FOWARD WITH THE TIMES
MAIN PAGE

  NEWS

      Commentaries

      Breaking News

  STANDARD VOICE

  PHOTO NEWS

  SPORTS

  ENTERTAINMENT

  POLITICS

  IN PARLIAMENT

  OPINION

  ADVERTISEMENT

  BUSINESS WORLD

  ONE ON ONE WITH DAVID MAHDI KOROMA

  RELIGION

  MEDIA & SOCIETY

  GOSSIP

  VIEWPOINT

  YOUR HEALTH

  THE ENVIRONMENT

  IN THE COURTROOM

  GENDER AFFAIRS

  PRESS RELEASES

  TOP MENU

  IN MEMORIAM

  CONTACT US
Search

NEWS > Commentaries

“Honest NASSIT Press Release” But Mr Edmond Koroma is That All
Posted by on Jun 27, 2008, 13:12

The recent press release issued out by NASSIT in reaction to Standard Times numerous publications about the shady deal of the former United States Embassy building on Walpole Street in Freetown is an attempt by the establishment to put what they would refer to as the “record straight”. Unfortunately, the attempt exposed them further, as the necessary information required by the public was deliberately ignored. What is interesting is that Mr. Edmond Koroma, the 21st Century dictator of NASSIT failed to give the proper tutoring to the writer of the release.

 

This is because the aim was to ridicule Standard times in the eyes of the public and cover-up the anomalies discovered in the entire transaction. The good side of it is that Edmond Koroma’s management team admitted that the transaction took place in Lebanon…the city of Beirut, after mandate has been given to them to undertake a spending spree of the people’s money without their consent and approval. Efforts by the team to conceal Mukerzel’s name in the transaction not to remind Sierra Leoneans about his role in the coffee deal only succeeded to cloud the reasoning ability of some of their apologists and not the critical minds who know that Mukerzel was the largest shareholder in the estate. That besides, he is the in-law to Mr. J. Milhen whose name was used as front in the transaction.

 

In addition, NASSIT also failed to brief the contributors to the scheme about the age of the building that it bought for the sum of $2.750.000 Million. According to research, the age of the building is about 43 years old built in the early 1960s and was used by the former Labour Department owned by Government. The building was leased to Mukerzel for 0ne pound at the time for ninety nine years (99 years) during the reign of the Margai’s. It was during the reign of Ahmad Tejan Kabbah that Mukerzel obtained a free-hold. The reason, readers of this column now know had been friends for long with their names very prominent in the coffee deal, which caused the ex-president to disappear from the scene in Sierra Leone for over twenty years trying to escape the coffee scandal that was unearthed by the Beoku Betts Commission of Enquiry around 1967.

 

In addition, Mukerzel was the SLPP rice king at the time and used the rice business to obtain the lease. One could notice the relationship, at the time the SLPP was in governance during the Margai’s era he obtained the ninety nine years lease for one pound a year and when the SLPP regained governance under the Tejan Kabbah era he obtained a free-hold and he is still in the rice business using the Commodity Trading Company managed by Lebanese born Arif Halloway in Sierra Leone. So his physical presence matters less in carrying out his deals. It is true that two valuators were hired by NASSIT to value the building and who are these valuators? What was the quotation by each of them? Public money is not a secret society, therefore Edmond Koroma and his management team must explain who these valuators were that did the work.

 

According to our investigation, one of the valuators submitted a little over $3 Million, while the other submitted a little over $5 million, but who are they? This writer is waiting to hear from NASSIT and would publish their response without cost.

The argument that the purchase amount of $2,750,000 included  a full complement of modern furniture in every room, two 500 KVA generators in good working order, eight-three split unit air conditioners and several large storage tanks for both fuel and water. These items are of depreciating values and should not be part of the property bought. Besides, how old are they after being used by the Americans for considerable period of time? 

 

Regarding their response to the contracts awarded to their cronies, they were very economical with the truth and as a result failed to tell who the contractors were, from the Bombali district or the Western area? I pause for a response.        

 

 






---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Advertisements

© 2006 Standard Times Press - All rights reserved.             Designed by: Muckson Sesay