TheCable

By Linda Nwoke

When I was relieved of my appointment as Country Director of BBC Media Action on May 29, 2014, I was not inclined to contest the company’s decision, even though I did not believe that it was the most appropriate decision given the circumstance. However, in the three years that has passed since that decision was taken, it has become increasingly clear to me that the issues that led to my exit were not quite settled as I thought, and that I should at the very least have done more to achieve closure before attempting to move on.

I was engaged by BBC Media Action as Senior Research Executive in April 2005. I later became Country Director of the organisation in May 2010. This was the position I held until May 2014 when I was relieved of my appointment “following an internal disciplinary process”.

The disciplinary process was in respect to allegations that I personally benefitted from an unauthorized rental of a residential property paid for by BBC Media Action; that I authorized payment to companies associated with my husband without declaring my interest; that, as co-signatory to an account, I pre-signed large numbers of bank cheques before proceeding on maternity leave; and that I took almost exclusive use of a car and driver of the company despite not being contractually entitled to it.

Remarkably, these ‘offenses’ were compiled over a two-year period, during which time any one of them should have attracted a caution, at most a reprimand, at the point that they occurred.

However, the purpose of this article is not to complain about the process or the fairness of the decision or whether the punishment fits the alleged offense. My primary concern in this article is to correct misleading versions of the story in the media that is threatening my career.

Following my disengagement by BBC Media Action, I had accepted the decision of the company, believing that it was also time for me to seek other opportunities taking with me valuable lessons from my experience, good and bad. Unfortunately it would turn out that the issues with BBC Media Action has made it difficult to settle in another job almost three years after I left the company.

In mid 2016, when I felt that my younger daughter was old enough for me to take up more professional responsibilities, I applied and was engaged by Internews as the organisation’s Deputy Chief of Party in Liberia. The organisation is implementing a $10 million USAID funded Media Development Plan. Barely 2 weeks into my appointment, my contract was terminated by the organisation after an online newspaper (FrontPage Africa) published a story that I had allegedly “engineered a scheme to defraud” my former employers. I was really surprised. Apart from the fact that this development was totally unexpected, the media report was a total misrepresentation of the facts. Hence I decided to write this article to present the facts as they are.

First, there wasn’t any such scheme to defraud BBC Media Action either during the period I served as Country Director or at any other time I worked in the company. To be clear, the only reference to anything remotely in relation to “potential fraud” was that because I had pre-signed a number of bank cheques, to be used in running the office while I was on extended (maternity) leave. Even then, the company acknowledged that I was concerned about how the company would continue to function in my absence hence I pre-signed my own column of the cheques before proceeding on leave. In the end, I was blamed for “failure of judgment” because I did not take steps to guard against potential misuse of the cheques that I signed. There was no question of a “scheme” to “defraud the charity” either in my actions or the findings of the company’s internal investigation.

Neither was there any suggestion of fraud on the issue of rental accommodation paid for by the company which I benefitted from. I had rented the apartment for an expatriate member of staff who was due to arrive in Nigeria in April 2012. However, the staff member did not arrive as scheduled. I took up temporary residence in property when I had a security issue at my home. However, because I failed to seek approval to live in the property or reimburse for the rental, the company considered this a serious breach of conduct. On my part, I admit that it was an error of judgment for which I paid a price that was more than sufficient.

Two other queries raised by BBC Media Action were that I authorized payments to companies associated with my husband, and that I took near-exclusive use of one of the company’s cars. I made it clear to my employees that my husband had been a contractor to BBC Media Action even before I met him. In any case I was not responsible for procurement at the organisation. In its investigation, the company found no irregularity in the transactions, only observing that I should have declared my interest when my circumstances changed. On the second issue, I also explained to the committee that at no time did I instruct staff in the office that they could not use the vehicle in question whenever it was available. But the company insisted that I did not make it clear to staff that the vehicle was available for them to use for work purposes.

Having clarified all the issues raised in the report of the investigation carried out by the company, it is important for me to further address an insinuation made by the obviously malicious story by FrontPageAfrica. The newspaper made a very mysterious reference to a nondescript “incident” which was “handled by the police”.  For the avoidance of doubt, there was never any instance of police investigation or involvement in the issues addressed in this article. I am very surprised that BBC Media Action, in response to the query by the newspaper, would make suggestive reference to “police investigation” when the company, by its own admission, stated that it had no record of such case that the newspaper had inquired about. Curiously, the newspaper failed to mention specifically what the issue or “incident” was. I could only conclude that their motive for doing so is very questionable.

Meanwhile, the damage done by such publication and the fact that the BBC Media Action failed to clarify that there was no case of fraud involved in its investigation has caused significant setback to my current and future career prospects. I have therefore decided to state the issues clearly as they are for the avoidance of any misrepresentation or misunderstanding.

In the course of my professional career spanning about fourteen years, I have given only my best and nothing less, just as I have done in my academic pursuit. I practically rose through the ranks and assumed the top management position at BBC Media Action as Country Director without any management training, taking on the colossal responsibility of doubling up in different management capacities while managing staff and resources, growing the organisation without adequate support. In the course of discharging that responsibility, I had made my mistakes and learned on the job. I considered my exit from BBC Media Action as the ultimate lesson which I resolved to take with me to my next employment.

It would be a cruel case of irony if I am denied the chance to apply the lessons from my experience due to the very circumstance that taught me those lessons.

My time with BBC Media Action was no doubt a very rewarding one given that the company gave me the opportunity to manage a very important sector of their operations at that level. In all that time no one questioned my capacity or competence. In the end I am fallible like every other human. Today, I have no doubt in my mind that I am a more enlightened professional with abilities far beyond the raw capacity that convinced BBC to give me such important opportunity.

All I seek at this moment and with this piece to tell my story, to clarify the issues and to bring closure to an event that happened three years ago. For me, the only thing worth preserving from my experience are the lessons, all of which I am surely taking with me to my next job assignment.