Connect with us

Society

Deconstructing Seplat’s ‘Hostile Takeover’ Spin

Published

on

 

At the last count, the upstream oil exploration and exploitation company, Seplat Petroleum Development Company Plc, has made several puzzling moves to evade repayment of an outstanding $85.8 million loan facility it owes Access Bank Plc. It is highly unconscionable to borrow depositors’ money from a bank, to ostensibly enhance business growth but only to conceive strategies to evade repayment on the terms agreed.

While filibustering maybe a useful strategy used to delay, divert and stifle a process from being brought to conclusion in the political arena – in the world of corporate governance and accountability, this nimble species of obfuscation is hardly expedient.

Seplat has boldly denied responsibility for a loan facility its sister entity – Cardinal Drilling Services Ltd. – acquired. Secondly, it has sought judicial protection/fight-back. Thirdly, it has gone after Access Bank’s counsel/receiver/manager. Fourthly, it has apparently deployed the media to muddy the water wherein subtle allegations of corporate bullying and even hostile takeover narratives are spun. Quirky allegations of arbitrariness or irrationality by Access Bank also clearly belong to the underemployed spin doctors of the debtor.

Significantly, these gaming have not shifted the substantive matter: repayment of the outstanding $85.8 million loan facility, Orjiako through his company CDS sourced from defunct Diamond Bank Plc, now acquired by Access Bank. Repayment of this outstanding loan could have leveraged the image of Seplat and even positioned them for further facilities from Access Bank.

It could be recalled that after its formal merger with mid-tier rival Diamond Bank Plc., in April 2019, following due regulatory approval, Access Bank Plc. acquired all the assets and liabilities of the defunct banking entity. This positioned Access Bank to pursue recovery of all outstanding debts including the $85.8 million owed it by Cardinal Drilling Ltd., a subsidiary entity of Seplat Petroleum Development Company Plc. which chairman is billionaire business mogul, Dr. ABC Orjiakor.

This legitimate move by Access Bank to recover the outstanding $85.8 million owed by Cardinal Drilling Services Ltd. (Seplat’s sister company), in effect, has spawned all shades of seemingly adroit maneuvering by the upstream exploration and production entity which has distanced itself from its sister entity, Cardinal Drilling Ltd and ultimately is denying responsibility for the loan.

Since Access Bank had engaged the services of Ogunba law firm, Kunle Ogunba & Associates as the counsel/receiver/manager to recover the loan obtained by Cardinal Drilling Services Limited, from Diamond Bank (now Access Bank) on behalf of Seplat Petroleum Development Company, the upstream petroleum behemoth has seemingly made adroit moves to thwart the loan recovery. This is at the heart of the festering dispute.

First, Seplat specifically denied it benefitted from the loan obtained by Cardinal Drilling Ltd. Secondly, the petroleum company targeted Kunle Ogunba (SAN), Access Bank’s counsel/receiver/manager and petitioned the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee (LPPC) and the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) to sanction a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mr. Kunle Ogunba, for alleged gross misconduct and unethical practices contrary to the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners 2007.

In the petition to the LPPC, which was equally copied to the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) President, the company accused Ogunba of violating Rules 1, 15, 24, 30 and 32 of the Rules of Professional Conduct 2007 and urged sanctions against the senior advocate in line with paragraph 55 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

For good measure, Seplat also accused Ogunba of obtaining ex parte orders which facilitated the seizure of No. 16A Temple Road, Ikoyi Lagos, housing Seplat’s corporate headquarters, with “patently false” claims, adding that he deliberately misled the court and failed to adduce any documents to support the claims. But significantly, this move is not the beef of the disputations.

But significantly, documents obtained from the court revealed the processes filed by Access Bank showed the plaintiff provided proof that Seplat benefitted from the loan. It was shown that after Cardinal Drilling obtained the loan and disbursed it, the company passed the obligation on to Seplat. According to the documents, Seplat used its subsidiary firm, Cardinal Drilling to obtain the loan from Access Bank, adding it utilised the loan obtained by Cardinal Drilling from the bank.

For instance, Access Bank disclosed that when Cardinal Drilling got a tranche of $30million, in less than 24 hours, it transferred the money to Seplat, stating that each time Cardinal Drilling was trying to repay the loan, Seplat would have to transfer funds to it for onward transfer to the bank.

More, even the company’s statement of account exhibited in court showed movement of funds and whose accounts were debited and credited. The bank has details of Seplat transferring funds into Cardinal Drilling’s account, which in turn would transfer same to Diamond Bank (Access Bank) as loan repayment. Cut to the bone, Seplat is the real debtor, which was why the bank and its lawyers joined Seplat in the debt recovery suit and obtained and executed the order against it, which is now a subject of appeal.

It could also be recalled that Justice Aikawa, despite objections by Seplat’s lawyers, held: “In my view, all these issues touch the substance of the case and should therefore be reserved for substantive trial. An attempt to delve into any of them at this stage has the potential and danger of determining substantive issues at this interlocutory stage, a tendency which has been frowned upon by the appellate courts. There is no evidence of suppression of any material facts by the plaintiff in this application.”

Clearly, beyond Seplat’s insistence that being joined as a debtor by Access Bank lacks merit and its resort to NBA’s LPPC and LPDC, seeking to unhorse Ogunba and undermine the effort of Access Bank in seeking to recover legacy debts following its acquisition of Diamond Bank, the substantive matter, according to the consensus of legal pundits, remains intact.

Unfortunately, the emerging perception now is that rather than Orjiako’s Cardinal repaying the loan or awaiting the outcome of its appeal on the matter, it is pushing to tarnish the image of Ogunba and intimidate him by generating petitions against him in a scheme to discourage him as Access Bank-appointed receiver-manager.

Also apparent is the fact that the petitioner has also embarked on media warfare to paint Ogunba in a bad light and pressure the LPPC and the NBA to sanction him. Many view this moves as fundamentally diversionary. More, allegations of corporate bullying and efforts at hostile takeover of Seplat are filtering in from the media. These are of course contrived narratives which deliberately ignore the core issues.
Why not just commence defrayment of the outstanding loan to an entity of which the parent company Dr. Orjiakor chairs? What will all the rigmarole serve? The core of this whole is pay back your loan. What’s so difficult to understand here?

Deploying corporate filibustering or subterfuge to frustrate the debt recovery as Seplat is gaming will negatively impact the critical banking sector and defeat the essence of granting such facilities to aid business growth. For Access Bank, the lender in this instance, it is a costly project. The cost covers time for debt recovery and the need to make greater loan provisioning, which reduces profitability and capital resources for lending.

It could also be regretfully recalled that defunct Diamond Bank Plc., an iconic bank comparable to Eastern Nigeria’s African Continental Bank (ACB), went under because of the recalcitrance of borrowers like Orjiako’s Cardinal. Defunct Diamond Bank considerably aided many businesses from the South-East. This particular debt was part of the huge debt overhang that aided the sinking of Diamond Bank. Today, for that region, it is a collective loss.

But a fact that many don’t know is that Access Bank Plc that acquired Diamond Bank is not about allow recalcitrant debtors flee from their obligations. It is a strict, law abiding, disciplined organisation and top industry player and have deployed all requisite legal means to recover what is due to it. In this case, the controlling shareholder of Cardinal Drilling Ltd must pay up.

It’s then little wonder that following the upturning of the order of the Federal High Court by the appellate court, Access Bank has filed a notice of appeal at the Supreme Court to challenge the Appeal Court, a move that enjoys the consensus of many legal pundits who see it as the way to go.

Cut to the bone, the new sponsored media narratives of corporate bullying and laughable hostile takeover are essentially boorish spins that will lead nowhere. The bottom line is that corporate responsibility must be respected and facilities obtained for business expansion and growth must be repaid. The danger here is that if this drama drags further, Orjiako might actually start believing himself.

 

By: Louis Achi

Society

Oando Boss, Wale Tinubu Receives Award as Best Investor of the Year

Published

on

By

 

Jubril Adewale Tinubu, oil tycoon and GCE of leading oil and gas firm, OANDO, yesterday shone brilliantly like a well-cut diamond when he received the award for the New Telegraph Investor/Transaction of the Year 2024.

 

The oil guru with three decades of expectational performance in the oil sector was among other prominent Nigerians that went home with honours at the Oriental Hotels, venue of the ceremony.

 

The award, described as well- deserved, was presented to Tinubu for leading his team to successfully completing the acquisition of Agip Oil Company at $783 million.

 

The transaction, which was completed in August 2024, was described my many as a remarkable one the nation’s economy.

 

Tinubu is an intelligent, pragmatic and a genius who strikes when the iron is hottest.

 

Gifted with a knack to spot opportunity ahead of the crowd, Tinubu has in the last 30 years of unbroken entrepreneurial voyage positioned Oando among the best oil and gas company in the world.

He believes Nigeria offers limitless possibilities and opportunities, and holds high, at all times, the banner of hope.

 

Today, the business has not only earned him fame and wealth, but has also contributed in great measures to the economic development of Africa and beyond.

 

Other awardees on the night include Governor Babagana Zulum of Borno State won the Governor of the Year 2024; Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu of Lagos State received the Governor of the Year in Projects, while Governor Ahmed Aliyu of Sokoto State won Governor of the Year in Economy

 

 

Others are Governor Sheriff Oborevwori of Delta State; Osun State Governor, Senator Ademola Adeleke; Ekiti State Governor, Biodun Oyebanji; Group Chief Executive Officer of the Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPCL), Mr Mele Kyari, won the newspaper’s prestigious Man of the Year 2024, while the Minister of Aviation and Aerospace Development, Barrister Festus Keyamo (SAN), won Minister of the Year 2024 in Transformative Leadership.

Continue Reading

Society

The weaponization of justice and the injustice faced by Dan Etete – Jeremiah Perekeme 0woupele

Published

on

By

 

In the intricate corridors of global jurisprudence, the scales of justice often tip under the weight of political machinations and economic interests. The case of Dan Etete, Nigeria’s former Minister of Petroleum, epitomizes how legal systems can be manipulated, leading to profound personal and national injustices.

Dan Etete, appointed as Nigeria’s Minister of Petroleum Resources in 1995, played a pivotal role in introducing the marginal oil field regime and indigenous participation in Nigeria’s oil and gas industry. His contributions have however been beclouded by the controversy around the controversial OPL 245. This oil block, one of Africa’s richest, became the focus of a protracted legal battle involving major oil companies amid allegations of corruption. Etete’s involvement led to accusations that have marred his reputation and overshadowed his contributions to Nigeria’s oil sector.

In a landmark decision, an Italian court acquitted Eni, Shell, and associated individuals, including Etete, of corruption charges related to OPL 245. The court concluded that there was no case to answer, highlighting the absence of sufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations. This verdict underscores the complexities inherent in international legal proceedings, where accusations often outpace the evidence required for conviction.

Etete’s ordeal is not isolated. Globally, individuals have faced similar legal battles, where accusations are levied, with years spent in court, only to culminate in acquittals. These cases highlight systemic issues within legal frameworks that allow for the weaponization of justice, often driven by political or economic motivations.

The protracted legal saga of Amanda Knox serves as a poignant illustration of Italy’s judicial labyrinth. Knox, an American student, was accused of the 2007 murder of Meredith Kercher in Perugia. After initial convictions and subsequent acquittals, she was finally exonerated by Italy’s Supreme Court in 2015.

The case highlighted significant issues within the Italian legal system. Issues were raised around the handling of forensic evidence, media interference, and prosecutorial conduct. It also underscored the challenges of ensuring justice in a system where legal procedures can be as complex as the crimes themselves.

In the UK, the case of the Birmingham Six remains a stark reminder of the fallibility of justice systems. Six Irish men were wrongfully convicted in 1975 for pub bombings in Birmingham, based on coerced confessions and questionable forensic evidence. After 16 years of imprisonment, their convictions were quashed in 1991, revealing systemic flaws such as investigative misconduct and the suppression of evidence. This case prompted significant reforms in the UK’s criminal justice system, emphasizing the need for checks and balances to prevent miscarriages of justice.

The term “weaponization of justice” refers to the deliberate manipulation of legal systems to achieve objectives beyond the pursuit of truth and fairness. The weaponization of legal technicalities, whether through coerced confessions, mishandled evidence, or political interference, undermines the foundational principles of justice.

In Dan Etete’s case, the prolonged legal battles, despite eventual acquittal, suggest a misuse of judicial processes, leading to reputational damage. Despite his achievements that merit recognition, and most notably his discharge and acquittal in three jurisdictions – ITALY, UNITED KINGDOM, and Nigeria; he has remained the focal point of smear campaigns.

What does his discharge and acquittal really mean? It means that Dan Etete has been formally cleared of charges in a court of law. This means the court has found him not guilty of the charges brought against him. An acquittal signifies that there was insufficient evidence to prove the person committed the alleged offence, or was proven innocent. This means the accused is released from the legal process and is free to go. If he has been found to have done nothing wrong by the Nigerian Legal system, where the judiciary has come under scrutiny in recent times, is it being insinuated that the course of justice was perverted in those other jurisdictions?

In reflecting upon the Chief Dan Etete cases, it becomes evident that the pursuit of justice requires constant vigilance, systemic introspection, and unwavering commitment to fairness. Just as poverty can be weaponized to perpetuate societal inequities, legal ambiguities when exploited, lead to miscarriages of justice.

Moreover, they erode public trust in legal institutions, deter individuals from public service, and can have economic repercussions, especially in sectors as vital as oil and gas. Furthermore, they highlight the need for reforms to prevent the misuse of legal systems and to ensure that justice is truly blind.

Politically Exposed Persons (PEPs) often find themselves under intense scrutiny due to their influential positions, making them susceptible to allegations of corruption. In several instances, PEPs have been wrongfully accused and, despite subsequent exoneration, have suffered significant reputational damage due to smear campaigns. Here are five notable cases from different countries:

Former President John Dramani Mahama was implicated in a bribery scandal involving Airbus SE, with allegations suggesting his involvement through his brother, Samuel Adam Mahama. These claims, lacking substantial evidence, were perceived as politically motivated to tarnish Mahama’s reputation and divert attention from governmental shortcomings. The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) eventually exonerated Mahama, but the smear campaign had already inflicted damage on his public image.

Adolphus Wabara, former President of the Nigerian Senate, faced allegations in 2005 of accepting a ₦55 million bribe to influence budget approvals. Despite his resignation and a prolonged 14-year legal battle, Wabara was acquitted in 2019 due to insufficient evidence.

Frederick Chiluba, Zambia’s second President, faced allegations of embezzling public funds after his tenure ended in 2002. Following a protracted legal process, Chiluba was acquitted of all charges in 2009. The court determined that the prosecution failed to provide compelling evidence linking him to the alleged crimes. This verdict underscored the challenges in distinguishing between political vendettas and genuine anti-corruption efforts.

Georgia Thompson, a Wisconsin state employee, was convicted in 2006 on federal corruption charges, accused of steering a state contract for political reasons. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit overturned her conviction in 2007, citing a lack of evidence.

Former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia was accused of misusing funds related to the Zia Charitable Trust, leading to her conviction and imprisonment in 2018. In November 2024, the Supreme Court of Bangladesh acquitted Zia and all co-accused, citing a lack of credible evidence.

Nabil Sayadi, director of the European branch of the Global Relief Foundation, was accused of transferring funds to an Al-Qaeda financier, leading to his inclusion on international watch-lists and the freezing of his assets. In 2006, Belgian judges exonerated Sayadi, citing a lack of evidence linking him to terrorist activities.

These cases highlight the profound impact that unfounded corruption allegations and smear campaigns can have on PEPs, often resulting in lasting reputational harm even after legal exoneration.While many accusations are substantiated, there are notable instances where PEPs have been wrongfully accused and subsequently exonerated by the legal system.

Chief Dan Etete’s experience, like the ones already referenced, serves as a stark reminder of the potential for justice systems to be weaponized. It calls for introspection and reform to safeguard the principles of fairness and equity, ensuring that individuals are protected from undue legal persecutions driven by interests that have little to do with justice. This underscores the necessity for robust legal frameworks that ensure due process, protect individuals from politically motivated accusations, and uphold the integrity of judicial systems worldwide.

*** Jeremiah Perekeme Owoupele is a Niger Delta based lawyer.

Continue Reading

Society

Portable now in our custody – Ogun Police

Published

on

By

 

The Ogun State Police Command says Habeeb Okikiola, aka Portable, is now in its custody.

 

Omolola Odutola, the state public relations officer made the disclosure in a statement on Wednesday.

 

According to her, “The Ogun State Police Command wishes to inform the public that Habeeb Okikiola, also known as Portable, arrived at the State Criminal Investigation Department, Eleweran, Abeokuta, at exactly 13:23 hours today, February 19, 2025.

 

 

“His presence at the SCID is connected to an ongoing investigation. The command assures the public that due process will be followed in handling this matter, and updates will be provided as necessary.”

 

Portable was declared wanted for assault on some officials of the Ogun State Town Planning Agency who were carrying out enforcement on his property in the Ilogbo area of the state.

 

Details later…

Continue Reading

Trending