Connect with us

Headline

Opinion: P&ID vs. Nigeria: A Review- Reuben Abati

Published

on

By Reuben Abati

The report that a commercial court in the UK has ruled that Nigeria must pay a UK firm, Process and Industrial Development Limited (P & ID) a sum of $9.6 billion or have its assets in the UK to the tune of that amount forfeited has generated more than a little interest. For a country with a foreign reserve of $45 billion and sovereign debt profile of over $80 billion that judgment debt is quite a lot, potentially capable of rendering Nigeria even more technically insolvent. Dayo Apata, Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Justice and Solicitor-General of the Federation has told the public that Nigeria will appeal the judgement and apply for a stay of execution to forestall the enforcement order that has been granted. Whereas this may be a logical step to take, even if it may achieve nothing in the long run other than putting more money in the pockets of counsel, there are specific issues that have been thrown up by Nigeria’s (mis)management of the case so far and the ruling of the UK court. 

 

The first issue is Nigeria’s habitual disregard for the sanctity of contracts and terms of agreement, and the failure of Nigeria’s representatives in many cases to enter into agreements that are in the best interest of the country. The facts of the case in Process & Industrial Development vs. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2019) EWHC2241 (Comm), by way of summary are as follows:  In January 2010, the Federal Republic of Nigeria (FRN), through its Ministry of Petroleum Resources entered into a Gas Supply and Processing Agreement (GSPA) with P&ID. Under the terms of the agreement, Nigeria “was to supply natural gas (wet gas) at no cost to P&ID via a government pipeline to the site of P&ID’s production facility.” P&ID was required to construct and operate the facility, process the wet gas and return to the government of Nigeria, lean gas to be used for power generation at no cost to the government of Nigeria. P&ID was entitled to other derivatives stripped from the wet gas. The GSPA had a tenure of 20 years from the date of first supply of wet gas. Clause 20 of the GSPA provided for (a) the agreement to be construed in accordance with the laws of Nigeria; (b) in the event of a dispute over the interpretation or performance of the Agreement, which cannot be resolved amicably, either party will serve on the other a notice of arbitration, (c) the Arbitration award shall be final and binding upon the parties and (d) “the venue of the arbitration shall be London, England or otherwise as agreed by the Parties.”  Two years later, a dispute arose between the P&ID and the Nigerian Government, and as this could not be settled amicably, the former served a notice of arbitration on the Nigerian government on the grounds that Nigeria had failed to make Wet Gas available in accordance with the GSPA.      

The matter went before an Arbitration Tribunal, under the Rules of the Nigerian Arbitration and Conciliation Act 2004, with London, England as place of Arbitration. After affirming its jurisdiction in the matter, the Tribunal began its procedural hearing to determine whether or not there was any repudiatory breach of contract. At this point, there was an attempt by the Ministry of Petroleum to reach a settlement agreement with P&ID to the tune of $850 million, payable in instalments. This was submitted for Presidential approval a week to President Jonathan’s departure from office. It would have amounted to tying the hands of the incoming government to grant the approval for the payment of that sum. Meanwhile, the Arbitration Tribunal had bifurcated the case and by July 2015, it affirmed that indeed Nigeria had failed to perform its obligations under the GSPA and then unanimously decided that P&ID was entitled to damages with interest. It took the new Nigerian government more than 4 months to respond. The excuse given for the delay, by Ms. Folakemi Adelore, witness for Nigeria, was that there had been a change of administration in Nigeria and that Ministers, including the Attorney General had only just been appointed. Nigeria asked for an extension of time to act on the outcome of the Arbitration Tribunal.

The Commercial court led by Phillips J. dismissed that appeal and the explanation for the delay at the time. Unsuccessful in having its way in England, Nigeria took up the matter at the Lagos Judicial Division of the Federal High Court of Nigeria, seeking essentially the same reliefs that were rejected by Phillips J. When notified of the proceedings in the Lagos High Court, P&ID dismissed the proceedings as “abusive and as a deeply unattractive attempt to forum shop”. There was a back-and-forth exchange of emails between the parties involved and the Tribunal over the meaning of venue or seat of arbitration. The Tribunal would eventually rule that London is the seat of arbitration “in the juridical sense”. The Nigerian government then went back to the Lagos High Court to set aside the Tribunal’s Procedural Order No. 12 and got favourable judgment. The Arbitration proceedings in London continued nonetheless to determine the quantum of damages and on January 31, 2017, the Tribunal issued its Final Award. The Tribunal insisted that P&ID would have played its own part in the contract if Nigeria had not repudiated its own obligations. It therefore ruled in favour of P&ID and ordered Nigeria to pay US$6.597,000, 000 being net present value of the profits which would have been earned by the P&ID. The Federal Government was also asked to pay interest on the amount at 7% per annum from March 2013. This final ruling was given in 2017. The Nigerian Government refused to pay and also failed to appeal the ruling! Why?

It may be routine conduct in Nigeria to ignore court orders, and assume that nothing will happen but things don’t work like that in the international domain. In March 2018, P&ID went to the Commercial Court in England to institute proceedings for the enforcement of the Final Award as declared by the Arbitration Tribunal. The Nigerian Government again did not respond in time. It waited till October 2018 before it finally acknowledged service and applied for relief for sanctions. The matter would finally be heard by Justice Christopher Butcher. It should be noted that on all the issues raised before the court of Butcher J. viz: the seat of arbitration and the order of the High Court of Lagos, issue estoppel, the conclusions of Procedural Order No. 12, (that is the ruling of the Arbitration Tribunal), public policy, pre-award interest and whether or not, the Final Award in favour of P&ID was excessive and punitive, the Court found in favour of P&ID on all the issues. Justice Butcher’s ruling raises cogent and recondite points of law, in a learned and rigorous manner; but in one word, he butchered Nigeria. The manner in which he did so, I intend to indicate shortly.

For now, what is clear to me is the reckless manner in which Nigerian officials often enter into agreements, on behalf of the country, without paying attention to the small print of the agreement and thinking through the feasibility of the agreement entered into. The net result is that the country incurs liabilities that are detrimental to corporate interest. On the face of it, the GSPA with P&ID would have been beneficial to Nigeria, particularly in terms of the constructive use of associated gas and the supply of lean gas to the national electricity grid for both industrial and domestic use. The GSPA was signed by the Ministry of Petroleum on behalf of Nigeria: was the Ministry not in a position to know the volume of wet gas that would be required to fulfil Nigeria’s obligations? What happened to the proposed pipeline? It would appear as if Nigeria signed the agreement in 2010 and just went to sleep. Where international contracts are involved, and we breach the terms of agreement, we end up projecting the country as an unfit and risky destination for investment. Even the private sector has been accused of failing to respect contractual agreements, the most recent example being the case of Nigerian airline operators and Boeing which has more or less blacklisted Nigerian airlines from leasing its aircraft. As it is with the Federal Government, so it is with the states. The Lagos Metro line project conceived by the Lateef  Jakande administration in 1983  could have solved the perennial mass transit crisis in Lagos but it was soon politicized. When the Buhari military regime came to power, the project was eventually cancelled in 1985, without regard for the terms of the contract. The foreign contractor went to court and Nigeria had to pay a penalty of more than $78 million. The contractor was compensated for doing nothing!

Another issue is the lack of diligent prosecution of cases in which Nigeria is involved by those whose duty it is to do so. I assume that this is due to our tendency to either politicise everything or focus more on personal interests, or failure on the part of either representing counsel or the Attorney General’s office. As stated, it took Nigeria in this case about five months to respond to the initial ruling of the Arbitration Tribunal in London. The excuse that Nigeria was busy with elections and that new Ministers were not in place until November 2015 naturally appeared strange and laughable. When final ruling was given, Nigeria also did nothing. It had to wait until P&ID sought enforcement.

Butcher, J. in his August 16, 2019 ruling made heavy weather out of several acts of omission on the part of the Nigerian authorities. He observed in one instance, that “…the FRN had remedies for any procedural unfairness, but it did not utilise them”. Nigeria could also have objected to Procedural Order No. 12 or question the Final Award. In the words of Butcher J., “it did neither and the time for doing so is long past.” This is a serious indictment (see paragraphs 64 -66 of the ruling). The energy that should have been devoted to the Arbitration in London was diverted towards obsession with “seat of arbitration” and getting a favourable judgment from the Lagos High Court which in Nigeria’s contention was the “supervisory court”, a point about “sovereignty” both the Tribunal and the Court dismissed. Nigeria failed to pursue relevant questions: Questions for example about the quantum of damages. Or the tax that would have accrued to Nigeria through P&ID. Besides, what is the profit value of Nigeria’s 10% equity? And why were questions not raised about in-door management rules? It is also curious that Nigeria failed to insist on something quite obvious: the competence and the failure of P&ID to build the facility stated in the GSPA. Equity aids the vigilant, not the indolent. Could the Nigerian team have been making needless mistakes in order to help the other party? In a country that is perpetually in search of patriots, particularly in official corridors, this is a relevant question.

The Commercial Court in London has held that the Final Award by the Tribunal in favour of P&ID is not punitive or excessive, rather it is compensation for damages suffered. The Court gave an order enforcing the Final Award. There is no guarantee that Nigeria will succeed with either its appeal or its request for stay of execution. Whatever happens, the (mis)handling of this case requires introspection and steps to be taken to ensure that this kind of embarrassment does not occur again, hoping that there are no such similar cases in other jurisdictions or in hibernation which may soon come to the knowledge of the Nigerian public. The success of P&ID may well embolden other parties with similar issues with Nigeria to go to court. Our case is not helped either by the politicization of the matter with the on-going trading of blames. It may be necessary for the National Assembly when it returns from its recess to conduct an inquiry into how Nigeria, with all the concerns about revenue and growth, is now faced with a judgment debt of $9.6 billion, with daily interest accruing.  Who are the state officials and their collaborators if there are any, who failed to ensure due diligence, both at the level of the contract and the management of the dispute with Process and Industrial Development Ltd? Why was wet gas not made available? Did the Attorney General’s office even vet the GSPA at all? From all indications, the dispute could have been settled out of court. Why did that option fail? $9.6 billion is about 20% of the country’s external reserves and 2.5% of GDP. Every single person, dead or alive, lawyer or state official, who has a hand in this mess must be called out.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Headline

ADC Tells Tinubu to Resign As World Bank Reveals 139million Nigerians Live in Poverty

Published

on

By

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) on Saturday asked President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to resign rather than seek re-election, asserting that the World Bank’s recent report showing that 139 million Nigerians live below the poverty line is his scorecard.

The ADC, in a statement by its spokesperson, Bolaji Abdullahi, said the World Bank’s report, which also estimated that 17 million Nigerians are at risk of starvation, was “disturbing.”

“The evidence of 139 million people living in poverty and 17 million at risk of starvation is President Tinubu’s scorecard,” the party said. “On account of this catastrophic failure alone, President Tinubu should be contemplating resigning from office rather than seeking re-election.”

It decried that the “catastrophic” situation was occasioned by the Tinubu administration’s policies, which it said, “have favoured money over people and statistics over survival.”

The opposition party maintained that the economic growth Mr Tinubu’s government has repeatedly boasted of as a result of its economic reforms is “meaningless” if the livelihoods of people at the grassroots have yet to improve since 2023, when he assumed office.

“Instead of changing course, the government has stubbornly stuck with its ruinous economic policies and even continues to market recklessness as courage and wickedness as ‘necessary pains.’

“However, three years down the line, it is now clear that the chicken has come home to roost,” the ADC said.

According to the party, Nigeria desperately needs a leader who truly cares about citizens’ well-being and understands that economic reforms should improve citizens’ lives, not worsen their misery.

“A president whose government is not openly feasting while asking the people to continue fasting. A government that does not wallow in profligacy while handing the people palliatives,” it added.

The party condemned the ruling APC’s social intervention programmes aimed at cushioning the effects of its economic policies, adding, “Poverty cannot be defeated through palliatives.”

The ADC pledged that if elected in 2027, it would tackle the root causes of hunger by reducing energy costs, enhancing food production, and ensuring that farmers returned to their farmlands.

It also vowed to rehabilitate the 264 abandoned dams, improve access to fertilisers and quality seeds, and invest in storage facilities.

According to the party, transportation, waste, and food prices would be reduced while creating productive jobs.

“Hunger cannot be separated from poverty, education, or healthcare. That is why an ADC government will prioritise nutrition, primary healthcare, quality basic education, and skills development because no nation can build a prosperous economy while millions of its children are hungry, out of school, or cannot read simple texts,” the party said.

Continue Reading

Headline

‘Punishment Before Trial’: The Travails of Nasir El-Rufai

Published

on

By

By Eric Elezuo

For 150 days and counting, a former Governor of Kaduna State, and one time Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, has remained in the custody of various security agencies including the Department of State Services (DSS), the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) for alleged offences ranging from fund misappropriation, wiretapping and eavesdropping on security information among others. El-Rufai has not been found of any offence though he has spent over 150 days in custody.

The former governor’s plight was brought back to the fore weekend, when his wife, Asia Ahmad El-Rufai, made a passionate appeal to the international community to intervene over what she described as her husband’s prolonged detention and alleged denial of due process.

Mrs El-Rufai argued that the former governor’s continued incarceration amounted to “punishment before trial” and posed a threat to Nigeria’s democratic institutions. She noted that her husband has not been fairly treated even as she alleged that the former Director-General of the Bureau of Public Enterprise (BPE) may have taken ill in custody, bleeding from both nose and mouth. She wondered how someone, could made to undergo such severe punishment even when he is not undergone any trial, let alone being found guilty.

In a statement she signed herself, released his social media handles to mark what she described as the 150th day of El-Rufai’s detention, El-Rufai’s wife called on foreign governments, multilateral and multinational organisations and international human rights groups to closely monitor the legal proceedings involving her husband.

She acknowledged not speaking as a political actor but as a wife and mother seeking fairness for a member of her family.

The woman was of the opinion that the period of her husband’s incarceration without trial, has taken a significant emotional and physical toll on the former governor, members of his family and close associates.

“On the 150th day of Mallam Nasir El-Rufai’s detention, I ask readers outside Nigeria to pause over what that number means. One hundred and fifty days is not a legal phrase.

“It is five months of missed meals, missed prayers, missed proper mourning of his deceased mother, missed family conversations, interrupted medical care and moments we can never recover,” she said.

Acknowledging that her husband had been a controversial figure during his more than two decades in public service, as well as how rule of law and democracy should play out, she observed that “My husband is no stranger to controversy or public scrutiny. He has been praised, criticised, loved and opposed. That is democracy.

“But what is happening to him today is not democracy, and it is not accountability. It is punishment before trial,” she said.

Continuing and reflecting on the origin of the travails of her husband, Mrs El-Rufai traced his confrontation with the law to when am attempt was first made to arrest him at the airport on his way back from Egypt. The embarrassing situation at the airport culminated in his appearance for questioning, and ever since he has been allowed except when he was momentarily permitted to go and bury his dead mother.

She said, “There was the sudden invitation, his voluntary appearance before the authorities, and the promise of bail that existed on paper but not in freedom.

“There was the night he was moved between locations without warning and without the dignity of allowing his family to know where he was being taken,” she stated.

Asia also alleged that the former governor became seriously ill while in custody and experienced bleeding from his nose and mouth.

She claimed that officials were reluctant to provide him with adequate medical attention or allow his family to deliver his prescribed medication.

“I still remember the helplessness of hearing that he had fallen gravely ill in custody, bleeding from his nose and mouth, while those responsible for his welfare were reluctant to provide the care any person deserves.

“I remember the anxiety of trying to get his medication to him and wondering whether officials would accept it,” she said.

According to her, the detention had inflicted emotional distress on the family, which continued to wait for the legal process to take its course.

“These are not abstract violations. They are the moments that chip away at a family’s resolve and hope,” she added.

While not requesting that her husband be placed above the law, or escape investigation as a public officer, she insisted that such investigations must be conducted transparently, and in accordance with constitutional safeguards.

“If the state believes it has evidence, let it be presented before an impartial court, openly and fairly.

“But justice cannot be selective. It cannot be pursued through overlapping charges, repeated detention, impossible bail conditions and public humiliation designed to persuade the nation of guilt before a judge has heard the case,” she said.

She accused the government of the day of orchestrating the gory details of the situation, including stringent bail conditions to deprive her husband of freedom, even as the election approaches, stressing that Nigeria was drifting from legitimate accountability towards “lawfare,” which she described as the deployment of legal institutions and judicial procedures as political weapons. She believes that El-Rufai’s problems are the consequence of his disagreement with President Bola Tinubu, and his eventual decanting from the All Progressives Congress (APC).

“The concern is not whether former officials may be investigated; they can and should be.

“The concern is whether the law is being applied neutrally or deployed against those who have fallen out of political favour,” she said.

“His political rupture with President Bola Tinubu’s ruling All Progressives Congress and his refusal to surrender his independent voice should not make him a target for indefinite punishment or detention disguised as prosecution,” she said.

“The legal architecture”, she continued, “surrounding him is bewildering even to trained observers: multiple charges in different courts, overlapping allegations, shifting statutory theories and duplicated claims arising from the same alleged events.

“If one application for bail is made and the conditions are met, another accusation can be filed the next day. If one judge must consider freedom, another process can be used to delay it,” she alleged, querying why such procedures was allowed to turn the judicial process into a form of punishment before conviction.

 

In March 2026, the ICPC arraigned El-Rufai, alongside one Joel Adoga, before Honourable Justice A.I. Aikawa of the Federal High Court, Kaduna Division, on a 10-count charge bordering on abuse of office, money laundering and fraud.

According to the charge sheet marked FHC/KD/73/2026, the former governor was accused of unlawfully receiving multiple sums of money in naira and foreign currencies while serving as a public officer.

Specifically, the Commission alleged that El-Rufai, in September 2020 and January 2023, received the sum of N289,826,998.12 on each occasion as severance allowance, far exceeding the legally entitled sum of N20,013,245.00, being 300 percent of his annual basic salary.

The ICPC charge further revealed that between 2016 and 2023, the former governor allegedly took control of various sums in United States Dollars through his domiciliary account with Guaranty Trust Bank. These include $320,800 allegedly paid in tranches by Joel Adoga, as well as other deposits amounting to $155,800, $305,300, and several smaller sums from different individuals, all reasonably suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities.

Joel Adoga was also accused of conspiring with the former governor in July 2019 to disguise the origin of $10,000 deposited into the said account.

One of the counts reads that both defendants, in July 2019 at Wuse, Abuja, allegedly conspired to disguise the origin of $10,000 paid into the former governor’s domiciliary account, knowing or reasonably ought to have known that the funds formed part of the proceeds of unlawful activity, contrary to and punishable under relevant provisions of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

When the charges were read, both defendants pleaded not guilty to all counts, but they were ordered to be remanded in ICPC custody.

The ICPC further violated the court-ordered access to the former governor, saying that the order did not override the agency’s internal security rules.

In May 2026, the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja granted El-Rufai N100 million bail in the trial over the alleged unlawful interception of the phone communications of the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu. However, he was re-arrested right at the court premises by the DSS, prompting the family to raise alarm.

 

EL-RUFAI’S STRINGENT BAIL CONDITIONS

Much as the embattled former Kaduna governor was granted bail, the conditions have appeared too stringent and tough to meet, the situation that prompted the African Democratic Congress (ADC) among many other concerned Nigerians to react.

In its immediate reaction, the ADC accused the Federal Government of turning El-Rufai into a political prisoner, describing his ordeal as “political persecution dressed up as prosecution.”

El-Rufai’s family also condemned the re-arrest.

El-Rufai’s second wife, Hasiat, who addressed journalists outside the DSS facility, said the family was traumatised by the development and lived daily under the shadow of threats and surveillance.

“We now live in constant fear. Every day we get a threat — DSS is coming to raid your house, ICPC is coming to raid your house, police are coming to raid your house. You are being followed. Our phones are tapped,” she said.

As part of the bail conditions, the trial judge, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik ordered the defendant to produce a surety who must be a federal civil servant not below Grade Level 17.

According to the court, the surety must not only be resident in either Maitama or Asokoro highbrow districts of Abuja, but must also deposit the original Certificate of Occupancy of a landed property not valued below the bail sum.

It held that the surety must also provide evidence of receipt of salary for at least three months, with an authenticated letter from the manager of a bank within the jurisdiction of the court.

Furthermore, the court directed the surety to depose to an affidavit of means and equally submit a recent passport photograph to its registry.

It added that a verification letter from the surety’s immediate department must be submitted alongside a tax clearance certificate covering the last six months.

The defendant was further mandated to surrender his valid international passports and directed not to travel out of the country without permission.

Justice Abdulmalik ordered the defendant to report to the headquarters of the Department of State Services, DSS, every last Friday of the month by 10 a.m. to sign an attendance register, pending the determination of the case. The former governor was also directed to submit a letter of attestation from the Chairman of the Kaduna Traditional Council.

The trial judge warned that failure to comply with any of the conditions would lead to an automatic revocation of the bail.

Expressing its position on the travails of the former governor, the ADC, in a statement signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, said “What is happening to Mallam El-Rufai confirms beyond all doubt that this detention is no longer about justice, it is about politics.

“It also confirms our fears that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is deploying the instruments of state power to keep one of the leading opposition figures out of circulation. This is political persecution dressed up as prosecution.”

ADC also drew comparisons between El-Rufai’s case and those involving former Kogi State governor, Yahaya Bello, and former Delta State governor, Ifeanyi Okowa, both facing separate corruption allegations.

“When placed beside other high-profile cases, the contrast becomes stark and shameful. Yahaya Bello, former governor of Kogi State, has been accused in an alleged N80.2 billion money laundering case.

‘’Ifeanyi Okowa, former governor of Delta State, was arrested over the alleged diversion of N1.3 trillion in derivation funds. But today, they are walking around free, singing President Tinubu’s campaign song,” the ADC statement noted.

However, unconfirmed feelers reaching The Boss have it that El-Rufai’s incarceration has a lot to do with keeping him away from the face politics till after the 2027 General elections. The truth, or otherwise behind the postulation remains to be seen. Nigerians have to wait till the former governor’s next appearance in court by September 2026, to determine the direction of his freedom.

Continue Reading

Headline

Mary Habila’s Death: Tinubu Has Failed Comprehensively, Disgracefully – Atiku

Published

on

By

By Eric Elezuo

A former Vice President, and Presidential Candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Atiku Abubakar, has lashed out at the administration of President Bola Tinubu over its prolonged silence on the death of a medical practitioner, Mary Habila, who died at the residence of the Minister of Works, Dave Umahi.

Atiku condemned the inability of the  Tinubu-led government from making any pronouncements or instituting any form of probe to unravel the cause of death since the sad incident occurred on June 27, 2026, saying the administration has failed comprehensively and disgracefully.

Atiku’s remarks are contained in a statement he released on his social platforms endorsed with his regular AA.

While not casting any blame on any particular person or entity, Atiku maintained that condolences are not enough,but must be accompanied by thorough investigation into the circumstances that led to the death of the 26 years old medical practitioner in her prime.

The former Vice President therefore called for a “credible, independent, and transparent investigation” to establish the truth, noting that “it is the refusal of the Federal Government to guarantee such an investigation that constitutes the scandal before us”.

The statement in full:

I have followed with deep sorrow and mounting concern the reports surrounding the death of Miss Mary Habila, a 26-year-old Nigerian from Nok, Southern Kaduna, who died on June 27, 2026, within the private residence of the Honourable Minister of Works, Senator David Umahi, in Uburu, Ebonyi State.

First, I extend my heartfelt condolences to the Habila family. No family should have to mourn a daughter taken in the prime of her life while also fighting simply to learn the truth of how she died.

But condolences are not enough. Nigerians deserve answers, and it is on this score that the Tinubu administration has failed, comprehensively and disgracefully.

Consider the facts that are not in dispute. A young woman died in the residence of a serving Federal Minister. For nearly two weeks, neither the Minister, nor the police, nor any arm of government said a word to the Nigerian people. It took the courage of Sahara Reporters to bring this death into public view. Three weeks after her death, no autopsy has been performed. No cause of death has been established. The investigation remains domiciled in the very state where the Minister served two terms as Governor and where his influence is beyond question.

And through all of this, silence from the Presidency. Silence from the Federal Executive Council. Silence from the Inspector-General of Police. Silence from the National Assembly. Not one word. Not one directive. Not one gesture to assure Nigerians that the life of Mary Habila matters to this government.

Instead, the Minister has been permitted to manage the narrative of a death that occurred under his own roof: issuing statements through his personal aides, deploying his private lawyers to correspond with the police, and continuing his official duties as though nothing has happened, while civil society groups, youth organisations, and the family’s own community cry out for an independent inquiry.

Let me be clear: I make no pronouncement on anyone’s guilt or innocence. That is precisely the point. Only a credible, independent, and transparent investigation can establish the truth, and it is the refusal of the Federal Government to guarantee such an investigation that constitutes the scandal before us.

A government’s first duty is the protection of life. Where a life is lost in circumstances touching a high official of state, the burden on government to act transparently is at its heaviest.

President Tinubu’s administration has instead treated this tragedy as an inconvenience to be waited out. If the death of a young Nigerian woman in a Minister’s residence cannot stir this government to act, then Nigerians must ask: whose life, exactly, does this government value?

I therefore demand the following: One, President Bola Tinubu must direct the Honourable Minister of Works to step aside immediately, pending the conclusion of investigations. This is not a punishment; it is the minimum standard of public accountability in any serious democracy. No official under this cloud should preside over a federal ministry as though it were business as usual.

Two, the Inspector-General of Police must immediately transfer the investigation from the Ebonyi State Command to Force Headquarters, with the involvement of independent forensic experts. No investigation conducted in the shadow of the Minister’s home-state influence can command public confidence.

Three, a full, independent, and internationally credible autopsy must be conducted without further delay, with the findings made public. The stalemate over the post-mortem, three weeks after this young woman’s death is an indictment of every institution involved.

Four, the family of Mary Habila must be protected from any pressure, inducement, or intimidation, and must be guaranteed unfettered access to the facts of their daughter’s death.

The measure of a nation is how it responds when the powerful are touched by tragedy and the powerless demand truth. Mary Habila was somebody’s daughter, somebody’s sister, a young professional with her life ahead of her. She was a Nigerian. Her death must not be reduced to a footnote of political convenience.

Nigeria will work again, but only when the life of every Nigerian counts, and when no one, however highly placed, stands beyond the reach of accountability.

May the soul of Mary Habila rest in peace. May her family find justice. -AA

Continue Reading

Trending