Headlines
Nigeria’s Loss of $9.6bn: Who’s Responsible?
- /home/rhoncare/pointblank.ng/wp-content/plugins/mvp-social-buttons/mvp-social-buttons.php on line 27
https://pointblank.ng/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Malami-800x600.jpg&description=Nigeria’s Loss of $9.6bn: Who’s Responsible?', 'pinterestShare', 'width=750,height=350'); return false;" title="Pin This Post">
- Share
- Tweet /home/rhoncare/pointblank.ng/wp-content/plugins/mvp-social-buttons/mvp-social-buttons.php on line 69
https://pointblank.ng/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Malami-800x600.jpg&description=Nigeria’s Loss of $9.6bn: Who’s Responsible?', 'pinterestShare', 'width=750,height=350'); return false;" title="Pin This Post">
By Eric Elezuo
On August 16, 2019, the Nigerian government received the greatest shock of its administration when a British Court awarded over $9 billion damages against it for failing to honour a contract in a landmark judgement.
The judgment, which was delivered by Justice Butcher of The High Court of Justice, Business and Property Courts of England and Wales, ruled against Nigeria’s objection to arbitration which in 2017 settled that the Nigerian government should pay $6.6 billion as damages to a company, Process & Industrial Development Limited (P&ID). The damages and interest add up to a figure above $9 billion.
Nigeria’s former Attorney-General, Mr. Bayo Ojo, was among the three member arbitration panel that gave judgement in favour of P&ID against the Nigerian government and at the same time secured the monetary award. While Mr. Ojo tried his best to ensure that Nigeria escaped with a paltry $250 million, the majority opinion of Lord Hoffmann and Anthony Evans, the two other members of the panel, ensured that Nigeria lost the case.
Hoffmann and Evans held that P&ID’s expenditure and income should have been about $6.597 billion if the agreement was duly performed by the government. They also insisted that the award should be paid together with interest at the rate of 7 per cent from March 20, 2013.
Ever since the judgement, blames have been traded between the present All Progressives Congress (APC) administration led by Muhammadu Buhari, and previous administrations dating back to the late Umaru Musa Yar’dua era.
Leading the blame game is the returnee Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Nigeria, Mallam Abubakar Malami. The Minister, who was reappointed by President Muhammadu Buhari, few days after the judgement described the ruling as the “consequences of the underhand dealings of the past administration”.
He said: “Sadly, in spite of the spirited and concerted efforts of the current administration to combat corrupt practices and rent-seeking in all its forms, Nigerians woke up on Friday, August 16, 2019, to the rudest consequences of the underhand dealings of the past administration that has resulted in the award of $9 billion against the Federal Republic of Nigeria, by a British court which ruled that Process and Industrial Development Limited had the right to seize $9 billion in Nigerian assets.”
The lawyer went ahead and specifically fingered the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan as the culprit, saying he connived “with local and International conspirators in a bid to inflict grave economic adversity on the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the good people of Nigeria.”
Malami concluded his blame with a threat, stressing that the federal government would punish any government official whose action or inaction led to the award of $9 billion damages against Nigeria. He also promised that the government “will vigorously defend its rights to protect its people’s assets around the world against the enforcement of the judgement.”
It is worth knowing that the value of the penalty represents approximately a fifth of the country’s foreign reserves of $45bn. the fact of the case is itemised as follows:
- The agreement, which set the basis for the current legal action, was a Gas Supply and Processing Agreement signed in January 2010.
- If concluded, the deal would have offset a significant percentage of Nigeria’s energy deficit (Africa’s largest oil and gas producer has a notoriously epileptic power supply).
- P&ID claims about $40m were expended on the project, but Nigeria did not meet its obligations and cost the company billions in damages representing future profits it had lost.
- In 2013, after the deal failed, P&ID dragged the government to court and won a $6.6bn arbitration case against the Federal Government.
- Four years later, the firm was awarded $6.6bn, with an additional $2.4bn included as accrued interest.
- Nigeria for years resisted P&ID’s attempts to begin enforcement proceedings of the rulings in the US and the UK; the judgement by the British court now allows the firm to begin seizing Nigerian assets.
- Under the Jonathan administration, Nigeria negotiated an out-of-court settlement with P&ID for a far smaller sum of $850m. However, the president left the payment to the incoming Buhari administration, which set aside the settlement and asked its lawyers to return to litigation.
Undaunted by the threats and name calling of the Buhari government, the Jonathan camp responded, throwing the blame to the feet of the present administration. It alleged that the administration failed to pay the $850million out of court settlement with P&ID just to spite the previous administration. The government has however, denied that it did not handle the case diligently.
In a statement, signed by a former aide of Jonathan, Mr. Reno Omokri, the Jonathan camp noted as follows:
“Former President Jonathan was not president in January 2010. During that time, he was completely shut out of power by an unelected cabal that ran Nigeria during the period of the ill health of the late President Yar’Adua, before the National Assembly courageously intervened on February 9, 2010.”
Jonathan assumed office in February 2010 and, according to Omokri, the deal had by then already been set in motion by Rilwanu Lukman, Umaru Musa Yar’Adua’s Petroleum Minister. The cabinet and close allies of the late president had refused to turn over sensitive documents to his deputy because Yar’Adua hadn’t handed over to him as constitutionally stipulated.
“That same cabal has resurrected and has now coalesced around President Muhammadu Buhari, with some of them being made either ministers, or formal and informal advisers. As a matter of fact, the main man behind that cabal is now one of the closest persons to General Buhari.”
It is okay that the Attorney General has sworn to prosecute and punish everyone involved and responsible for the loss, if it is eventually executed, one thing must be established, will he also prosecute himself if given the afore-mentioned, he also had a role to play.
Headlines
Atiku Vindicated As Tinubu Seeks Another $20.52bn, €1.045bn Loan
Former Vice President and African Democratic Congress presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, has said President Bola Tinubu’s request for approval to borrow $20.52 billion and €1.045 billion vindicates his October 12 warning about a loan plan of up to $20 billion.
Atiku said the President’s failure to identify the specific projects the loans would fund raises serious concerns that borrowed public money could be channelled through the Lagos–Calabar Coastal Highway, now rerouted inland, to political campaigners and favoured contractors.
In a statement issued by Phrank Shaibu, Director of Strategic Communication of the ADC Presidential Campaign Council, Atiku said:
“On October 12, I warned Nigerians that President Tinubu was reportedly preparing to borrow up to $20 billion in connection with the Lagos–Calabar Coastal Highway. I asked him to confirm or deny the plan and publish the accounts. He did neither. Today, he has asked the Senate to approve $20.52 billion and €1.045 billion in external loans. My warning has been vindicated.
“The President has listed broad sectors but has not provided a project by project account of what this enormous borrowing will fund. Nigerians have not been given clear project details, costs, locations or contractors to scrutinise.
“That silence is especially troubling given the highway’s inland rerouting. Nigerians have every right to ask whether it is becoming a pipeline for borrowed money to reach Tinubu’s campaigners and favoured contractors. Barely 12 weeks before an election, how can the President ask lawmakers to saddle Nigerians with more than $20 billion and €1 billion in debt without identifying the projects and their costs? Is this a development plan for Nigerians or a campaign financing scheme dressed up as infrastructure?
“You cannot continue taking frivolous loans on the eve of your departure from office. Let it be on record that one of the first responsibilities I will undertake as President is to scrutinise and investigate every kobo borrowed, especially loans taken in the final year of your tenure. Nigerians will ask questions, and we will find the answers by every lawful means.
“I put local and international lenders on notice: any loan granted to this winding down administration must meet all constitutional, statutory and due process requirements. Upon assumption of office, I will scrutinise every such loan. Any borrowing found to have been obtained without proper authorisation or process will be challenged and will not be allowed to stand.
“The National Assembly must not approve a single dollar until the President publishes every project, contract, cost, contractor, loan term and repayment obligation. No public money should be borrowed in the dark, and no lawmaker should sign a blank cheque against Nigeria’s future.”
Atiku said the burden was on Tinubu to prove that the borrowing would serve the country, not his political interests. He urged lawmakers to publish the proposal and supporting documents and subject them to rigorous scrutiny before any decision.
He added that families already struggling with a cost of living crisis should not be made to carry debts they did not approve. The woman fighting to keep her business alive and the worker spending their income just to feed deserve to know where the money is going, who will benefit and who will pay. At the ballot box, Nigerians will have the chance to reject a government that borrows against their future while taking their sacrifices for granted.
Headlines
2027: Nigerians Tired of ’Emi lokan’ Presidency, Makinde Mocks Tinubu
The Allied Peoples Movement (APM) presidential candidate, Seyi Makinde, on Thursday, criticised President Bola Tinubu’s “Emi Lokan” slogan ahead of the 2027 presidential election.
Makinde said Nigerians do not need “turn-by-turn nepotism”, arguing that voters should be free to decide who becomes the country’s next president in 2027.
The Oyo State governor spoke during the APM’s town hall meeting in Akure, Ondo State.
Makinde asked: “How can someone say ‘Eemi lokan’ in a country like Nigeria? You were given the opportunity. If you recall the 1999 presidential election, the South-West voted massively for Baba Olu Falae, but the rest of Nigerians voted for Baba Obasanjo. So, this is not an issue that only the South-West can resolve; it is an issue we must address collectively as Nigerians.
“We do not want ‘turn-by-turn nepotism’, nor do we want a situation where people say, ‘I will vote for projects because it is my turn’. You will not finish those projects, and when it becomes someone else’s turn, they will do the same thing. We will end up with a Nigeria where we cannot get value for the resources belonging to Nigerians.
“The Reset Nigeria agenda is about building a country where infrastructure development supports economic growth and addresses the concerns of young people and women.
“Once we fix our economy, no zone will be left behind, and no demographic group will be left behind.”
Headlines
Oyedele Denies Hinting FG’ll Introduce Fuel Tax In spite of Video Evidence
Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Taiwo Oyedele, has denied saying the Federal government will introduce a fuel tax when the economy stabilises and income levels improve.
In a post on X on Tuesday, Oyedele said his remarks during an interview with ARISE News was misrepresented, insisting that a “fuel tax is not on the table.”
However, during the interview with Rotus Odiri, ARISE News Business Correspondent, on the sidelines of the 2026 International Monetary Fund and World Bank annual meetings in Bangkok, Thailand, Oyedele said the tax would come when income levels improve enough for Nigerians to accommodate it.
He said taxes account for between 20 and 80 percent of pump prices in some countries, while many African countries impose between six and 10 different taxes on fuel products.
He said introducing fuel tax while petrol was still subsidised would have been counterproductive because government would effectively be paying the tax itself.
According to him, imposing the tax immediately after removal of petrol subsidy would be insensitive to Nigerians.
“The objective should be that instead of trying to suppress prices, which hasn’t worked for us, it hasn’t worked for any country in the world, not one. Instead of trying to suppress prices, think about how to grow income faster than prices rise,” Oyedele said.
“That’s how you bring prosperity and grow the middle class and that is exactly what we are doing as led by Mr. President himself.
“At the appropriate time, when the economy has stabilizes and income level will be able to accommodate it, those taxes will come. Not because we want to impose taxes,” he added.
In his Tuesday post, the minister reiterated that introducing a fuel tax at this time would be insensitive following removal of petrol subsidy, describing reports that government will introduce the levy when the economy stabilises as “fake news.”






