EXCLUSIVE: How N63Billion Kano Irrigation Intervention Was Split Into 64 Projects, Documents Raise Questions Over Contracts | Sahara Reporters
The documents have raised questions about the award and implementation of contracts under a multibillion-naira ecological intervention intended to expand irrigation infrastructure, improve food security and tackle erosion and flooding in Kano South, Kano State.
Documents obtained by SaharaReporters detail 64 project entries under a Kano irrigation intervention, with billions of naira allocated to contractors and consultants.
The documents have raised questions about the award and implementation of contracts under a multibillion-naira ecological intervention intended to expand irrigation infrastructure, improve food security and tackle erosion and flooding in Kano South, Kano State.
The documents detail dozens of consultancy and construction contracts covering irrigation facilities, tube wells, erosion control, bridges, road improvements and the procurement of equipment under an intervention coordinated through the Ecological Project Office.
The development comes amid allegations that officials involved in administering the intervention divided three major irrigation projects into numerous smaller contracts, awarded jobs to politically connected companies and presided over projects that allegedly failed before completion.
The allegations have also drawn attention to the role of the Permanent Secretary associated with the Ecological Project Office, Dr Aishatu Ndayako Muhammad, and a director identified by sources as Abubakar Takuma. SaharaReporters learnt that both Muhammad and Takuma are from Niger State.
A letter dated July 12, 2024, and addressed to President Bola Tinubu by Senator Sulaiman A. Kawu Sumaila, who represents Kano South Senatorial District, provides documentary background to the intervention.
In the letter, Sumaila said he was forwarding details of proposed irrigation schemes, roads and bridges in Kano South following a meeting with the President on July 2, 2024. The meeting was also attended by Kabiru Alhasan Rurum, a member of the House of Representatives representing Rano, Kibiya and Bunkure Federal Constituency.
The letter outlined three major irrigation projects with a combined estimated cost of N95 billion.
The proposed projects were the Kano River Irrigation Project at Tiga Dam, estimated at N50 billion; the Challawa Gorge Dam Irrigation Scheme, estimated at N30 billion; and the Kafin Chiri Irrigation Scheme, estimated at N15 billion.
The proposals were presented as part of efforts to advance the President’s Renewed Hope agenda through agricultural development, food security and infrastructure expansion.
The document explained that the Kano River Irrigation Project, originally designed to serve more than 60,000 hectares, was then covering approximately 17,000 hectares, leaving substantial room for expansion.
It also stated that the Challawa Gorge Dam scheme had the potential to support irrigation across more than 10,000 hectares, while the Kafin Chiri scheme could expand irrigation along the Garko-Sumaila axis.
According to the document, developing the schemes would require additional canals, reservoirs, tube wells, drainage infrastructure and other facilities, alongside compensation for farmers affected by construction.
The proposed intervention was also expected to create employment and improve agricultural production across the region.
Sources familiar with the matter alleged that President Tinubu subsequently approved the intervention and directed the release of N63 billion from the proposed N95 billion allocation.
“Approval granted by President Tinubu for the Ecological Fund Project which was estimated at N95 billion. The President directed the payment of N63 billion to be released,” one of the sources said.
Dr. Aishatu Ndayako Muhammad, the permanent secretary, connived with her officials and registered many companies, split the three jobs into 52 and awarded contracts to cronies. Many of the jobs failed before completion. It is gross misconduct and against procurement laws and procedures.
A separate document titled ‘Summary of Utilization of 1st Tranche Kano Irrigation Scheme Intervention’, attributed to the Ecological Project Office, lists 64 project entries covering consultancy services, construction, procurement, irrigation development and erosion control.
The entries include the rehabilitation and expansion of the Kano River Irrigation Project, the Challawa Gorge Dam Irrigation Scheme and the Kafin Chiri Irrigation Project.
They also cover the provision of tube wells and water-harvesting facilities across several local government areas, the construction of bridges and culverts, erosion-control works, road improvements and the procurement of agricultural equipment and logistics support.
The document identifies consultants and contractors against individual projects and provides figures for consultancy fees, contract amounts and total financial commitments.
Among the major entries is the rehabilitation and expansion of the Kano River Irrigation Project, assigned to Masarki Nigeria Limited as contractor, with a listed contract amount of approximately N11.84 billion and a consultancy fee of N270 million.
The rehabilitation and expansion of the Challawa Gorge Dam Irrigation Scheme is listed with a contract amount of approximately N7.47 billion and a consultancy fee of N258 million.
The Kafin Chiri Irrigation Project is listed with a contract amount of approximately N7.09 billion and a consultancy fee of N215 million.
Other entries cover projects involving hundreds of millions of naira each, including tube wells, irrigation facilities, erosion control, flood mitigation and road improvements.
The document therefore provides a substantial record of how the first tranche of the intervention was reportedly allocated across different project categories.
Sources familiar with the intervention alleged that officials responsible for its administration divided the three major irrigation schemes into numerous smaller contracts and awarded them to companies connected to associates of officials.
The sources further alleged that the arrangement enabled politically connected individuals and companies to benefit from the intervention, while some projects failed to reach completion despite the substantial sums allocated to them.
The allegations raise questions about whether the contracts were awarded through open and competitive procurement procedures and whether the companies selected had the technical capacity and financial resources to execute the work.
The contract schedule lists numerous consultants and contractors across the 64 entries. These include companies assigned to irrigation facilities, road improvements, erosion control, flood mitigation and equipment procurement.
Senator Sumaila Accuses Officials Of Sabotaging Tinubu’s Agenda
The controversy comes as Senator Sulaiman Kawu Sumaila, who represents the Kano South Senatorial District at the 10th Nigerian National Assembly, has publicly accused unnamed officials in Abuja and the Presidential Villa of frustrating the implementation of projects intended to benefit communities in Kano South.
In a video seen by SaharaReporters, the senator appealed to President Tinubu and well-meaning Nigerians to intervene, alleging that some officials were working against the President’s development agenda because the projects were located in Kano South.
“We are appealing to Mr President, to well-meaning Nigerians that some quarters who are not happy with what Mr President is doing in Kano, in northern Nigeria, more particularly in Kano South are sabotaging the efforts of Mr President in commencing the Phase II of the project,” Sumaila said.
He alleged that some individuals occupying senior positions in Abuja and the Presidential Villa were undermining the initiative because residents of Kano South stood to benefit from it.
The senator praised Tinubu’s intervention and said he remained committed to supporting the President’s efforts to improve conditions in the area.
He also invoked the National Assembly’s oversight responsibilities, warning that elected representatives would not allow anyone to deprive their constituents of projects intended for their benefit.
“We will not allow anybody to short-change our people because of selfish interest, because you are not happy with the achievements of Mr President,” he said.
Sumaila added that he intended to expose those he believed were responsible for frustrating the project.
Abubakar Takuma Named In Allegations Against Project Officials
Sources who provided information about the intervention identified Abubakar Takuma, described as a director involved in the administration of the projects, as a central figure in the alleged arrangement.
The sources alleged that Takuma worked with other officials to facilitate contract awards to favoured companies.
Sources also alleged that Takuma was constructing a mansion in Guzape, an expensive residential district of Abuja, as well as a private hospital in Wuse 2.
They suggested that the developments warranted scrutiny in light of the allegations surrounding the public intervention.
Photographs of the property were made available to SaharaReporters.
Another major concern raised by sources is that some projects under the intervention allegedly failed before completion.
The 64-entry schedule includes works intended to improve irrigation infrastructure, provide water-harvesting facilities, construct bridges and culverts, control erosion and improve roads across Kano State.
The success of these projects is critical to the intervention’s stated objectives of improving agricultural production, supporting livelihoods and strengthening resilience against flooding and erosion.
Efforts made by SaharaReporters to get Takuma for a reaction to the allegations on his mobile line failed as he did not answer his calls or reply to a message sent to him.
When SaharaReporters contacted Dr Muhammad for a response to the allegations, she requested that the inquiry be made official and that the correspondent make himself available for a fact-finding meeting.
“We are here to serve the interest of the public. Could you be kind enough to make this request official?” she said.
“We will be most willing to respond to your request. In addition, kindly avail yourself of a fact-finding meeting on the issues. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation,” she added.