Malam Murtala Aliyu, a former minister and Matawallen Gombe, is the embattled Secretary-General of the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF). In this interview, he faulted the claim by the Board of Trustees (BoT) that his tenure has ended, stating that while he is not bothered about leaving, it would be unfair to embarrass him out of office.
The BoT said your tenure has ended. What is your take on that? And where did the NEC get its powers to suspend the BoT chairman?
Well, let’s take it one by one. The issue of my tenure has been under discussion for some time. Some people wrote petitions that my tenure had ended in March 2026, based on the consideration that three years plus another three-year tenure would add up to six years.
There have been arguments here and there, but the truth is that the constitution is very clear: the two tenures are separate.
You have to serve for three years, which is renewable at the pleasure of the ACF. And as secretary-general, the engine room and the accounting officer, even when your tenure finishes, you do not just walk away. You wait until another secretary-general is either appointed or somebody is brought in on an interim basis to hand over to.
That had not happened, and I was holding forth until July 25, 2023, when a letter of appointment was given to me for another term. It did not say ‘reappointment.’ That letter, dated the 25th, was signed by the then chairman of the selection committee of ACF and the secretary of that committee: General Akilu, the chairman, and Malam Bukar Zarma, secretary of the committee. They signed the letter, and a copy of the letter is here.
They said that my tenure begins on my inauguration, and I was not inaugurated until December 12, 2023, together with all other members of the National Working Committee and the chairman of the Board of Trustees, who was appointed to complete the tenure of Alhaji Shehu Malami, Sarkin Sudan.
Now, the petition was sent to the chairman of the BoT, which was wrong. A petition on leadership should go to the chairman of NEC, and instead of the chairman of the BoT passing it to the chairman of NEC, he erroneously just gave it to me, saying there was a petition against me and that I should go and answer it.
My initial reaction was to disregard that, but then I thought, since I had said okay in front of him, I answered the petition. The petition was regarding the tenure of the secretary-general. This was the answer I gave because this is the letter he wrote and signed, and this was my answer to him.
Then, after that, he sent another letter saying that I should vacate the office and hand over to the administrative secretary. Now, probably he did not understand the importance of the secretary-general.
But even if I am to hand over, I am not going to hand over to the administrative secretary. I will probably hand over to the chairman of NEC and tell him, ‘Okay, look, get somebody to handle this.’
So, I replied to him in very detailed terms. I told him about the infraction he was committing and so on. After this, I went to meet General Akilu, who was the chairman of the then Leadership Selection Committee. But I also made him understand that their own tenure, or rather their own mandate, is also terminated at the same time as the secretary-general’s. And I gave him a letter stating that this was an issue under his responsibility. He acknowledged it, and I have copies of this letter.
So, now they came – the Elders Committee – that is, Alhaji Yayale Ahmed, Anthony Sani, who was the previous secretary-general, the one I took over from, and Malam Bukar, who was the secretary of the committee. Anthony Sani was one of the petitioners.
So, when we sat down, initially I wanted to protest that Anthony Sani should not be there in the first place, since he was one of the petitioners. But I said, okay, since the elders are there, let’s talk.
Then the chairman of the Board of Trustees looked at me in the face and said, ‘I cannot work with you.’
Now, it is not for him to tell me that he is not going to work with me because both of us were appointed through the same procedure. He has a constitutional mandate, which is to chair the BoT, and I have a constitutional mandate as the secretary-general and chief accounting officer.
Anyway, the elders said, ‘Okay, look, since you have served for this long and you have done very well, do you still want to continue?’
I said, ‘No, but I don’t want to be just walked out of this place because somebody doesn’t like my face. I’ve served diligently. I’ve faced some challenges. There was no salary, no allowance. I used my own resources, so I need some respect.’
And the elders said, ‘Okay, fine. Would you want to take time to prepare your handover notes and so on?’
I said, ‘I have no problem with that, as long as it is done respectfully.’
Then he said, ‘Okay, maybe till when?’
I said, ‘My son was getting married on April 25, and between now and that time, I will not be available. After that, we will look at what time I will be back to put things together.’
The man said he could not give me beyond the middle of May.
Well, I said, ‘Okay, go ahead and do whatever you want. I will also do the needful.’
Then the National Executive Council chairman, the NWC chairman, called me and said, ‘Look, summon a meeting for the 5th and 6th.’
The next thing I saw after summoning the meeting was a statement from Bashir Dalhatu, the BoT chairman, saying that the meeting should not hold because I was no longer the secretary-general. And even by their own calculation, I was supposed to remain secretary-general till May 15. So I said, ‘Okay, fine. Please, Chairman, some people think I am not the secretary-general. You are the one to summon the meeting. Call the meeting yourself.’
So the chairman called the meeting.
The working committee met on the 5th. But before the meeting, we wrote to the Commissioner of Police and the Director of DSS to inform them that we were going to hold the meeting on the 5th and 6th.
And, of course, after our meeting on the 5th, there was another letter again signed by Bashir Dalhatu stating that people should keep off from that meeting because the person who called the meeting was an ex-secretary-general.
And the chairman again wrote and said, ‘Look, I am the one calling for the meeting.’
The next thing we saw, the police came in and took over the building.
And so we called the members and said, ‘Let’s meet at another venue.’
Even while we were meeting at that venue, the police came and said we could not meet. I think we had already started, so they left us.
And that was when other developments took place.
Some people are contesting the powers of NEC to suspend the BoT chairman. Or was it an arbitrary decision?
The NEC is the executive. Just like somebody wrote a petition that my tenure had finished, somebody also wrote a petition pointing out the infractions or improprieties committed by the BoT chairman.
These improprieties included unilaterally determining the tenure of an official and also opening an account for the ACF, of which he is a signatory.
The mandate of the chairman of the Board of Trustees is only to chair the BoT and not to perform executive functions. So they were questioning that, and then also instructing the movement of funds unilaterally from the main account to an investment account of the ACF.
Before we get deep into his suspension, you are the chief accounting officer of ACF. Where did he derive the power to actually open the account?
Yes, there was an error from my own side. Because when he came and told me that we should open an account with the bank, I said, okay. So he brought the forms. I should have raised an alarm then. But he said it was just to open the account so that immediately after the launch of the endowment, the proper committee would be put together to manage the funds, and then we would transfer the responsibility to them. So I agreed.
But then subsequent events happened. They requested that the account be moved to Kano from Kaduna, and that made me a little uncomfortable. But I just cautioned him, and he said, ‘No, no problem.’
You cautioned him?
I cautioned him against moving the account because all our accounts are in Kaduna. Why would this one be in Kano, and then to a specific branch? So this was the thing that frightened the leadership. Like I said, the Board of Trustees has no executive power and has no mandate to manage finances. Again, what became curious to the leadership was that when he called an emergency board meeting, he unilaterally set up a committee to manage the funds and another committee to advise the management committee.
Those two committees were set up by him and presented to the Board of Trustees. But by the Constitution, the Board of Trustees cannot set up committees like these. So ordinarily, the NEC should set up those committees and confer with the Board.
Why were you not suspended also, if he was suspended, because it was the two of you who opened the account?
Yes, I did, first of all, take responsibility. But like I said, the money is still intact; nothing is missing. But the procedure was wrong. And it was based on the respect we have for elders in the North. So when he gave the instruction, I obliged, erroneously. I accept responsibility for that.
And, for instance, the Ethics Committee also believed that I did that, especially because I explained the situation to them. But if the account had been transferred back, then there would have been no problem.
But I can also tell you that the NEC had instructed, and we had written to the bank to restrict the account to the proper location and also with the proper signatures.
Then where are the financial infractions, because you just said that the money is intact?
The bank told us that our average expected return was about 8%, and he agreed. He told the meeting that, look, since the bank is majorly ours, we should accept that, even if another bank gives us more. So, the finance committee said, no, there is no emotion about that. Either we discuss with Jaiz Bank and get the appropriate return, or we can decide what to do with the bank. And we communicated that to the bank.
And when we finished the procedure for the proper appropriation of the account, then we would go into that. So that is one of the issues. They said, look, why would he negotiate on behalf of ACF and also just accept that?
Secondly, just a few days before the meeting, N19.4 million dropped into the account as proceeds.
Now, if you put N2.5 billion in an account and, three months later, N19 million comes in, people will ask, ‘What is happening?’ So who will negotiate on behalf of ACF?
So these are things that are just to be investigated. Nobody is accusing him. They are to be investigated to determine what happened, what was discussed with them, who is in charge of what, and so on. And he did not respond.
The BoT chairman has accused you of not managing the funds raised for the 25th anniversary the way expected. What would you say?
In the first place, the approved budget for the whole anniversary was N742 million, which included N176 million for football and golf tournaments. I did not spend a kobo outside of the budget. As the accounting officer and the engine room of the Forum, I do not need piecemeal approval to carry out any task that has already been approved by the necessary approving authority.
All monies received for the event were from donors and sponsors. The total amount spent was N641 million and not N700 million. The budget included items that were added to the event, like the furnishing of the ACF main conference hall, the ACF documentary, both totalling over N60 million.
Additional events like cultural display, security, and women’s pavilion were added. Despite that, we made a saving of over N100 million from the budgeted sum. Details are with the accounting department and can be audited.
So there was nothing that I did, as the accounting officer, that was outside the budget. Moreover, the issues that he claimed he instructed me not to go ahead with, such as sports without sponsors, were not disregarded since the whole monies received for the event were from sponsors and donors, for which I personally had played a more than significant role in raising.
Furthermore, the directive as to what should be added or dropped from the programme should come from the main organising committee and not from individuals. Let us get it clear. He is not an approving authority in the ACF; approval of expenditure is by the Secretary-General (with a limit), the Chairman (with a limit), the Chairman on the advice of the Finance and General Purposes Committee, and then the National Executive Council. The Board of Trustees or its Chairman have nothing to do with approval.
The BoT chairman also explained that he proposed that the endowment money should be kept separately to avoid tampering with it for the day-to-day running of the ACF…
Regarding the monies for the endowment, first of all, the account was opened before the event. The bank was Jaiz Bank. That means that preparation and expenses were still ongoing. And I, as the accounting officer of the Forum, am the co-signatory. So who is the money being kept away from?
The Chairman of the Board of Trustees should have nothing to do with opening or operations of accounts. At the time the account was opened, no member of the management was aware of it. Everyone saw it for the first time when it was flashed on the screen for the benefit of donors.
What was disturbing, however, was that he relocated the account to a particular branch in Kano to a specific person who, curiously, was also his bank relationship officer. Not trusting the Secretary-General (who is a co-signatory), the National Working Committee, but especially the National Executive Council, or even the Board of Trustees with monies belonging to the Forum is curious. ACF is not a personal estate.
So far, all accounts are audited by external auditors, and right now they are at work. Will it not be sensible to await the outcome of the external audit report before making insinuations? I have worked in private and public institutions, and till today there is never a time I have been accused of or invited for financial or any other impropriety.
All documents concerning the budget, donors, and expenses are available should you require them to verify.
Can we now conclude that the crisis in the ACF is about money?
No. It is true that the fund may have contributed to it, but the whole issue started with getting rid of the Secretary-General, who is the accounting officer and the other signatory, the co-signatory.
Who are actually the signatories to ACF accounts?
In all accounts, I am Category A. The treasurer, the financial secretary, and the assistant treasurer are Category B. Two people have to sign.
Then why the concern? Is it because Alhaji Bashir Dalhatu gave approval for another account to be opened?
That shows a little concern. Secondly, he also gave a unilateral instruction because when additional money came in, N1.4 billion, it was moved to the investment account without the co-signatory.
So now people became concerned, saying, ‘Ah! So this can happen.’
If he can unilaterally give instructions and money can be moved, who knows what can happen in the future? These are the things that frightened the leadership in ACF. So now, to correct the aberration, we have written to Jaiz to say, ‘Look, these are the statutory signatories of the ACF from now on.’ Secondly, the money should be allocated to Kaduna. These are the two instructions we gave.
It is like the misunderstanding has escalated from between you and the BoT chairman to now between the BoT chairman and the NEC chairman?
Yes, I will tell you why. If the BoT chairman had not signed the release stating that the Secretary-General who called for the meeting was no longer there and was an ex-Secretary-General, okay, the NEC chairman would not have gotten involved in all these exchanges.
But when he instructed me to call for a meeting, and I did, that was fine. But it is not for him to say the NEC cannot call for a meeting because somebody is an executive.
In fact, he told the press that the meeting should not hold because he was not supposed to be there. It is not for him to say the NEC meeting cannot hold because somebody is an ex-Secretary-General.
Can we now say that the issue is personal now, or maybe you can to explain to our readers whether you are fixated about your office or are you willing to go?
No, no. Look, like I said, this office is actually a burden; I am only serving the North. There is no salary, no allowance. It is not as if I am getting any benefits, okay. But I have served for six years. This is my sixth year.
What I expect, and I can say with all sense of modesty, is that since I became Secretary-General, there have been considerable changes in terms of structure, in terms of membership, and in terms of the quality of people that come in, and so on.
What I expect is a little more appreciation, to say, ‘Oh, thank you,’ and not to be disgraced out just because somebody does not like my face.
How can we now find maybe a middle ground between the responsibilities of the BoT chairman and the responsibility of the NEC chairman, because it is like there are two captains?
The BoT chairman has no role at all by the Constitution apart from chairing BoT meetings.
And what do they do?
The role of the BoT is clearly spelled out in the Constitution, and I can give you a copy of the Constitution.
But do you think the organogram of ACF is structurally defective and where does the secretary-general fit in?
The Secretary-General is the secretary to the Board, secretary to NEC, and secretary to NWC, and is an ex-officio member of all committees of the Forum, as stated in the Constitution.
What would you say is the solution to this quagmire?
Well, put the ACF itself ahead of any personal interest. That is it, and for everybody to know the limits of his position. If you are the BoT Chairman, remain the BoT Chairman. If you are not comfortable being BoT Chairman and you feel you want to play another role, then wait until there is a vacancy for NEC Chairman and contest for it.