An
Irish firm , which won a world record $ 9 . 6 bn arbitration fine
against the Federal Government , has instructed its lawyers to identify
Nigeria ’s assets that can be targeted to recover the money.
The
company confirmed in an electronic mail to our correspondent that it was
focussed on identifying Nigeria ’s assets that could be seized in the
process of enforcing the decision of an arbitration tribunal which was
recently converted to a court judgment .
In the email response to
The PUNCH on Sunday , the company hinted at the possibility of seizing
Nigerian naval vessels or oil cargoes, citing the Argentinean and
Venezuelan experiences as precedents .
In the email sent by the P
& ID’s representative, Mr John Ehiguese, the company said , “ We
cannot confirm specifics . However, the P &ID’ s legal team is
working diligently to identify and target assets that may be used for
enforcement of the tribunal award .
“ There have been many successful enforcement cases against sovereign states in the past . “
In the case against Argentina , creditors detained an Argentine naval
vessel ; in the case against Venezuela there was the seizure of state
-owned oil cargo . There is a wide range of potential assets . ”
However,
the company did not rule out the possibility of alternative resolution
of the fine, which has the potential of wiping out 20 per cent of the
country ’s foreign reserves .
The company in an email response to
one of our correspondent’ s questions said the onus was upon the
government of President Muhammadu Buhari to show good faith and enter
into reasonable negotiations .
It stated , “ The real question is
: is the Nigerian Government willing to enter good -faith negotiations ?
The ball is now in the court of the Buhari Administration to
demonstrate a mature , good -faith approach to a resolution ; their
legal arguments have been completely rejected.
“ In the meantime ,
the P & ID will look to seize Nigeria ’s assets in the UK to
enforce the award as soon as possible . The company ’ s current focus is
vigorously enforcing the award .
“ The onus is on the Nigerian
government and the Buhari Administration to demonstrate a mature , good
-faith approach to a resolution . ” The Irish firm accused the administration of engaging in a smear campaign instead of addressing the issues .
It
said, “ Instead of accepting responsibility or pursuing a negotiated
settlement , the Buhari administration has regrettably chosen to
continue its campaign of misinformation and misdirection , including
wild allegations against the English judge and commencing a sham
investigation .
“ This approach is not constructive , and will
not help to resolve the situation . The P & ID will begin enforcing
its legal rights , including the seizure of Nigerian assets in the UK .”
Nigerian
government officials , including the Attorney General of the
Federation, and Minister of Justice , Abubakar Malami ( SAN) , and the
Governor of Central Bank of Nigeria , Godwin Emefiele , had consistently
said the judgment would be challenged .
Attempts to confirm
whether an appeal had been filed or that the Federal Government had
instructed its lawyer to file the appeal proved abortive .
The Federal Government ’ s lawyer , Harry Matovu, ( Queens Counsel ) , said he would not be able to speak on the matter.
He
said, “ I am unable to comment on this matter, and I would respectfully
suggest that you refer any queries to the Federal Government. ” When
our correspondent contacted an aide to the Minister of Information and
Culture , Mr Lai Mohammed, he declined the request on the grounds that
the minister would address the issues on Monday ( today) .
The contract and the judgment
The
contract that has simply become known as the GSPA is the Gas Supply
Processing Agreement , which was entered into on behalf of the Federal
Government by the Ministry of Petroleum Resources .
The contract was signed on January 11 , 2010 between the two parties . By
the contract , the Federal Government entered into an agreement to
supply a firm registered in the United Kingdom, Process and Industrial
Development Limited 400 MMScuFD of wet gas for a period of 20 years.
The company was to process the wet gas into lean gas suitable for firing gas-powered electricity generation plants .
While
the company would make available 85 per cent of the lean gas proceeds
from the process , it was to be compensated through the by- products
such as butane and sell in the international market . Nigeria was to benefit from the sale of the by -products through 10 per cent share in the British firm .
Information available to our correspondent showed that the supply of wet gas was to take place in two phases.
In
phase one , the government was to make available 150 MMScuFD during or
before the last quarter of 2011 . In phase two , the remaining 250
MMScuFD must be supplied on or before the third quarter of 2012 .
The
Process and Industrial Development Limited was to build two or more
plants for the processing of the wet gas into lean gas at no cost to the
government since it would be compensated from the proceeds .
However,
the government failed to build the pipeline to supply gas to the
company . The company also failed to construct the plant for processing
the plant.
On August 22 , 2012 , the British firm filed for
arbitration. It wrote the Federal Government on March 20 , 2013 ,
accusing it of repudiating the contract it entered with the company .
The
government alleged that the agreement was on various grounds invalid or
subsequently frustrated , varied or discharged by force majeure .
A
panel of arbitration ruled that Nigeria was liable for the failure of
the contract and should pay the British firm a sum of $ 6 .597 bn as the
profit that the company would have made in the 20 years tenure of the
contract .
It also ruled that the company should be paid seven per cent interest until the award was settled.
This
is what has snowballed into $ 9 .6 bn judgment debt as the firm had
recently sought and secured from a British High Court the conversion of
the arbitration decision into a court judgment .
The company , Process and Industrial Development Limited
If
the name of the company that had secured a $ 9. 6 bn judgement against
Nigeria conjures an image of a global industrial giant, you will not be
mistaken .
However, not much can be gleaned on the Internet about
this company except its case against Nigeria. It appears, therefore ,
that the company is a portfolio firm incorporated in 2006 to secure the
contract with Nigeria .
However, its founders, Brendan Cahill and
Michael Quinn — had a 30 -year track record of planning and delivering
projects in Nigeria, the company claimed .
“ These include projects that had real and measurably positive impacts on the Nigerian economy and people ,” the company added .
It
listed the projects to include ‘ upgrading the port infrastructure at
the Nigerian ports in Lagos and Calabar and establishing Africa ’s first
-ever gas pressure vessel manufacturing facility – including
installation at nine sites across Nigeria ( known as the “ Butanisation
Project ”) .’ The company claimed that there were also other projects
that ‘delivered billions of dollars of value for the Nigerian economy,
and created thousands of jobs for Nigerians . ’
“ The gas
pressure vessel manufacturing is now a significant industry in Nigeria ,
helping to train skilled local workers , and benefitting families and
communities , ” it added .
Historical perspective
Our
correspondent reports that the lacuna in the leadership of Nigeria
played a critical role in the $ 9 . 6 bn arbitration award quagmire that
Nigeria is now fighting hard to wriggle out from . Administrative
and leadership tardiness also played a significant role in escalating
the smouldering fire that could have been quenched , findings have shown
.
Available information showed that the controversial gas
contract was signed between the Federal Government of Nigeria and the
Process and Industrial Development Limited on January 10 , 2010 .
This
was the rudderless period in the history of Nigeria occasioned by the
medical trip undertaken by the late President Umar Yar ’ Adua without
transmitting power to Vice - President Goodluck Jonathan.
Yar
’Adua had gone to Saudi Arabia in November 2009 . He did not return from
that trip alive . In fact, his corpse only returned to Nigeria on May
16 , 2010 .
While he was away , a cabal reportedly headed by the
then Attorney General of the Federation , Mr Michael Aondoakaa , ensured
that Jonathan was kept outside the mainstream of government business.
The three - man arbitration panel
The panel that delivered a judgment was made up of three lawyers – Bayo Ojo ( SAN) , Lord Hoffmann and Anthony Evans .
Bayo
Ojo , SAN was appointed by the Federal Government to represent it on
the arbitration panel . The P &ID appointed Evans Anthony and the
two of them in turn appointed Lord Hoffman to chair the panel .
Lord
Hoffman and Anthony Evans held that Nigeria was liable to $ 6 . 6 bn
and that became the majority decision . Ojo , a former Minister of
Justice and Attorney General of the Federation, in a minority judgement,
held that the P &ID was entitled to some compensation but should
not be more than $ 250 m .
No comments
Post a Comment