Orji Kalu weeps at Senate over prison experience
The Chief Whip of the Senate, Orji Uzor Kalu, was tearful at the valedictory session of the ninth Senate on Saturday as he declared that “I am not a thief”.
Kalu, who represents Abia North Senatorial District, explained that he has made money as a businessman before he joined politics, saying that he financed the formation of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) between 1998 and 1999, and lamented how he was tagged a thief by the same government he assisted.
As the emotion laden Kalu battled to control his tears, he expressed disappointment over the humiliation he went through in hands of agents of government, saying that some elements who cannot explain the source of their wealth walk around freely, but those of them who work hard in business are being harassed.
He explained that his sojourn in the Senate had given him a better picture of citizens, stressing that Nigerians are “wonderful people.”
He thanked the Vice President, Senator Kashim Shettima for always coming to see him in prison on a weekly basis throughout the time he spent in prison and those who showed concern over his imprisonment.
He said: “Before I joined politics, I had money to buy whatever I wanted. I had already established manufacturing companies in Onitsha and three manufacturing companies in Aba.”
“Between 1997 and 1998, I financed the Peoples Democratic Party and those who do come to my house for transport fares are those labeling me a thief”, he lamented.
Recall that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had arraigned the former Abia governor and Ude Jones Udeogu, a former Director of Finance And Accountant in the state, on 36 counts of money laundering to the tune of N7.1 billion.
On December 5, 2019, Kalu was sentenced to 12 years imprisonment while Udeogu got a 10-year sentence.
The Supreme Court later nullified the trial of Kalu and his co-convict.
The apex court held that Mohammed Idris, the trial judge who had been elevated to the Court of Appeal at the time of the case, ought not to have presided over the matter while he was an appeal court judge.
No fresh charges have been preferred against him.
