Two sacked directors of the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU) is suing the agency over their dismissal.

The ex-NFIU officers asked the National Industrial Court to set aside their dismissal from public service.

In an affidavit supporting the motion, the plaintiffs claimed their ordeal began in 2020 when they wrote memos to local and foreign authorities after initiating a probe against former Vice President Atiku Abubakar.

The agency fired Muhammed Abdulrahman, an associate director in charge of intelligence and investigation and Fehintola Salisu, associate director of compliance and analysis, for insubordination.

In the suit marked NICN/ABJ/253/2021, the plaintiffs prayed the court to set aside their dismissal from public service because it contravened the law.

As the most senior person in the organisation, in the absence of the director of NFIU, Modibbo Hamman-Tukur, Ms Salisu initiated action to respond to the request for information as expected by the partner organisation in Malta, according to the affidavit. Mr Abdulrahman also wrote to investigative authorities in Nigeria requesting details about the subject.

They alleged that the NFIU accused them of bypassing the appropriate authority before initiating the probe in separate queries served on them and later suspended indefinitely after the queries in August 2020.

They added that six months after their suspension, the NFIU invited them to appear before the Appointments, Promotions and Disciplinary Committee in February, following which they were dismissed from service.

They disclosed that the committee indicted them of negligence, dereliction of duty, and gross misconduct in its report.

“The grounds or allegations which the committee found us liable and recommended our dismissal, under Public Service Rules, 2008, can only give rise to a retirement or termination and not dismissal,” their affidavit stated.

In the suit filed by their counsel, PT Akan, the plaintiffs prayed for an order setting aside the findings and recommendations of the committee on appointments, promotions and discipline constituted by the director, upon which the defendants in the suit relied upon to dismiss them.

They also prayed the court to determine the following whether, in light of “Rules 030102 of Chapter 3 of the Federal Government Public Service Rules, 2008,” the defendants were vested with the power to dismiss the claimants from its services without such power expressly delegated to them by the Federal Civil Service Commission.

In addition, they wanted the NIC to determine whether, within the meaning and definition of “Section 1 of Chapter 16, Rules 160101 and 060102 of the Federal Government Public Service Rules, 2008,” NFIU does not qualify as parastatal.

Among other things, they asked the court to determine that “if it is, whether the defendants are not bound to comply strictly with the provisions of the Public Service Rules, 2008 before dismissing the claimants from its service.”

They also prayed the court to declare that their dismissal from the NFIU was arbitrary and unlawful and consequently null and void and of no effect whatsoever.

They are also seeking an order directing the defendants to issue a letter recalling and re-instating them into the service of NFIU and restoring all the privileges, entitlements and positions held by the claimants before their purported dismissal by the defendants.

“An order directing the defendants to pay to the claimants’ salaries, allowances and all their entitlements from the period of their purported dismissal to the period of reinstatement,” added the document.

The matter will be heard on Wednesday. 

(NAN)