In a recent turn of events, Betta Edu, the government official overseeing the disbursement of funds to vulnerable groups in four states, faces scrutiny for transferring over 500 million naira to a private account before reaching beneficiaries. Edu defends her actions, claiming approval for the process, but the details prompt a closer examination.
Edu’s ambiguous defense leaves the public questioning whether the approval granted was for funding vulnerable groups or for funneling payments through individual accounts. She dismisses critics as disgruntled elements attempting to tarnish her reputation, asserting that the public should not be concerned about the document revealing the fund transfer.
However, an unanswered question looms: why didn’t beneficiaries in Akwa Ibom, Ogun, and Lagos submit their account details directly to the ministry? The use of an intermediary to pay ‘vulnerable groups’ in Lagos raises eyebrows, emphasizing the need for transparency in government transactions.
Edu cites civil service rules, justifying an individual serving as a project accountant to collect funds for a project in their personal account. This opens the door to potential misuse, allowing individuals like Mojisola to collect government funds for disbursing to beneficiaries, a departure from the previous emphasis on direct disbursement for transparency.
This controversy draws parallels with the case of the suspended NSIPA CEO Halima Shehu, highlighting a shift in government practices. The public questions the wisdom of using intermediaries when direct payment to beneficiaries through BVNs and bank accounts could ensure a more transparent and accountable process. As the public demands answers, the narrative surrounding Betta Edu’s fund transfer controversy raises broader concerns about the state of transparency in government transactions.
