think so. That can’t be possible,” he said.
The latest development comes weeks after complaints by NSCDC personnel over the redeployment of 79 officers involving the Akwa Ibom and Kwara State Commands.
On September 20, 60 officers were redeployed from the Akwa Ibom State Command to various state commands, while 19 officers from the Kwara State Command were transferred to Akwa Ibom.
The redeployments were approved by NSCDC Commandant-General Ahmed Abubakar Audi through four separate signals signed by Musa Farouk B.K. on behalf of the Commandant-General.
The signals, which took immediate effect, stated that the transfers carried no financial benefits.
The affected officers were posted to several states, including Niger, Ekiti, Katsina, Bauchi, Jigawa, Gombe, Kaduna, Taraba, Adamawa, Enugu, Kebbi, Plateau, Osun, Nasarawa, Imo, Kwara, Kogi, Ebonyi, Anambra, Abia, Bayelsa, Edo, Sokoto, Kano and Yobe.
Personnel affected by the transfers had protested the absence of financial benefits, arguing that many of them had not requested the redeployments and would struggle to finance their transportation and relocation to distant states.
One officer alleged that the transfer originated from the administration department following the intervention of Abetiambe.
“The above signal emanates from administration department through the instigation of Akwa Ibom State Command, Commandant Geraldine Sixtus,” the officer alleged.
The affected personnel also questioned the decision to transfer officers from Akwa Ibom to distant parts of the country, including several northern states, without financial assistance.
They argued that the cost and security implications of travelling long distances by road made the transfers particularly difficult for officers who would have to finance their relocation from their salaries.
The officers also alleged that the transfers were selective and disproportionately affected personnel from Akwa Ibom who had spent many years in the state command.
One officer described the redeployments as “targeted victimization of officers of Akwa Ibom origin”, while alleging that the transfers were not part of a broader nationwide personnel reshuffle.
The personnel further argued that knowledge of local terrain, communities and languages was important to the effectiveness of the NSCDC, particularly because of the agency’s grassroots security responsibilities.
The controversy also prompted a review of the Federal Government Public Service Rules.
Rule 130132 provides for resettlement allowance as compensation for out-of-pocket expenses incurred by officers in the course of qualifying transfers.
Rule 130133 defines transfer, for the purpose of the relevant provisions, to include movement from one station to another during a tour of service, among other circumstances.
Rule 130134 provides that resettlement allowance shall be paid at the rate of two per cent of an officer’s annual emolument.
The rules also distinguish between transfers requested by officers and other official transfers. Rule 130135 states that an officer whose transfer is at his or her own request is entitled to transport allowance but not resettlement allowance.
However, the review did not establish the specific “28 days allowance” earlier cited by some of the affected personnel.
The affected officers had also said none of those transferred had been subjected to disciplinary proceedings that would justify the movements as punitive transfers.
Meanwhile, Ekerette Friday, spokesperson for the Akwa Ibom State Command, had previously confirmed that he had seen the transfer signals issued by the NSCDC National Headquarters.
He said the agency was guided by the Public Service Rules and other applicable directives.
“I have also seen the transfer signal that emanated from the National Headquarters of the NSCDC, transferring a number of officers from one state to another, predominantly in the North, which sparked much of the complaints,” he said.
“I have also seen where it is stated that the transfer attracts no financial benefits. I don’t know precisely why that is so. I think that should be above my pay grade.”
Friday said public service rules made provisions concerning the treatment of officers transferred from one location to another and that employers generally had a responsibility to consider the welfare of personnel required to relocate in the course of their duties.
“When officers are transferred from one place to another, for instance, if someone is transferred a distance of as much as 1,000 kilometres, every organisation has a duty of care towards that officer,” he said.
“So, as I was saying, it is the responsibility of an employer to make those provisions. Why they have not been made, I do not have that information at the moment.”
He, however, noted that transfers could sometimes be imposed as part of disciplinary action.
“But what I also know is that such stipulations, that there are no financial benefits, only occur when the transfer is requested by the individual, usually out of convenience, or when it is imposed on punitive grounds,” he said.
“Because one of the penalties that can arise from a disciplinary panel is transfer. One of the recommendations that a panel can make, especially for infractions that are not serious enough to amount to gross misconduct, is transfer.”
He added: “So, if none of those variables are in place, I think one may need to interrogate why that is so. That is where I stand on this matter.”