A form Special Assistant on Prosecution to President Mohammadu Buhari, Okoi Obono-Obla and two others were arraigned on Friday before a High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) in Apo, Abuja on a 10 count charge filed by the Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission (ICPC).

Arraigned with Obono-Obla, who Buhari suspended as Chairman of the disbanded Special Presidential Investigation Panel for the Recovery of Public Property (SPIP), are his (Obobo-Obla’s) Senior Assistant, Special Duties (Protocol), Aliyu Ibrahim and the Managing Director of ABR Global Petroleum Resources Ltd, Daniel Omughele.

Obono-Obla was accused of conspiring with the others to divert N19,994,185.00 meant for the furnishing of SPIP offices.

Obono-Obla was also accused of forging his academic credentials.

They pleaded not guilty to the charge, following which lawyers to the defendants – Paul Erokoro , SAN (for Obono-Obla), Abel Ozioko (for Ibrahim) and Emmanuel Okere (for Omughele) prayed the court to grant their clients bail on liberal terms.

Lawyer to the prosecution, Samuel Ipinlaiye, said he would prefer the defendants are not remanded in custody in view of the current coronavirus challenge.

Ipinlaiye withdrew his earlier objection to the defendants’ bail application, but prayed to grant bail on terms that would ensure that the defendants are available to stand trial.

Ruling, Justice Olukayode Adeniyi granted each of the defendants bail at N1million with a surety, who must not be below the rank of director in the service of either the Federal Government and any of its agencies or the FCT and any of its agencies.

Justice Adeniyi ordered Ipinlaiye to retrieve the defendants’ international passports, already deposited with the ICPC and hand them to the Registrar of the court.

The judge adjourned till March 17 for the commencement of trial.

Erokoro told journalists after the court session that his client was just being victimised.

He noted the Nigeria Police Force (NPF), another agency of the Federal Government, plans to r-arraign Obono-Obla on Monday before another High Court of the FCT in Kwali on similar alleged offences.

In the charge, marked: CR/922/2020, in which they were arraigned on Friday, the ICPC accused Obono-Obla, Ibrahim and Efe of conspiring in 2018 to confer an unfair advantage on Ibrahim.

The prosecution said they “diverted the sum of N19,994,185.00 received by SPIP through its contractors from the Nigerian Deposit Insurance Corporation (NDIC).”

It added that the sum, meant to furnish SPIP offices, was allegedly “diverted to the personal account of Aliyu Ibrahim, using proxy companies, without furnishing the said SPIP offices as proposed to the NDIC”.

Ibrahim was, in count three, accused of using his position “to confer unfair advantage” on himself by diverting the money into his account using proxy companies without furnishing the SPIP offices as proposed to NDIC.

The alleged offence contravenes Section 26(1)(c) and punishable under Section 19 of Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act 2000.

In counts four, Obono-Obla was accused of dishonestly using as genuine, “a Mary Knoll College, Ogoja General Certificate of Education, Ordinary Level, May/June 1982 (GCE) Statement of Result for Ofem Okoi Ofem with candidate No: 09403/247 showing an O’Level credit (6) score for Literature in English”.

ICPC said he used it as “part of the five O’Level credit requirement for you to study Law for the 1985/86 academic session in UNJOS (the University of Jos) when you had reason to believe that the document (GCE), the basis upon which you were admitted to study Law in UNIJOS, was forged as you never sat for the English Literature examination for May/June 1982 GCE”.

Obono-Obla was, in count five, accused of making false document around November 1985, regarding the GCE certificate.

The alleged offence is contrary to sections 366 and 363 and punishable under Section 364 of the Penal Code.

ICPC said in count six that Obono-Obla, around July 2018 in Abuja, as SPIPC Chairman “failed to attend/honour an invitation” by ICPC for an investigation, contrary to Section 28(1)(a) and (6) and punishable under section 28(10) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act 2000.

SUSPECTED kidnappers have abducted seven children from the Rachael’s Orphanage Home, Abaji Area Council, Abuja.

The gunmen also abducted a security guard identified as Joseph Mathew, including two housewives; Rukaiyyat Salihu, and Suwaiba Momoh, during the attack on Saturday.

While the police claimed they had rescued one of the hostages, it added that efforts were being intensified to free others still held captive.

The names of the abducted orphans were given as Elizabeth Andrew, Dayo Udeh, Jacob Ukpas, Melody Ijeh, Benard Itim, Issac Mathew and Laruba Emmanuel.

Police sources said the attackers forcefully entered the orphanage and whisked away their victims to an unknown location.

A resident of the area, Mohammed Nurudeen, who was shot in the thigh, explained that the gunmen abducted his wife at gunpoint and also shot him.

He said, “The men came at midnight while we were sleeping and forced me to open the door threatening to kill us if we refused to obey their orders. They shot me and took away my wife. I appeal to the security agencies and the government to assist in rescuing my wife unhurt from the gang.”

But the Federal Capital Territory command said it had launched a rescue operation for the kidnappers, assuring that the victims would be released soon.‌

The police spokesperson, ASP Maryam Yusuf, said, “We are working hard to rescue them and apprehend the perpetrators. Already, we have rescued one of the hostages and we want to assure that the rest would also be rescued unhurt,” she stated on Sunday. (thenigerialawyer)

The lady at the centre of the leaked video which exposed the butt of Africa’s richest man, Aliko Dangote has been sued for $30,000 over the leaked video. The lady, Autumn Spikes who claims to be Dangote’s ex-mistress has, however, warned that the suit could further bring out more details about what she claims to be an eight year affair.

The suit was filed in an American court in Miami, Florida.

The civil lawsuit was filed under the pseudonym John Doe. The name also has an alias that says ‘DA’, which appeared presumably as initials for Aliko Dangote.

However, the woman said the lawsuit could further expose the intimate details of the billion’s relationship with his estranged mistress.

The supposed Dangote’s ex-mistress went on social media to expose the lawsuit and threaten Mr. Dangote that he had taken the wrong turn by making the case public, indicating that the billionaire risked having additional embarrassing information about him published on the Internet as part of the suit.

Already, the woman claimed Mr. Dangote had offered to pay her for her silence, an arrangement she rejected before the billionaire filed the suit.

The woman claimed she was in a relationship with Dangote for nine years without a non-disclosure agreement to gag her from publicly commenting on the affair.

A spokesman for Mr. Dangote did not immediately return a request seeking comments about the case on Sunday evening.

Using a handle, Allarounda1 on Instagram, the woman posted a video of herself and Mr. Dangote on a couch inside what appeared to be a luxury yacht on January 1. It was unclear in which country the yacht was sailing when the mistress shot the video, but it showed Mr. Dangote drapped himself in an orange blanket while fiddling with his mobile phone amidst clearly exposed buttocks.

The supposed Dangote’s ex-mistress also posted pictures of Mr. Dangote alighting from a luxury plane in a private hanger, describing herself repeatedly as a ‘ForbesListSugarBabe’ in apparent reference to her lover’s status amongst an elite list of world’s billionaires.

The raunchy images were later deleted by the woman, claiming she had been flooded with requests from bloggers to comment further on her affairs with Mr. Dangote. She also rejected claims that she took her affair with Mr. Dangote to social media to chase undue fame.

In follow up updates, she said she was trying to clean Mr. Dangote’s name from the mess earlier created by Bea Lewis, who described herself as a restaurant operator in the United States.(gwg)

Health precautions have been reinforced at the Federal High Court in Lagos following news of the death of a judge of the court’s Abeokuta Division.

Our correspondent learnt that Justice Ibrahim Watilat, 58, died of an undisclosed ailment.

He was said to have passed on around 4am on Monday, January 25, 2021, in an Abuja hospital.

Last Tuesday, the judge convicted and sentenced two internet fraudsters to six months and four months imprisonment respectively.

He found the duo guilty of criminal impersonation filed separately against them by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, Ibadan Zonal Office.

Born on May 12, 1963 in Borno State, the late Watilat was appointed as a Federal High Court judge on December 2, 2015.

Following the news, COVID-19 protocols including social distancing and wearing of nose masks were rigidly enforced by judges, judiciary staff and security officials on the court’s premises and in courtrooms.

Entry into the court premises was also restricted, with parties asked to wait outside until their matters were called. (Thenigerialawyer)

…we will ensure thorough investigation of all crimes — CP
…51 suspects on trial for kidnapping, other offences in Oke-Ogun, Ibarapa areas – Owoseni
…traditional rulers demand justice, peaceful coexistence
…as Fulani leaders seek peace

A delegation of Oyo State Government officials and the new Commissioner of Police in the state, Mrs. Ngozi Onadeko, on Sunday, toured the trouble spots of Ibarapa and Oke-Ogun areas of the state where they conducted on-the-spot assessment of the tenson-soaked communities.

The Commissioner of Police, who led senior Police officers including Deputy Commissioners of Police and Mobile Police Commanders on a tour of Igangan, Tede and Ago Are communities sued for peace, while also declaring the readiness of the Police to embark on a thorough investigation to ensure justice for victims of kidnapping, armed robbery, rape and other crimes.

The Special Adviser to Governor Seyi Makinde on Security, Commissioner of Police Fatai Owoseni (rtd), who led the government’s delegation also appealed to community leaders, youths and Hausa-Fulani residents to eschew violence and live in peace.

A statement by the Chief Press Secretary to the governor, Mr. Taiwo Adisa, added that Owoseni told the people to be vigilant and ensure they identify the criminal elements among them for prosecution by the Police, declaring that no one should take laws into their hands.

He also debunked insinuations that the government of Governor Makinde has abandoned the people to their fate, adding that at least 51 suspected perpetrators of kidnapping, rape and banditry are currently in police net from Oke Ogun axes.

He said that government would ensure that justice prevails in the cases involving the arrested lot, adding, however, that the people must remain vigilant.

“If you see something, say something,” Owoseni counseled residents of the visited communities.

The delegation also visited the razed home of the Seriki Fulani in Igangan, where it assessed the extent of damage and promised thorough investigation.

Secretary of Igangan Development Advocates, Lawal Akeem, who spoke in Igangan, said that the people were tired of the antics of the Seriki Fulani, Alhaji Saliu Abdukadir, whom he accused of complicity in different cases.

He also said that the community has been forced to pay about N50 million in ransom for different cases of kidnapping, while also accusing Fulani herders of regularly vandalising farms and raping women of the community.

Another youth in the town, Taiwo Adeagbo, said that no fewer than 15 women have been raped in recent weeks.

A member of the Oyo State House of Assembly, Hon. Peter Ojedokun, also told the delegation that Ibarapaland had been peaceful all the while but that the peace was affected recently when Fulani herders started attacking members of the community on their farms, kidnapping persons and committing crimes.

Two Fulani leaders, the Seriki Fulani of Igbo Ora, Alhaji Idris Abubakar, and the Seriki Fulani of Eruwa, Alhaji Sule Mohammed, asked for forgiveness from those offended, adding that they are ready to facilitate a peaceful coexistence in Ibarapaland.

The Caretaker Chairman of Ibarapa North-West Local Council Development Area, Hon. Okediji Samuel Olusegun, also corroborated the allegations leveled against the Seriki Fulani of Igangan, saying that the Seriki has been fingered in the series of security challenges in the area many times.

Addressing the gathering of traditional rulers, government officials and Fulani leaders in Igangan, the Commissioner of Police, Onadeko said: “We have come to assess and listen to you over the incident that happened. I want to appeal to everyone of us to be calm and ensure there is peace. If there is no peace in the community, there won’t be growth and development.

“I want to appeal to the youth. We have listened and they have interpreted all your complaints and I want to say you should not spoil your case by using force. We are a new team. Bring out all the cases you have, put them in an orderly manner and we will make sure that justice is done.

“So, I want to enjoin all of you to be peaceful and live with one another in a peaceful manner. If we live in peace in this community, we should be able to identify kidnappers, robbers, and rapists. It does not matter where you come from – whether you are from Igbo, Yoruba or Hausa. Actually, we have the good and bad ones. Criminality is not only ascribed to a particular ethnic group, it cuts across all the ethnic groups.

“So, if we don’t come together with one voice, how are we going to fish out all these people?

“Please, be calm. Cooperate with the Police, law enforcement agencies and we will make this place secure for everyone, irrespective of where you come from.

“I want to assure you that all the cases you brought up, a thorough investigation will be done on them and you will see that justice will be delivered. We will be having more of this interactive session and consultative gathering so that we will be able to sit down, talk and iron things out together without resorting to violence, which does not pay.

“Please, don’t take laws into your hands. Just tell us. Let us have peace and everything, by the grace of God, will be okay for all of us.”

While also speaking at Igangan, retired Commissioner of Police, Owoseni, said that the government of the day in Oyo State has been working closely with the Police to fish out criminal elements, adding that 51 suspected criminals linked to kidnapping and other crimes committed in Oke Ogun and Ibarapa areas are already in Police net.

He said some are already charged to court, while others would soon have their days in court.

He said: “Let us put sentiment and politics aside, from what we heard, it is not as if the Ibarapa community is against one ethnic group. What they are claiming and the allegation they have made is that a particular person, who they are now seeing to symbolise an entire ethnic group, has been misbehaving. It is just like what the governor has been saying; that there is trust-deficit between the people and the government, mistrust between the people and law enforcement agencies.

“If you look at the catalogue of what has been said, they feel they have not been given justice and they feel that someone has been stalling justice.

“They feel that someone has been dropping names in order to oppress the community. I believe that with the steps that have been taken to mend all these gaps and with the assurance that the Commissioner of Police has given that they will look at all the cases again, there will be a change.”

Speaking specifically on investigations and arrests, the retired Police Commissioner said: “There are a lot of narratives that have not been given out. “Everybody believes that kidnapping, assasination had taken place in Igangan and it seems the government was not doing anything.

“Truth is, 51 suspects have been in detention for various offences that bother on this kidnapping.

“Arrests were made. Some have been arraigned in court. Some are awaiting trial. For some, investigation are still ongoing, which we made them know. “Everyone will learn lessons, especially the police officer that was accused of complicity in some of these cases. “The CP has given that assurance that every victim will get justice and all the allegations they have made as to the Seriki colluding with criminals, will be looked into.”
The delegation, which also visited Ago Are and Tede communities, which got engulfed in communal clashes over the weekend, held peace parleys at the Ago Are town hall and the palace of the Onitede of Tede, Oba Rauf Oladoyin.

The Commissioner of Police, Onadeko appealed for peace between the two communities, promising to host a peace meeting in her office before the end of the week.

Owoseni, who addressed newsmen at the palace, said that it was wrong for anyone to take laws into his hands, adding that the people must learn to trust security agencies to achieve peace in their areas.

He said of the communal clash between Tede and Ago Are: “This is an evidence of what the governor is doing on the security situation in the state. While the crisis in Igangan was brewing, that was when we heard that these two communities – Tede and Ago-Are – were also at war.

“The purpose of coming here today is to nip in the bud this communal fight. There is an immediate and remote cause but in order to quickly make it not to fester, we are here.”

The Olugbon of Orile Igbon, Oba Francis Olusola Alao, who is also the Deputy Chairman of Oyo State Council of Traditional Rulers, who was in Igangan, Tede and Ago Are, also appealed for peace, insisting that the state can only develop in an atmosphere of peaceful coexistence.

He appealed to the youths to always report their cases to the security agencies, adding that self-help cannot help anyone at the end of the day.

Other monarchs at the Igangan peace parley held at the Igangan Town Hall include the Asigangan of Igangan, a representative of the Eleruwa, the Olu of Igbo Ora, and monarchs from adjoining communities in Ibarapaland. (Thenigerialawyer)

*Says Key leaders’ silence worrisome, dangerous

Senator Bukola Saraki, immediate past Senate President has called on President Muhammadu Buhari, Senate President, Ahmed Lawani, Speaker of the House of Representatives, Femi Gbajabiamila, politicians and other relevant stakeholders to come together and proffer solution to the lingering herders crisis in Oyo and Ondo States in particular.

Saraki, in a release on Sunday, maintained that President Buhari should call all relevant politicians and stakeholders together – former heads of states, retired and serving security chiefs, present and former leaders of various arms of government, traditional rulers with relevant experience, experienced youth with the technological know-how to solve security problems and even international civil servants of Nigerian origin who can help. He stressed that everybody must be made to contribute ideas on how to save the country from insecurity, disunity and invasion by criminals.

The former Senate President said: “The president should call everybody together and provide the much-needed leadership to solve the problem. This is a period that requires all hands to be on deck. This is not the time to talk of the All Progressives Congress (APC) or the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). It is a time for all to work for Nigeria. This is a problem for all and should be solved by all. “

“I want to also make a passionate plea to my brothers, Ahmed Lawan and Femi Gbajabiamila, both of whom are experienced legislators, to provide a far-reaching legislative intervention that will help the executive arm in the search for peace. The situation is getting worse by the day. Insecurity has become the order of the day and it is fueling disunity and criminal activities.

Adding, “I have watched with concern the recent development in Oyo and Ondo States in which quit notices were given to Fulani herders and there were subsequent burning of the property of the Fulani herdsmen in some parts of Oyo State. These happenings have increased tension and unduly raised the temperature in the country. The ugly development in these two states are symptomatic of the continued threat to the unity of our country that we have witnessed on a higher scale in recent times and in different parts of the country, including the South-East and South-South zones.”

The PDP chieftain appealed to all Nigerians to work for peace and take initiatives that would douse tension, stressing that the elite and ordinary people have a responsibility to begin to take measures that would reassure the people across board that a united Nigeria would benefit everybody better than a disintegrated country.

Saraki lamented on what he called the deafening silence by key stakeholders, leaders and others who should speak out, pointing out that the silence was a dangerous tell-tale sign that things were wrong.

The Waziri of Ilorin said: “This is not good for our country. We must all speak out and talk about the solution to this twin-problem of insecurity and threat to national unity. We all do not have another country to call our own other than this one country, Nigeria.

“We need to live in peace with each other and it is my prayer that Almighty God will continue to preserve the unity of the country. I have the conviction that there are many more things that unite us than the few points that cause disagreement among us. Let me use my case as an example of why this country should continue to grow as one united and progressive entity. I am of Fulani origin and have a Yoruba mother. My father was a Muslim and my mother is a Christian.

“Thus, I am affected on all sides by any inter-ethnic tension in this country. I am sure there are many Nigerians that are in a similar situation.” (thenigerialawyer)

*Accuses him of misleading court to secure order
*Senior lawyer denies allegations

Seplat Petroleum Development Company has asked 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.

Ogunba has, however, denied any wrongdoing, alleging a plot by Seplat to blackmail him.

Seplat move comes barely three years after the LPPC stripped Ogunba of SAN rank sequel to Honeywell Group’s petition accusing him of gross misconducts, including the “institution of multiplicity of proceedings before different judges of the Federal High Court on the same subject with the deliberate aim of abusing the process of court and derailing the course of Justice.”

The sanction was, however, lifted on 20th September 2018 with a proviso that the learned silk should be of good and honourable conduct going forward.

But in the new petitions, Seplat, a leading independent indigenous oil and gas exploration and development company, accused Ogunba of instructing the invasion of No. 16A Temple Road, Ikoyi Lagos, housing its corporate offices, a rented property which also housed Samsung Heavy Industries Nigeria Limited, African Finance Corporation, and Arise Television.

It urged the LPPC to “immediately commence disciplinary action against Mr. Adekunle Babatunde Ogunba, SAN” over steps and actions it considered “unbecoming of a legal practitioner of his standing and constitute a danger of bringing disrepute to the legal profession, which is held so dear”

Seplat alleged that having locked up its corporate office in a commando style, “the agents of Adekunle Ogunba served certain court processes on Seplat containing an Originating Summons, a Motion on Notice and interim ex parte Order in suit No FHC/L/CS/1588/2020”.

The suit is in respect of a loan obtained by Cardinal Drillings Services Limited from Diamond Bank (now Access Bank), which has fallen due and in respect of which Access Bank appointed the law firm of Kunle Ogunba & Associates Receiver/Manager, pursuant to a Deed of Debenture executed between Access bank and Cardinal Drilling.

Seplat also accused Ogunba of obtaining the said ex parte orders with “patently false” claims.

In the court processes filed by Kunle Ogunba & Associates, a counsel in the chamber deposed: ”The 1st Defendant (Seplat) employed the 2nd Defendant (Cardinal Drilling Services Limited) as a veritable ‘vehicle’, ‘smokescreen’ and/or ‘shell company’ for obtainment of the facilities from the Plaintiff (Access Bank PLC), in furtherance of the purchase of drilling rigs for the ‘sole benefit and utilisation’ of the 1st Defendant, which outstanding indebtedness the 1st Defendant has refused to liquidate.

“The 1st Defendant is ‘sister company’ to the 2nd Defendant, jointly promoted by the 3rd Defendant (Seplat Chairman, Dr. A.B.C Orjiako) who is the alter ego of the 1st and 2nd Defendants”.

But Seplat has accused Ogunba of deliberately misleading the court and failure to adduce any documents to support the claims.

“This information is patently false. In support of the affidavit, a deed of debenture, an offer letter of banking facility and a personal guarantee were exhibited to the affidavit. None of these documents had Seplat as a party, nor bore its signature or corporate seal.

“There was no documentary information exhibited to the affidavit sustaining that Seplat used Cardinal Drilling as a ‘vehicle’, ‘smokescreen’, ‘decoy’, or ‘shell company’.

“Furthermore, the loan and security agreement exhibited by Adekunle Ogunba do not show that Seplat was part of this banking relationship or loan arrangement or received any part of the proceeds disbursed by Access Bank to Cardinal Drilling”, Seplat stated

“The loan was secured by deeds of fixed debenture over Cardinal Drilling’s assets”.

“Seplat is not party to the Loan Agreement or the Debenture and did not provide any guidelines, guarantees, commitments or indemnities on behalf of Cardinal or otherwise in connection with the loan”, Seplat affirms.

The company further stated: “The Cardinal rigs were used to provide services to Seplat and other exploration and production companies, such as Nigerian Petroleum Development Company Ltd (a subsidiary of the NNPC) and Summit Oil.

“Orjiako is the Chairman of Seplat and is neither a party to any of the loan agreements or the Deed of Debenture between Access Bank and Cardinal Drilling nor did he make any personal guarantee or commitments in respect thereof”.

Seplat, therefore, maintained that as a senior lawyer and experienced receiver, Adekunle Ogunba knew or ought to have known that: “Only a person who directly obtained a loan facility or party who guaranteed such a loan facility in writing is liable to a lender for such debt.

“Only a party to a debt that is liable for a bank debt in law or in equity can be sued in the court of law.

“It is only in respect of a party who is directly liable for a debt that an injunctive relief may be requested or granted against its assets.”

The firm consequently accused Ogunba of gross misconduct and unethical practices, including filing “a knowingly baseless action against Seplat as the First Respondent in contravention of long settled legal principles, in order to harass Seplat, cause embarrassment to Seplat and damage its reputation and goodwill” as well as disrupt its businesses contrary to the Rules of Professional Conduct 2007.

The company further noted that fallouts of Ogunba’s alleged misconducts could worsen foreign direct investors confidence in Nigeria.

“We are faced with mounting unrest from the international investment community, who are asking whether Adekunle Ogunba has set new precedent under Nigerian law in relation to debt recovery and how it could potentially expose foreign direct investors in Nigeria to rogue acts of debt recovery, whereby an unrelated debt is forcefully and suddenly attached against a non-debtor over and above the rights of other actual and senior creditors.

“Certainly, these questions do not help efforts to overcome the in-country risks and legal frameworks uncertainties that international investors often attach to investments in Nigeria and its companies”, Seplat stated.
However, Ogunba has alleged an attempt by Seplat to intimidate him.

In an SMS response he sent to our correspondent, the senior lawyer said
“It is obvious that the petition (if any) is an attempt to blackmail me and avoid the payment of huge indebtedness of Seplat to Access Bank Plc and nothing more.

“Seplat is better advised to take steps to liquidate its debt rather than attempt to intimidate me, a lawyer merely doing my duties as such. Once again, I reiterate the fact that the petition has not been formally brought to my attention for a formal reaction.

“It is stock in trade of these huge debtors to peddle petitions all around in a bid to avoid the payment of their debts. I was not there when they borrowed the funds and they have obviously targeted my person for the nuisance value rather (than) take steps to liquidate the debt.

“This particular debt was part of the huge debt overhang that sunk the defunct Diamond Bank and they don’t mind if Access Bank goes under for their sake too”, he told our correspondent.

Meanwhile, the Lagos Division of the Court of Appeal where Seplat is currently challenging the orders against it had on Friday ordered the unsealing of Seplat’s corporate offices pending the determination of the appeal.
In a unanimous ruling on Seplat’s Motion on Notice, read by Justice Joseph Ikyegh, the appellate court also suspended the order stopping banks from fulfilling their obligations to Seplat under banks-customers relationship. (Thenigerialawyer)

The federal government is committing $80 million to the fight against terrorism and banditry in the northern part of the country this year, President Muhmmadu Buhari announced on Saturday.

Buhari spoke during the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) Authority of Heads of State and Government virtual Summit.

The President, whose speech was read by Foreign Affairs Minister Geoffrey Onyema, expressed worries over the spate of terrorissm in some countries of the region, emphasizing the need for the countries to work together with a view to stamping out the menace.

The President also said a total of $20 million already been contributed to the ECOWAS pool for security action plan to execute the war against terrorism in the region.

The region, according to him “ needs to commence immediate implementation of ECOWAS Action Plan on the fight against terrorism.”

He urged member states to pay their voluntary contribution into the fund dedicated to the implementation of the 2020/2024 Action plan.

He added: ”We have already directed the immediate remittance of the sum of $20 million pledged by Nigeria to the pool account of the ECOWAS Action Plan to fight terrorism while the sum of $80 million is to be disbursed for the fight against terrorism in the Northeast and banditry in the Northwest of Nigeria for the year 2020.”

Speaking on the global health challenge, he charged West African countries to prioritize and acquisition and local manufacturing of COVID-19 vaccines for citizens of the region.

He challenged the ECOWAS Commission to work with the West African Health Organisation (WAHO), to see to the acquisition of the vaccine, its storage and effective distribution among member states.

He lamented that the effect of the pandemic on the economies of countries within the region had been seriously affected, which he said would in turn affect the economic fortunes of the organization, hence the need for ECOWAS to readjust its priorities.

His words: ”The second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic is ravaging the ECOWAS region. ”Now that vaccines are soon to be available, I call on all member states to ensure that we prioritize the acquisition of the vaccines for our citizens while at the same time increasing efforts to develop our own vaccines so that we can build hard immunities against the COVID-19 pandemic in West Africa.

“We urge the ECOWAS Commission to work with WAHO, the West African Health Organisation to assist member states in acquiring the vaccines and provide facilities to store and distribute the vaccines within the region.

“Efforts should also be accelerated for the region to start producing rapid diagnostic test kits of international standards to be made available to all member states. It is important for the region to evolve effective measures and avoid total lockdown at this critical time that our economies are gradually recovering from the first wave of the pandemic.”

Thenigerialawyer

By Momoh Kadiri

Introduction                                                                                                               

When the coronavirus pandemic heralded the globe in 2020, little was predictable, let alone known, in terms of the paralysis and crises it would cause given the unquantifiable damage and its impact on global socio-economic livelihood. The scale of the outbreak is unprecedented and quite extraordinary. One stark reality of Covid-19 is that many commercial disputes are bound inevitably to result in court or arbitration proceedings due to the adverse impact of the pandemic. This article does not dwell on specific time-honoured legal principles such as force majeure, frustration, or breach of contract, which may be triggered inevitably by Covid-19. But, bringing or defending arbitration proceedings can be quite a considerable expense, especially in a time of dire economic difficulty.  How should businesses respond to such extremely grappling situations including making difficult commercial decisions, and how about dealing with associated risks and costs of arbitration proceedings? This is of significant consequence because, for some businesses, their survival or future viability is wholly dependent on making a complex choice: whether, when, and how to bring or defend claims. This short article briefly highlights some key costs-related issues that typically arise in international arbitration proceedings, and proffers some practical tips that parties may usefully deploy in mitigating such risks; ensuring that the arbitration yields a desirable outcome, and is cost-efficient.

Proliferation of arbitration cases and costs

International arbitration is the most popular dispute resolution method chosen by parties in resolving cross-border disputes[1]. However, the flip side indicates that arbitration comes with relative cost implication for parties to have their dispute adjudicated by arbitration. The proliferation of arbitration cases has exacerbated cumulative costs borne by parties. Parties will doubtless be keen to ensure that they make the right choices; seeking suitable models for funding their claims, especially in the wake of the prevailing economic squeeze.

Incidence of costs in international arbitration

Parties to an arbitration will need to pay the arbitrators’ or tribunal’s fees, as well as paying fees of their own legal representatives. In contradistinction, the State employs and pays judges to sit and adjudicate litigation cases before domestic courts. So, what factors influence or drive costs in arbitration, and, why is this relevant? How costs in arbitration arise and are borne may conveniently be categorised broadly into two: whether the arbitration is ad hoc, or institutional. Whereas the latter has its inherent beneficial advantage by reason of it being independently administered by an experienced secretariat within the selected institution, however, one of its drawbacks lies in the requirement for payment of administrative fees by parties to the arbitral institution that they have selected, which is distinctly generally not the case in ad hoc arbitrations. Parties must envisage and adequately prepare to address these issues, and how they impact arbitration costs.

1. Drafting and negotiation of the underlying contract, including the arbitration clause/agreement

Although the arbitration agreement is generally and is often conveniently set out in the “Dispute resolution” section of a contract, however, the arbitration agreement requires particular attention; future disputes are likely to make it difficult – if not impossible- to reach agreement when a dispute does crystalize.  Parties should unequivocally address relevant matters in advance; doing so expressly and unambiguously: selection of type of arbitration (choosing between ad hoc or institutional arbitration), the applicable rules (of the institution), nomination of arbitrator(s), the seat or place of arbitration, the governing law2, as well as deal with any other matter that will one way or the other, have some impact on the arbitration. Likewise, where there are existing safeguards regulating fees of the arbitral tribunal, it would be inappropriate for the arbitrators to request from the parties, sums higher than that expressly stipulated within such agreed institutional rules.3 Generally, parties must exercise great care when negotiating and drafting the arbitration agreement; recognising that the arbitration agreement is separate and separable from the rest of the main contract to which the agreement is contained. The infamy and notoriety gained by so-called “pathological arbitration clauses” must be avoided, as they often lead to delay and cost escalation for parties.

2. Selecting counsel for an international arbitration

Given that most costs typically borne by parties in arbitration are fees payable for the parties’ legal representation, parties will be well-advised to give this close consideration in order to make informed choices when selecting counsel, including agreeing fees payable for representation. Although international arbitration was traditionally almost exclusively handled by much larger international law firms, however, by using a lean and dedicated team, smaller boutique law firms are able to provide robust and seamless representation in international arbitration; often at a fraction of the fees that are typically billed by much bigger law firms. Faced with the prevailing unprecedented and dwindling economic conditions impacting on many businesses’ bottom lines as a result of the impact of the coronavirus pandemic, businesses that are parties to any on-going or future arbitration cases, will no doubt be keen to exploring any cost-saving avenue for mitigating the costs of such disputes.

3. Dealing with enforcement issues- what is the value of an (unenforceable) arbitral award?

Aside from devising strategic and robust steps that enhance or culminate in winning the arbitration, parties and any counsel engaged need to focus on any legal obstacles that may likely impede or impact on the enforceability of the arbitral award. This is important because, an arbitral award that is unenforceable is simply of little or no pecuniary value to a winning party and/or the award creditor; a situation often described as akin to “winning the battle and losing the war”. Although the New York Convention4 offers a transnational legal framework for the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards, the difficult reality is that mere adoption of the convention by a particular jurisdiction is not necessarily an indication of voluntary compliance by a losing party. And, it provides no security that an award may not be set aside or annulled by domestic courts clothed with curial or supervisory jurisdiction. Enforcement of an arbitral award is a complex and costly legal undertaking that requires proactive and strategic steps to counteract or overcome any legal impediments.

4. Are the courts and judges supportive of arbitration?

An arbitral award on its own, absent voluntary compliance by a losing party, is not enforceable; the award requires recognition and enforcement by the courts. The attitude, approach and role of courts and indeed judges, requires careful consideration; particularly in jurisdictions with less developed or developing judicial institutions5. Save for substantive jurisdictional grounds6, or material irregularity7 touching on lack of due process, which may arise in arbitration proceedings, courts must, in general, be consistent and non-interferent in enhancing and safeguarding both the arbitral process, as well as facilitating enforcement of the arbitral award that is the end product.  Parties and their counsel must be alive to these realities, and must be proactive in enjoining judges to strike the right balance when faced with genuine or frivolous applications. Counsel’s knowledge of the approach of courts at any jurisdiction where enforcement may be sought is thus key, to say the least.

Conclusion

There is simply no silver bullet that is a panacea for keeping arbitration costs reasonable or manageable. A holistic approach requires taking a number of steps briefly highlighted: paying attention to negotiation and drafting of the arbitration agreement; selecting counsel that will deliver a successful and cost-efficient outcome; keeping enforcement in view; and paying adequate attention to attitude and role of supervisory courts, including where any enforcement may be pursued. These are important steps within a delicate puzzle to making an arbitration successful and cost-efficient. Whereas some relative relief by way of vaccines are now available for treatment of Covid-19 (even as we need to wait to see how effective the vaccines are), however, the unfortunate reality is that the harsh economic impact of the pandemic on businesses and indeed on global commercial activity is very telling and will be for a while – with no immediate respite in sight. Thus, business owners need to take their own destiny in their hands – should they desire to stay afloat in the prevailing economic undercurrent. Businesses must devise a strategic roadmap that leads to recovery; by adopting cost-efficient means to mitigate the risks and costs of any disputes or arbitration claims.

*Momoh Kadiri, LL.M (London) Fellow, Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (UK). Momoh is Managing partner, Mitchell Simmonds, a leading specialist arbitration and commercial dispute resolution law firm based in Canary Wharf, London. Email: [email protected]

[1] In a leading international survey, 97% of respondents indicated that international arbitration is their preferred method for dispute resolution for cross-border disputes: Queen Mary University of London/White & Case, 2018 International Arbitration Survey: The Evolution of International Arbitration survey on International Arbitration, p.5.

2 In Enka v Chubb [2020] UKSC 38, the UK Supreme Court considered and delivered a landmark judgment on 9 October 2020; as to the correct approach to determining the proper law of an arbitration agreement- the majority holding (in a split decision of 3-2) that in the absence of an express or implied choice intended to govern the contract or the arbitration agreement within it, the governing law is that with the closest connection. In such circumstances the validity and scope of the arbitration agreement is governed by the law of the chosen seat of arbitration, as the law with which the dispute resolution clause is most closely connected.

3 In Getma v Republic of Guinea, in a highly unusual decision published in November 2015, the Cour Commune de Justice et d’Arbitrage (CCJA), the Court created under the auspices of the Organisation pour I’Harmonisation en Afrique du Droit des Affaires (the Organisation for the Harmonisation of Commercial Law in Africa or OHADA), the CCJA annulled the arbitral award on the grounds that the arbitrators indeed breached their mandate by negotiating directly with the parties over the institution’s fees.

4 The New York Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, 1958

5 E.g., Whereas Nigeria is a signatory and indeed ratified the New York Convention on 17 March 1970, and also adopted the UNCITRAL Model Law, enforcement however remains a difficult experience given the considerable number of arbitral awards that are frequently challenged or set aside. This results in severe delay which takes an average of 15 years’ litigation thereafter. See IPCO v NNPC [2017] UKSC 16; [2015] EWCA Civ 1144 and 1145

6 In England, an arbitral award may be challenged on the grounds of substantive jurisdiction under the Arbitration Act 1996, s.67.

7 Ibid.s68: an award may be challenged on grounds of serious irregularity affecting the tribunal, the proceedings or the award.

Thenigerialawyer