9 arrested for offering fake FIRS jobs, promotion

Security officials working with the Federal Inland Revenue Service, FIRS, have arrested nine suspects in connection with a fake recruitment exercise into the agency.

The arrests were made after months of investigation using electronic and telecommunication trail of the suspects

The suspects are being investigated for alleged forgery of documents, impersonation of officials of the FIRS and other federal ministries, agencies and banks officials. The suspects are also accused of deceit of members of the public and soliciting for money for promotion of FIRS officials.

The suspects allegedly employed a vast network of websites, email addresses, computers, telephone lines and bank accounts and were spread over different parts of the Nigerian capital, Abuja. They promised to facilitate the promotion of some FIRS officials and sent sms to spouses, relatives and persons connected to the staff.

Although officials of the revenue agency would not speak on the matter saying investigations were ongoing, sources said the suspects being questioned were Alex Oki, David Kachia, Yakubu Tanko, Mohammed Shuaibu, Kehinde Jamah, Ogbonna Agwu, Aminu Ibrahim, Pascal Ajah and Chris Onyekachi.

Items received from the suspects include FIRS staff records, complimentary cards, polythene bag containing bank deposit slips and documents from several ministries and federal government agencies.

The suspects’ activities were exposed when a member sent an sms to a senior FIRS staff, seeking for money to facilitate the official’s promotion.

The official reported the matter leading to the investigations and the arrest. The suspects are expected to be charged to court soon.

The FIRS recently conducted an online promotion examination, which ran simultaneously in several locations across the country. Over 2000 staff participated and participants knew their results immediately they finished answering the questions.

The agency has also announced in several newspaper publications and on its website, www.firs.gov.ng, that it is not recruiting into the service for now.

A statement on the agency’s website states that “This is to inform the general public that FIRS is neither recruiting nor replacing unfilled positions within its workforce.

“Anybody submitting his/her CV or applying through any website, responding to sms, texts any online medium, social media platforms or in whatever form, for employment with FIRS, is doing so at his or her own risk.

“Please note that employment into the FIRS, will be advertised in national newspapers as well as on the FIRS website www.firs.gov.ng.

“Members of the public are hereby strongly advised to avoid being deceived or defrauded by unscrupulous and dubious characters, the statement running on the FIRS website for over two months now read.”


DOWNLOAD THE PREMIUM TIMES MOBILE APP

Now available on

  Premium Times Android mobile applicationPremium Times iOS mobile applicationPremium Times blackberry mobile applicationPremium Times windows mobile application

TEXT AD: Revealed!!! The Only Way Left of Getting an Extra Large Manhood and also Last Up to 38Mins+. Get the Insider Secret Here


All rights reserved. This material and any other material on this platform may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, written or distributed in full or in part, without written permission from PREMIUM TIMES.


  • Tunde Fawole

    Victoria Ohaeri, this is your premise. “I start from the premise that mass forced demolitions and forced evictions constitute violation of fundamental human rights, and Governor Nasir El-Rufai should be held to account.” With due respect, your premise is the reason for the argument that Nigerian laws, Nigerian judicial system are class weapons against Nigerian people since these laws are SUBTLY and STRUCTURALLY rigged against the working people, and some Nigerian lawyers are conspirators in that rigged system. These lawyers who hide under legalism are coopted by the rigged legal system to conduct a class war against Nigerian people. Lawyer Victoria, please consider a rival premise to your premise which is that “The use of the judicial system to steal and amass land and wealth by members of the Nigerian ruling class constitute violations of fundamental human rights of Nigerian people…” This is a premise that is more fundamental and more foundational than your premise. And this premise allows to interrogate those who used the judicial system and crass legalism to steal the commonwealth of the people. Madam, it is a jaded thinking to conclude that laws and economics are class neutral. No law and no economics is class neutral. In that situation each person’s position depends on the class we want to use our
    knowledge to serve. We either use our knowledge to serve the interests of the working people or hide under crass legalism to use our knowledge to serve the ruling class-the source of our misery.

    • Sola Aareago

      Like you, I also believe very strongly that Ms Ohaeri in her attempt to demonstrate her crass legalistic ability, was hasty in her conclusion that the administration of Nasir el-Rufai in Kaduna had acted in violation of some fundamental human rights of certain citizens of Kaduna state.
      To start with, Ms Ohaeri had jettisoned common sense and logic in her interpretation of the provisions of the law. She forgets that firstly, literally and as a matter of law, “you cannot build something on nothing”
      Secondly, where is the arbitrariness if and when a legally constituted arm of government upholds the law as it had sworn to do.
      “Had Governor El Rufai-led Kaduna State government obtained a court order
      prior to carrying out mass forced evictions or demolitions, this would
      have availed affected parties with the opportunity to state their own
      case”

      The above position is disingenuous as well naive. The onus to approach the courts for remedy cannot be transferred to the administration. The privilege of doing so (going to court) is and remains the sole responsibility of the “erring landholders” who were being sanctioned, and lawfully for that matter, for the deliberate breach of extant laws and regulations, by obviously encroaching on common spaces (schools and hospital land).
      It is instructive that despite Ms Ohaeri alluding to the fact the erring landholders had the window to exercise their rights to approach the courts in an action to “stay execution” or otherwise, they decided pass-up the opportunity – no one else could be blamed for this.

      • Mayo

        Your point is also disingenuous. There is a reason why the police are meant to obtain a search warrant before they can search your place. By your argument, the police should just barge in to search your place and it is then your job to go to court to argue that what the police did is wrong. Yes, you can do that but that doesn’t negate the fact that the police should have done the proper thing.

        APC was elected on the mantra of change. They said they would do things differently. The governor also swore an oath to uphold the laws. Well, the laws says you have to serve someone adequate quit notice before you try to evict the person. Let me give a basic example. If you own a piece of property which you rent out and your tenant has not paid rent for some time, you can’t just evict the person. The law says you must serve him quit notice and give somewhere between 3 – 6 months (can’t remember the exact time frame) before you can evict the person. Does it seem fair that you can’t throw out the person? yes, but that is what the law says (which is the reason why landlords ask for 1 – 2 years rent upfront). If the person sues you, the person can win that case and you will also pay the cost of the person suing you.

        • IskaCountryman

          you are wrong to use a search warrant as an example, but that not withstanding, if an active crime or felony is going on, the police has the right to enter into any place to stop such an act from occurring without a search warrant…

        • Sola Aareago

          Wrong!!!
          Though, your analogy, factually correct, has been misapplied – that of the police needing a court warrant before a search – in the analogy you gave, Yes the police would need a search warrant because you are still under suspicion.
          To help you, I would offer you a more appropriate analogy.
          You commit an offense, the police give you a citation for the infraction then offer you a chance to challenge the citation before an independent judge (court). You have the choice to take the offer of an independent third party which the courts represent or not to.
          The mantra of “Due process” has to be clearly understood, otherwise ………….

          • Mayo

            Using your own example, the police will give you a citation. The citation says you ‘allegedly committed XYZ offense. If you agree, then pay the associated fine, if you don’t agree, come to the court to defend yourself. The citation has not made the police judge and jury.

            Going back to the original idea expressed in the article, the law does not justify what El Rufai has done. Are you aware that some people actually obtained land, building permits etc by following the right process. If someone in government messed up by allocating the wrong land to these people, are you then saying they should unilaterally bear the consequences? That is part of the reason why the law says the government should give them eviction notice and time to contest that notice. Such people can then go and present their documents to the authorities and if the fault was not theirs (but that of government official), the government will work out an arrangement that is agreeable to both the government and the people.

          • Sola Aareago

            Wrong again sir!!! the police do not, I repeat do not say or imply that “If you agree, then pay the associated fine, if you don’t agree, come to the court to defend yourself ” rather you are given a window (time/period) within which “you” choose between the default option which is paying the fine or going to court to challenge the citation. The police (authority) cannot be blamed for the option taken by an individual.
            In simple terms, the above is analogous of the following; Kaduna state authorities (el-Rufai) gave the citation(s), offered a window to erring individuals to weigh their options and act, then applied sanctions according to the law. Where has el-Rufai erred?
            I hope this settles it and we are on the same page. Thanks

          • Mayo

            Have you ever actually read the citation given you by the police? Secondly, in broad terms what is the difference between what you have described as ‘ rather you are given a window (time/period) within which “you” choose between the default option which is paying the fine or going to court to challenge the citation’ and what I described?

            Finally, the point of Victoria’s article is that people were not given a ‘window’ (which is what you are saying should happen). She is saying El-Rufai’s administration has only been in power for 2 months and within those 2 months they claim to have conducted a thorough investigation to determine who fell afoul of the law, communicated to those people that they have fallen on the wrong side of the law, given them options and then applied sanction (of demolishing their house) because they have not used any of the options given to them. All in 2 months?

          • Sola Aareago

            Simple put, the difference is that the citation issuing authority does not approach the courts for any additional direction, it is the erring party that does that. You err, you are cited, you are given an opportunity of an independent opinion or settle to face the prescribed sanctions, the choice is yours.

            I’m not sure you and I are commenting on the same article because par.14 of the article that I read is captioned “Inadequate notices” meaning, in Victoria’s opinion, there was a “window” but inadequate, yeah? Talk of ingenuity!

            Your emotional arguments are not lost on me but let’s get this straight, you cant mix “rule of law”, “due diligence”, etc with emotions

      • IskaCountryman

        thank you…

    • Mayo

      If the laws are SUBTLY and STRUCTURALLY rigged against the people, then in a democratic setting, you should elect new representatives to change those laws or organize a protest (there are laws allowing you to do that). But you can’t just to willfully ignore the law because you feel you are on the right path. There is a reason why they say ‘Justice is blind’. It means the law is the same no matter who is involved – rich, poor, young, old, guilty, non-guilty

  • john Ogwuche

    Victoria, if you do not have any other thing to write about please close shop. Illegality is illegality. There should be absolute clean up in all aspect of human live and practices.

    • Mayo

      You said – Illegality is Illegality. And that is exactly what Victoria is saying i.e. that was El Rufai is doing is also illegal. And the title of this article sums it up correctly – an illegality can’t cure another illegality.

  • Kabiru Aliyu

    Victoria, Thank you for being the voice of the victims.
    As for the supporters of Elrufai’s actions I wish to let you know that the issue is grey. He certainly has some justification, some of the cases, but the approach is completely wrong and inhumane. I acquired land legally from the state government, followed all due process to get building permits and invested my life savings and now it is marked and targeted. You have no idea what this means…

  • IskaCountryman

    apc no know book…o