By Makutu Manneh
Modou Jonga, a former Chief Executive Officer of the Brikama Area was questioned about a mysterious transaction in which they made two payments for a trip to Dakar comprising councilors and council staff.
He appeared before the Local Government Commission of Inquiryon Monday, 12 August 2024. The Commission is established to investigate the financial and administrative operations of local government councils to enhance transparency and accountability.
The witness was handed two vouchers dated 13 October 2021 and 31 January 2021. The Lead Counsel asked him to explain.
The first one discussed was the one dated 31 January 2021.
“Who authorised this payment?” Lead Counsel Gomez asked.
The witness was silent.
“Did you sign it?” Counsel Gomez asked.
“Yes,” the witness answered.
The same line of questions was repeated for the other voucher dated 13 October 2021. The witness admitted that he signed both vouchers. Both vouchers were tendered and admitted in evidence.
The voucher for January 2021 was for an official trip to Grand Yoff, Dakar, Senegal from the 16th to 20th January 2021.
“Was there an invitation?” Counsel Gomez asked.
“No,” the CEO answered.
He later claimed that there was an invitation. He added that the trip included staff and councilors. The amount paid was D607,650. The voucher was signed by the accounts clerk, the principal auditor it, the director of finance, and the CEO, but the paying-out cashier did not sign.
The second voucher was for the payment of the same trip. It was for 16 to 20 January 2021. The amount was D630,720 for the same trip. The accounts clerk signed it, the internal auditor clerk signed it, the CEO signed it, the director of finance signed and the paying cashier did not sign it. This one has the invitation.
“Why did you prepare two payment vouchers for the same trip?” Counsel Gomez asked.
“It is clearly very wrong. I cannot explain why two payment vouchers were raised,” Jonga said.
The Commission noted that the payment was done in January, and in October of the same year a voucher was raised for the same trip which was already done and paid. Another payment was made in October.
“I don’t know what explanation to give here. I cannot provide an explanation,” the witness said.
The witness requested time to consult the director of finance about the two payments.
“What are you going to ask him? Everything you need is here. The vouchers are here and all the details are here,” Counsel Gomez told the witness.
The witness agreed that all the details were there, but he needed to confirm with the accounts unit. He testified that the payment was unlawful.
Jonga testified that the second voucher did not have the names of the recipients.
“There is evidence that the monies have been paid. It is before you and you can see. Everything is before you. The payment was made, but there was no recipient. This is an issue of suspected fraud. Is that not a reasonable conclusion,” Gomez told the witness.
“It is a reasonable conclusion,” the witness said.
The witness requested time to consult with the director of finance about the two payments.
Commissioner Oreme E. Joiner told the witness that the event was in January 2021 and payment was already done. He said the second request for the same payment was made in October, about 10 months later.
“Shouldn’t that raise a red flag that something is wrong here?” Commissioner Joiner asked.
“Yes, I agree,” the witness answered.
The Commission granted him chance to consult with the director of finance about the two payments.
The witness said the claims of the Finance Director and the Principal Cashier that their cash books were missing were not true.
“Until the time of my leaving in February 2024, the cash books were there. There was no complaint or report sent to me about the missing cash books,” the ex-CEO said
“We have not been paying withholding tax. We take responsibility for this,” the witness answered
He was told withholding tax is not optional, but mandatory. He agreed and admitted that they failed to adhere to the law.
He was asked about bank reconciliation and the financial statements of the Council. The witness said he would endevour to produce them.
The auditors observed that there were incomplete works concerning the road projects. This included the Box Bar Lot 2. The witness said the delay was as a result of the delay in the procurement of materials by the contractor. He said the Contract’s Committee accepted to extend the contract based on the reasons put up by the contractor. When asked if the contract was completed, the witness said the contractor could not fulfill the contractual obligation and the road was still not complete. The witness said D1.7 million out of D3 was paid to the contractor. He was asked for the status report and he stated that he will find out.
On the borehole project in Foni for the two communities, the witness said the contract was for the drilling of the borehole and its accessories. He testified that trench drilling was not part of the contract and it was not an obligation on the part of the contractor to drill the trench. He stated that there was a delay by the community to mobilise themselves for the work. Lead Counsel Gomez told the witness that the drilling of the trench was central to the project and the witness agreed. He was asked why it was not part of the contract; the witness said it was not part of the contract. The witness explained that the plumbers in the Planning Unit of the Council to complete the work. He said the contractor defaulted. The witness was asked about so many omissions in the contract, which included the lack of a termination clause. The auditors said the Area Council paid over one million dalasi to the contractor. The witness said the Council did not pay the full amount. He added that the full amount was not paid. The witness claimed that the contract was completed, but there is no certificate to show that it was completed. He said the reason for this was that the contract was completed by the council staff. He said there was an assessment done by a consultant by the name of Demba Jabbi from the Department of Water Resources.
The written statement of the witness dated 5 April 2024 and the additional statement dated 24 May 2024 were both tendered and admitted in evidence.
The Counsel proceeded to question the witness about the 2022 and 2023 System Audit Report covering from January 2022 to December 2023. The witness said the Council did not respond to the audit queries.
The auditors discovered that former employees of the Council were paid salaries. The auditors said those people continued to receive their salaries and provided a list containing the names of those individuals. The witness could not provide an answer.
The auditors found out that some council staff were paid transport allowance and fuel. The auditors listed the names and the vehicle numbers of the people having both transport allowance and fuel at the same time. The witness claimed that some of those allocations were meant for carrying out council works. He later admitted that that was a wrong thing to do.
The auditors noted that some junior staff were paid more than their seniors. The witness confirmed the audit finding as true. He told the Commission that the issue was addressed in the 2024 budget.
The auditors uncovered that a total of 68 revenue collectors suppressed D883,950. The witness confirmed the audit finding and said before he left the Council, he did not take steps to address the issue. He said the collectors were not confronted with the audit finding against them. He admitted that he did not take any action to recover the suppressed funds.
The auditors also raised the issue of vouchers without appropriate signatures. The auditors listed payment vouchers with missing signatures. The witness agreed that there were missing signatures despite his initial signature.
The witness was handed a voucher dated 23 March 2020 for the amount of D65,259.90. The voucher was admitted in evidence and marked as an exhibit.
Two vouchers were tendered and admitted in evidence. One of the vouchers was a payment of D84,000 for hiring trucks to clear the Sinchu Baliya dumpsite dated 12 March 2020. The recipient did not sign the receipt of the money. The paying-out cashier did not sign. The person, who made the claim, Mustapha Manneh, did not sign. The witness said the payment was not supposed to be authorised. He admitted that it was an unlawful payment. The other voucher was a payment of D186,000. The same violations were raised and the witness admitted. He was reminded of the responsibilities of the Chief Executive Officer as provided in the Financial Manual for Local Government Councils.
The witness provided the strategic plan and the strategic blueprint for the Brikama Area Council which were both tendered and admitted in evidence.
The witness was given a file containing contract documents of the Brikama Area Council. The witness said the file contains contract documents of the Council. He added that five (5) of them were signed during his time as the CEO. The contract file was tendered and admitted in evidence. It covers the period 2019 to 2023.
Meanwhile, the witness provided documents to the Commission. He provided the invitation letter for Sheriffo Sonko and Fa Saikou to attend the 10th Abu Dhabi World Urban Forum from the 8 to 12 February 2022, travel clearance and the report of the forum; the framework contract between the BAC and the GNPC for fuel supply dated 29 March 2019; a letter from the CEO instructing the Principal Internal Auditor to investigate the GTR Books and the investigative report; civil works contract with the National Roads Authority dated December 2020 for an amount of D3 Million whereas D1.7 million was paid to Samjass for the contract; contract for the drilling of the 2 boreholes in Foni; Contract with Metrix; Investigation Report in the matter of the auction sale for January 2020; Auction Report for March 2022; Auction Report prepared by Lamin Suso; CRBR covering from 2016 to 2023; a CRBR covering 2018 only; and a few other documents. They were all copies. There were 14 documents in total.
He will reappear today.
