Connect with us

News and Report

Oando In Trouble: London Tribunal asks Tinubu, Boyo to pay Volpi N208 billion

Published

on

Amid accusations by aggrieved shareholders of attempts to suppress the report of the ongoing forensic audit of its operation, Oando PLC Chief Executive, Wale Tinubu, and his deputy, Mofe Boyo, have been asked to pay Ansbury Investments Inc. about $680 million (about N207.9 billion @ N305.8/dollar).

Ansbury was incorporated in Panama as part of a family trust by an Italian-Nigerian businessman, Gabriele Volpi.

The three-member London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) presided by David Midon on July 6 gave the partial award against the two embattled top officials of Nigeria’s indigenous oil company.

In the ruling, affirmed by two other co-arbitrators, Marco Frigessi di Rattalma and Harry Matovu, the tribunal upheld Mr Volpi’s application that Ocean and Oil Development Partners (OODP) was indebted to Ansbury by about $600 million (about N183.5 billion).

OODP Limited, incorporated in the British Virgin Islands, controls 55.96 per cent equity in Oando PLC through a holding company, Ocean and Oil Development Partners (OODP) Nigeria Ltd.

The company was established at a time Oando PLC was preparing to acquire ConocoPhillips’ upstream oil and gas assets in Nigeria.

According to a copy of the tribunal ruling sent to PREMIUM TIMES on Sunday by counsel to Ansbury Investment, Andrea Moja, the court also held that Whitmore Asset Management Limited was liable for another debt of $80 million (N24.5 billion).

Whitmore, incorporated in the British Virgin Islands as a single purpose investment vehicle, belongs to Messrs Tinubu and Boyo.

Court documents seen by PREMIUM TIMES showed initial agreement signed on June 17, 2013 gave 60 per cent equity in the venture to Ansbury and 40 per cent to Whitmore.

However, the source of dispute was whether there was a legally binding agreement for Ansbury to transfer 20 per cent share of its equity in the venture to Whitmore, such that OODP BVI equity would change to 60 per cent for Whitmore and 40 per cent for Ansbury.

Besides, the court was confronted with the decision whether the parties made a legally binding agreement to convert an outstanding loan of $150 million (plus interest) into shares in Oando E&P Holdings Limited.

In its ruling, the court said the draft amended loan agreement as well as the draft “Put and Call Option Agreements” never became effective.

“Whitmore is in breach of the repayment obligation in the First Loan Agreement,” the tribunal ruled. “The alleged oral agreement to switch the parties’ respective shareholdings in OODP BVI is not binding on the parties. The alleged oral agreement to extend the term of the loans to 1 January 2020 is not binding on the parties.”

Mr Moja said the final award was expected to follow in the next few days whereby the tribunal would make definite pronouncements on accrued interests on the debts owed and legal expenses.

He said the tribunal’s ruling is in respect of a debt Mr Tinubu is owing, and does not affect Mr Volpi’s status in Oando as its majority shareholder.

He said in line with the tribunal processes, details of the award have since been communicated to all the parties concerned since July 9. The ruling is, however, subject to appeal.

How Crisis Started

In 2012, Ansbury said it invested about $700 million in OODP BVI, by acquiring a 61.9 per cent stake in the firm, with Withmore Limited holding 38.10 per cent.

According to Mr. Volpi, Mr Tinubu approached him to invest in the company at a time Oando PLC was mobilising $1.5 billion to acquire assets in ConocoPhillips’ upstream oil and gas in Nigeria.

Similarly, OODP BVI, which controls 99.99 per cent equity in OODP Nigeria, holds 55.96 per cent of the stakes in Oando.

When the dispute broke out in 2017, Ansbury said it equally petitioned the Nigerian capital market regulatory authorities, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in May accusing the management of Oando PLC of mismanagement, “insider dealings, manipulation of the company’s shareholding structure and huge indebtedness”.

The petition culminated in the forensic audit of Oando PLC operations ordered by SEC in October 18, 2017.

But, the exercise did not take off several months after following the suspension from the office of the former Director General of SEC, Mounir Gwarzo.

MUNIR-GWARZO
Although Abdul Zubair was appointed acting DG to succeed Mr Gwarzo, he was redeployed on April 13 and replaced by Mary Uduk, whom critics say was brought by the minister to do her bidding.

Months after the audit by KPMG commenced, aggrieved shareholders under the platform of Proactive Shareholders Association of Nigeria (PROSAN) accused the management of the company, a fortnight ago, of working with the Minister of Finance, Kemi Adeosun and Mrs Uduk, to frustrate the release of the audit report.

The shareholders blamed the long delay in releasing the audit report on Mrs Adeosun and Ms Uduk’s alleged clandestine activities “to shield Oando management from criminal prosecution”.

“We are calling on the Acting Director-General of SEC to immediately release the report of the forensic audit conducted on the company since last year although we believe the result will be compromised since they have failed to suspend the management of the company while the so-called forensic audit lasted,” National Coordinator of PROSAN, Taiwo Oderinde, said on Sunday in a statement sent to PREMIUM TIMES.

Oando Speaks

When contacted, the spokesperson of Oando, Alero Balogun, said on Monday that she does not have the authority to react to the debt issue.

She, however, Oando or Mr Tinubu’s lawyers would do so at the appropriate time.

Ms Balogun denied the allegation by Oando shareholders that the management was sitting on the forensic audit report.

“We (Oando PLC) are not sitting on any audit report. We went to court to challenge the audit, because we said SEC would not be fair. We lost. Now the the audit has begun and they are saying it is taking too long. We are also waiting for the report of the audit like every other person,” she said.

When PREMIUM TIMES contacted the minister for her response to the allegation she was frustrating the audit, her spokesperson, Oluyinka Akintunde, said his boss had no comment on the allegation.

Mr Akintunde directed this reporter to SEC, which he explained was the agency that ordered the forensic audit.

When this reporter contacted the acting director general of SEC for her response, the acting spokesperson of the commission, Efe Ebelo, assured that Ms Uduk would respond to PREMIUM TIMES’ enquiry.

About a day later, no response has been received from the regulator.

The firm conducting the audit, KPMG, also declined comment on the status.

A representative of the firm, who answered the telephone when the company’s official telephone was called, said KPMG is not obliged to speak to the media on any of its clients’ briefs.

News and Report

Absence Of Oba Otudeko, Bisi Onasanya, Others Stalls Arraignment Over N12.3Billion Fraud As Otudeko’s Lawyer Protests In Court

Published

on

By

The counsel for Oba Otudeko, Chairman of Honeywell Group, who is facing charges of a N12.3 billion fraud, appeared before a Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday to protest the charge.

Mr. Bode Olanipekun (SAN) informed the court that he was protesting because the charge had not been served on Otudeko or the two other individuals charged alongside him, the News Agency of Nigeria reports.

Olanipekun informed the court that, despite not being served with the charge, the defendants were shocked to learn about the planned arraignment through the media when the story broke last Thursday.

The 13-count charge was filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) against Oba Otudeko, former Managing Director of FirstBank Plc. Olabisi Onasanya, and former Honeywell board member Soji Akintayo.

Olanipekun is the counsel for the three defendants.

They were charged alongside the company, Anchorage Leisure Ltd.

 

The EFCC alleges that the defendants obtained the sum under false pretenses.

 

According to the EFCC, the four committed the fraud in tranches of N5.2billion, N6.2billion, N6.150billion, N1.5billion and N500million, between 2013 and 2014 in Lagos.

 

The 13-count charge, filed by EFCC counsel, Bilikisu Buhari, on January 16, 2025, further claimed that the defendants used forged documents to deceive the bank.

Specifically, count 1 accused the defendants of conspiring “to obtain the sum of N12.3Billion from First Bank Limited on the pretence that the said sum represented credit facilities applied for by V-TECH DYNAMIC LINKS LIMITED and Stallion Nigeria Limited, which representation you know to be false.”

 

In Count 2, it was alleged that the defendants, on or about 26th day of November, 2013 in Lagos, “obtained the sum of N5.2 billion from First Bank Limited on the pretence that the said sum represented credit facilities applied for by V TECH DYNAMIC LINKS LIMITED which representation you know to be false.”

 

The 3rd count alleged that the defendants, between 2013 and 2014 in Lagos, obtained N6.2billion from First Bank Limited on the pretence that the said sum represented credit facilities applied for and disbursed to Stallion Nigeria Limited, which representation you know to be false.”

 

In the 4th count, they were accused of conspiring to spend the N6.15billion, out of the monies.

According to the Commission, the offences contravened Section 8(a) of Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act 2006 and was punishable under Section 1(3) of the same Act.

Counts 5 reads: “That you, Chief Oba Otudeko, Stephen Olabisi Onasanya, Soji Akintayo and Anchorage Leisure Limited on or about 11th day of December, 2013 in Lagos, procured Honeywell Flour Mills Plc to retain the sum of N1.5 billion, which sum you reasonably ought to have known forms part of proceeds of your unlawful activities to wit: Obtaining by False Pretense and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 18(c), 15 (2) (d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 (as amended) and punishable under Section 15(3) of the same Act.”

Meanwhile, Otudeko had reportedly fled Nigeria ahead of his scheduled arraignment on fraud charges.

 

According to TheCable Newspaper, Otudeko’s exit from the country is linked to the mounting legal pressures and financial disputes he is facing.

The newspaper reported that the businessman left the country via one of the land borders.

Continue Reading

News and Report

Loan controversy: Bisi Onasanya’s lawyer condemns media trial….Judge adjourns case to February 13

Published

on

By

In line with his resolve to defend himself and clear his name, Dr. Bisi Onasanya through his lawyer, Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika, SAN, at a session at the Federal High Court Lagos on Monday, January 20, 2025, demanded the service of proof of evidence and summons.

Onasanya, a chartered accountant and a former Group Managing Director of First Bank is defending himself against a controversial loan that allegedly occurred at First Bank 12 years ago. The retired banker is refuting the allegations alongside three others namely former Chairman of the bank, Chief Oba Otudeko, a former board member of Honeywell, Soji Akintayo, and a firm, Anchorage Leisure Ltd.

At a hearing at the Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday, Fusika condemned the media trial his client had been subjected to, saying he was not formally invited by the EFCC or served a notice of the charge.

He expressed surprise at seeing news stories in major newspapers linking Dr Onasanya to a trial on loan controversy during his time as First Bank Group Managing Director without prior notification.

“My Lord, it is concerning that my client has been unduly exposed to media trial without being formally served. This is a procedural anomaly that undermines his right to a fair hearing and personal dignity,” Olumide-Fusika said.

The prosecuting counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo, denied any involvement by the EFCC in the media coverage of the case.

He stated that the commission had not issued a press statement and suggested that journalists may have obtained information through other means.

“My Lord, we disassociate ourselves from any media reports,” Oyedepo said.

The EFCC also applied for an ex parte motion to issue a bench warrant for the defenders’ arrest and sought permission to serve them through substituted means, alleging they had evaded service.

Olumide-Fusika opposed the motion, arguing that his client had always been available and had not evaded service. Demonstrating his determination to clear his name, the senior lawyer prayed to the court to have the EFCC serve the charge and the proof of evidence in the open court.

“This application is unwarranted and speculative. My client has neither avoided service nor absented himself from this matter. The claims of the prosecution are baseless. Since I am here and my client is ready to go ahead with this case, I ask to be served the charge and the proof of evidence here in the court,” Olumide-Fusika argued.

Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke, who presided over the case, dismissed the EFCC’s motion for substituted service on Onasanya since he has accepted to be served in the open court.

The judge consequently ordered that the EFCC serve Olumide-Fusika the charge and proof of evidence in open court.

The EFCC complied with the directive, and Olumide-Fusika who confirmed the receipt of the document extracted a confirmation from the prosecution counsel that the proof of evidence submitted is exhaustive and there wouldn’t be an addendum. The defence counsel said EFCC’s confirmation should be on record, insisting that his client was ready to defend himself and clear his name.

Justice Aneke adjourned the case to February 13, 2025.

It will be recalled that Onasanya, through his Communication Advisor, Mr Michael Osunnuyi, had earlier dismissed allegations, describing the claims as baseless and an attempt to tarnish Onasanya’s stellar reputation for professionalism, integrity and humaneness.

Continue Reading

News and Report

Abuja-Lagos Super Highway Project faces threat as two consortiums engage in battle for FG’s nod

Published

on

By

AEC Unity Network Limited, the officially recognised concessionaire for the Abuja-Lagos Super Highway and High-Speed Train projects, has denied any association with an entity known as AEC-Geofocus Consortium (Geofocus).

AEC Unity Network clarified that Geofocus has no role in the planning, financing, construction, or operation of the 470-kilometer superhighway and high-speed rail projects, which are part of President Bola Tinubu’s Renewed Hope agenda to boost national infrastructure.

In a statement released on Sunday, the company emphasised that it is the sole concessionaire authorized by the Federal Government of Nigeria, having received approvals from the Federal Ministry of Works, the Federal Ministry of Finance, and the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (ICRC).

Barrister Ayodeji Ademola, legal consultant for AEC Unity Network, said in the statement that AEC-Geofocus has no basis whatsoever to make any claim in relation to the Super Highway project, having not been part of its conception from the onset.

In the statement, AEC Unity Network reaffirmed that it is the sole concessionaire authorised by the Federal Government of Nigeria to design, finance, construct, operate, and maintain the 470-kilometer superhighway and high-speed rail linking Abuja and Lagos.

According to the statement, the company’s approvals are from the Federal Ministry of Works, the Federal Ministry of Finance, and the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (ICRC).

The reaction by the AEC Unity Network may have been informed by media publications credited to one Engineer Mutiu Yinka Idris, who asserted that AEC-Geofocus was in charge of the project for the federal government.

Idris, who claimed to be Director of Operations for AEC-Geofocus, had in the publication described the company as a consortium of engineers, planners, and investors that had successfully attracted $16 billion from Middle Eastern investors, with additional interest from European financial institutions and the World Bank.

He had also claimed that the financial framework was designed to minimize government expenditure, safeguard public funds, and prevent cost overruns through an efficient risk-sharing mechanism.

Idris had assured stakeholders of a grand project flag-off before February 2025, reiterating AEC-Geofocus’ commitment to delivering world-class infrastructure.

“The $16 billion project will be led by AEC-Geofocus, a consortium of engineers, planners, and investors, and plans have been concluded to commence it by February this year, 2025,” Idris had asserted.

He said that the Lagos-Abuja corridor, spanning approximately 500 kilometers, will connect Lagos, Ogun, Oyo, Osun, Kwara, Kogi, and Niger states before reaching Abuja, under a design, Build, Finance, Operate, and Maintain (DBFOM) model.

But in its sharp reaction, AEC Unity Network expressed surprise at the emergence of AEC-Geofocus out of the blue to make claims on a project it was never part of.

Part of the statement read: “We emphatically state that AEC Unity Network Limited has no relationship whatsoever with AEC-Geofocus Consortium or Geofocus. Any claims made by Geofocus regarding involvement in the projects are ‘spurious and false.’”

“We categorically state that AEC Unity Network Limited has no relationship whatsoever with Engineer Mutiu Yinka Idris or Geofocus.”

“These fraudulent claims are completely at variance with our proposed infrastructure plans and are intended to confuse and defraud unsuspecting stakeholders,” the statement added.

The statement by Engineer Mutiu Yinka Idris, who claimed involvement in the projects on behalf of Geofocus in several media outlets and amplified on social media, is baseless and an attempt to mislead the public.

The company warned investors and the public to disregard any media advertisements or reports from Geofocus, describing them as unauthorized and misleading.

AEC Unity Network stated that its project is still in the planning stages, with no concurrent developments on the same corridor by any other entity.

To prevent confusion and potential fraud, AEC Unity Network urged local and foreign investors to verify information only through its official channels and avoid engaging with Geofocus on matters relating to the Abuja-Lagos Super Highway and High-Speed Train projects.

This infrastructure initiative, which includes a direct expressway and rail connection between Abuja and Lagos, is expected to enhance transportation efficiency and foster economic growth.

AEC Unity Network reiterated its commitment to transparency and professionalism, urging the public to engage only through its official channels for accurate information about the projects.

Continue Reading

Trending