Out-going Director-General of the Debt Management Office (DMO), Dr. Mansur Muhtar, yesterday defended former Minister of Finance, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, over allegations that she personally benefited from the Paris Club debt deal which $18 billion of the nation’s debt’s was written off.

Speaking with journalists in Abuja, Muhtar said the allegations which he described as “political” made him sad, as according to him, in spite of the much sacrifices made by the minister and other officials to secure the deal, some people accused her of personally benefiting from the deal.

His words: “I was saddened that people were thinking about this. I was frustrated. I took it personal but eventually, I realised I had to put it in context and I really had to look at it from a philosophical angle.

“The only sad thing as I said was that I was hoping that younger Nigerian generation would begin to see other role models. People like to rubbish the names of ministers and to link them with those things. I felt saddened because we conducted ourselves well and with the sacrifices she made and I thought she was a role model. And when you start pulling her down, that was the only sad thing,” he said.

He said those behind the allegations were politicians who failed to respond when confronted to produce evidence.
His words: “I think there are two things, two issues really. For me, I reflected on it a bit and was very painful that we are investing a lot of efforts, and many of the people that were involved were very patriotic and committed and making a lot of sacrifices and when we heard this. It was very discouraging at first even for my colleagues. But I reflected a bit on it, then one has to look at it from a philosophical angle.

“On the one hand, I think some of these, certainly, were politically-motivated and I know there were prominent political figures that made this assertion. But we wrote and said this was a serious accusation and if we did have facts to support this, we should make available immediately, to the appropriate agencies for proper investigation.

“And we have this letter and delivered to the person’s house and which was signed and received. We did not receive any response. We were also called by ICPC in connection with that and we wrote a very detailed reply and nothing has come out of that,” he said.

On the current audit of the transactions, Dr. Muhtar expressed confidence that nothing incriminating would come out of it, as according to him, the Paris and London Clubs debt deals were carried out transparently.

“There is nothing to be afraid of, it has been very transparent, open. We conducted these things with the highest standard of professionalism and integrity. And we have made sure that all records were duly and properly documented, so we have to give full account.

“There could be some errors, as human beings are not infallible. It is possible mistakes have been made, it is possible we have some omissions and stuff like that. But I think public officers should always be prepared to give account for their actions, and I am prepared to do that.
“People just believe that there is no way somebody can do this without making money out of it. In essence, it made us happy that we could look people in the face and say we haven’t done anything wrong, prove it if you have any information.

“On the other hand, I was saddened that basically the younger generation of Nigerians are not being given the opportunity to appreciate that there could really be a change in leadership that you could have a new crop of leaders or public managers who would do these things without putting their own personal interest first,” he said.

Dr. Muhtar who put domestic debt as at March at N1.86 trillion said safeguards had been put in place in the Fiscal Responsibility Bill to check reckless borrowing that could return the nation to the status of a heavily indebted nation in the future.

He said, however, that there was need for states to appreciate prudence in public finance as according to him, “the Federal Government cannot impose some of these things on the state. It can only do that in respect of external borrowing but domestic borrowing is independent and has fiscal autonomy.”

He said the DMO was planning a series of events to sensitise the states on this issue of debt and borrowing and the dangers and pitfalls, in the days ahead.
He pointed out that the civil society had a role to play in making sure that whether from domestic or international sources, state governments were prevented from undertaking borrowing that could be avoided.