Headline

US Court Denies Nigeria Sovereign Immunity Claim, Upholds $70m Award to Chinese Firm

Published

2 years ago

August 16, 2024

Eric

Nigeria’s claim to sovereign immunity cannot stand in a commercial venture, a US Appeal Court has ruled.

The court rejected Nigeria’s sovereign immunity defence to the enforcement of a $70 million investment treaty award won by Zhongshan Fucheng Industrial Investment Co. Ltd., a Chinese investor, in a free trade zone.

Nigeria had “gruesomely” violated both fundamental and commercial rights of the Chinese firm, judges at the US Court of Appeals in Washington DC ruled.

In a 2-1 verdict delivered on August 9, documents of which are attached, majority ruling affirmed the judgment of the US district court for the District of Columbia that held that the arbitration award is enforceable.

In January 2023, Beryl Howell, the presiding judge of the lower court, dismissed Nigeria’s argument that the court did not have jurisdiction over the case since the country is a sovereign entity.

Howell held that the court has jurisdiction since the United Kingdom (UK), where the $70 million arbitration award was issued against Nigeria, is a signatory to the New York Convention.

In 2010, Zhongshan, through Zhuhai Zhongfu Industrial Group Co. Ltd. (Zhuhai), its Chinese parent company, acquired rights to develop a free trade zone in Ogun state.

A year later, Zhongshan set up Zhongfu International Investment (NIG) FZE (Zhongfu), a Nigerian entity, to manage the project under the permission of the Ogun state government.

However, things took a different turn in July 2016 when the investor accused the state government of abruptly moving to terminate its appointment while attempting to install a new manager for the free trade zone.

Subsequently, Zhongfu initiated an investment treaty arbitration against Nigeria under the bilateral investment treaty between the People’s Republic of China and Nigeria (the China-Nigeria BIT).

The arbitrators had ruled that Nigeria was in breach of its obligations under the China-Nigeria BIT and awarded Zhongshan compensation of around $70 million.

In January 2022, the Chinese company initiated a case to seek enforcement of the arbitration award.

Nigeria pleaded state immunity but was turned away by Sara Cockerill, a high court judge in the UK, who said the country abused the time frame for appealing arbitral awards.

In the majority judgment, the US appellant court held that the final arbitration award is enforceable under the New York convention since the dispute is between “persons” that share a legal commercial relationship.

The court ruled that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) arbitration exception stripped Nigeria of the sovereign immunity in the arbitration award case.

“For the foregoing reasons, we hold that the final award is enforceable under the New York convention because it arose out of differences between ‘persons’ that share a legal, commercial relationship,” the majority judgment reads.

“The district court therefore has jurisdiction over this case under the FSIA’s arbitration exception. The judgment of the district court is affirmed.”

The majority judgment was issued by Patricia Millett and Julianna Childs.

In the dissenting judgment, Gregory Katsas, the third judge, argued that when the New York convention was drafted, the word “persons” did not include a sovereign nation.

Katsas held that the action of Ogun State cannot be attributed to Nigeria, adding that the arbitration award “arises solely out of Nigeria’s sovereign acts governed by public international law”.

“Text, legal context, and drafting history all indicate that the word ‘persons,’ as used in the New York Convention, does not include signatory nations acting as sovereigns. I respectfully dissent,” Katsas said.

Three days after the judgment of the US appeal court, a Paris court in France ordered the seizure of three jets belonging to the Nigerian government over the dispute involving the arbitration award to the Chinese firms.

In 2023, a court of appeal in the UK ruled that Nigeria is liable for a $70 million arbitration award in favour of the Chinese firm.

The development means that Nigeria has lost arbitration award cases against the Chinese firm in France, the US, and the UK.

The Nigerian government has accused the Chinese firm of attempting to use deceptive means to acquire the country’s offshore assets.

Agency Report

Below is the detailed judgment:

23-7016-2069169

United States Court of Appeals

Headline

Court Validates PDP 2025 Convention in Ibadan, Affirms Turaki-led NWC

Published

10 hours ago

February 27, 2026

Eric

The Oyo State High Court sitting in Ibadan has affirmed the validity of the 2025 Elective Convention of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP), which produced Dr. Kabiru Turaki as the substantive National Chairman of the party.

Delivering judgment on Friday, Justice Ladiran Akintola upheld the convention in its entirety, ruling that it was conducted in full compliance with the relevant constitutional and statutory provisions governing party elections in Nigeria.

The decision marked a significant legal victory for the party’s leadership and brought clarity to the dispute surrounding the convention’s legitimacy.

The ruling followed an amended originating summons filed by Misibau Adetunmbi (SAN) on behalf of the claimant, Folahan Malomo Adelabi, in Suit No. I/1336/2025.

In a comprehensive judgment, the court granted all 13 reliefs sought by the claimant, effectively endorsing the processes and outcomes of the Ibadan convention.

Justice Akintola held that the convention, organised by the recognised leadership of the party, satisfied all laid-down legal requirements as stipulated in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the Electoral Act 2022 (as amended), and the relevant provisions of the Electoral Act 2026.

The court found no breach of due process or statutory non-compliance in the conduct of the exercise.

In the same proceedings, the court dismissed the Motion on Notice seeking a stay of proceedings and suspension of the ruling, filed by Sunday Ibrahim (SAN) on behalf of Austin Nwachukwu and two others. The applications were described as lacking merit.

Earlier in the proceedings, the court had also rejected a bid by Ibrahim to have his clients joined in the suit.

Justice Akintola ruled at the time that the joinder application was unsubstantiated and consequently dismissed it.

Headline

Opposition Parties Reject 2026 Electoral Act, Demand Fresh Amendment

Published

1 day ago

February 26, 2026

Eric

Opposition political parties have rejected the 2026 Electoral Act recently passed by the National Assembly, which President Bola Tinubu swiftly signed into law.

The parties called on the National Assembly to immediately begin a fresh amendment process to remove what they described as “all obnoxious provisions” in the law.

Their position was made known at a press briefing themed “Urgent Call to Save Nigeria’s Democracy,” held at the Transcorp Hilton Hotel in Abuja on Thursday.

In a communiqué read by the Chairman of the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) Ahmed Ajuji, the opposition leaders stated:

“We demand that the National Assembly immediately commence a fresh amendment to the Electoral Act 2026, to remove all obnoxious provisions and ensure that the Act reflects only the will and aspiration of Nigerians for free, fair, transparent and credible electoral process in our country. Nothing short of this will be acceptable to Nigerians.”

Some of the opposition leaders present in at the event include former Senate President David Mark; former Governor of Osun State, Rauf Aregbesola; former Vice President Atiku Abubakar; former Governor of Rivers State, Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi; and former Governor of Anambra State, Peter Obi, all from the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

The National Chairman of the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP), Ahmed Ajuji, and other prominent members of the NNPP, notably Buba Galadima, were also in attendance.

The coalition said the amended law, signed by Bola Tinubu, contains “anti-democratic” clauses, which they argue may weaken electoral transparency and public confidence in the voting system.

At the centre of the opposition’s concerns is the amendment to Section 60(3), which allows presiding officers to rely on manual transmission of election results where there is communication failure.

According to the coalition, the provision weakens the mandatory electronic transmission of results and could create loopholes for manipulation.

They argued that Nigeria’s electoral technology infrastructure is sufficient to support nationwide electronic transmission, citing previous assurances by officials of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

The parties also rejected the amendment to Section 84, which restricts political parties to direct primaries and consensus methods for candidate selection.

They described the change as an unconstitutional intrusion into the internal affairs of parties, insisting that indirect primaries remain a legitimate democratic option.

The opposition cited alleged irregularities in the recent Federal Capital Territory local government elections as evidence of what they described as a broader pattern of electoral compromise.

They characterised the polls as a “complete fraud” and said the outcome has deepened their lack of confidence in the ability of the electoral system to deliver credible elections in 2027.

The coalition also condemned reported attacks on leaders of the African Democratic Congress in Edo State, describing the incidents as a serious threat to democratic participation and political tolerance.

They warned that increasing violence against opposition figures could destabilise the political environment if not urgently addressed.

In their joint statement, the opposition parties pledged to pursue “every constitutional means” to challenge the Electoral Act 2026 and safeguard voters’ rights.

“We will not be intimidated,” the leaders said, urging civil society organisations and citizens to support efforts aimed at protecting Nigeria’s democratic system.

On February 18, 2026, President Bola Tinubu signed the Electoral Act (Amendment) 2026 into law following its passage by the National Assembly. The Act introduced several reforms, including statutory recognition of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System and revised election timelines.

However, opposition figures such as Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi have also called for further amendments, particularly over the manual transmission fallback clause, which critics say leaves room for manipulation.

The president said the law will strengthen democracy and prevent voter disenfranchisement.

Tinubu defended manual collation of results, questioned Nigeria’s readiness for full real-time electronic transmission, and warned against technical glitches and hacking.

The Electoral Act sparked intense debate in the National Assembly over how election results should be transmitted ahead of the 2027 general elections.

Civil society groups under the “Occupy NASS” campaign demanded real-time transmission to curb manipulation.

In the Senate, lawmakers clashed during consideration of Clause 60, which allows manual transmission of results if electronic transmission fails.

Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe (ADC, Abia South) demanded a formal vote to remove the proviso permitting manual transmission, arguing against weakening real-time electronic reporting.

The move led to a heated exchange on the floor, with Senate President Godswill Akpabio initially suggesting the demand had been withdrawn.

After procedural disputes and a brief confrontation among senators, a division was conducted. Fifteen opposition senators voted against retaining the manual transmission proviso, while 55 supported it, allowing the clause to stand.

Earlier proceedings had briefly stalled during clause-by-clause review, prompting consultations and a closed-door session.

In the House of Representatives, a similar disagreement came up over a motion to rescind an earlier decision that mandated compulsory real-time electronic transmission of results to IReV.

Although the “nays” were louder during a voice vote, Speaker Tajudeen Abbas ruled in favour of rescinding the decision, triggering protests and an executive session.

Headline

AFP: How Tinubu’s Govt Paid Boko Haram ‘Huge’ Ransom, Released Two Terrorists for Kidnapped Saint Mary’s Pupils

Published

4 days ago

February 24, 2026

Eric

The Nigerian government paid Boko Haram militants a “huge” ransom of millions of dollars to free up to 230 children and staff the jihadists abducted from a Catholic school in November, an AFP investigation revealed Monday.

Two Boko Haram commanders were also freed as part of the deal, which goes against the country’s own law banning payments to kidnappers. The money was delivered by helicopter to Boko Haram’s Gwoza stronghold in northeastern Borno state on the border with Cameroon, intelligence sources told AFP.

The decision to pay the militants is likely to irritate US President Donald Trump, who ordered air strikes on jihadists in northern Nigeria on Christmas Day and has been sent military trainers to help support Nigerian forces.

Nigerian government officials deny any ransom was paid to the armed gang that snatched close to 300 schoolchildren and staff from St. Mary’s boarding school in Papiri in central Niger state on November 21. At least 50 later managed to escape their captors.

Boko Haram has not been previously linked to the kidnapping, but sources told AFP one of its most feared commanders was behind the mass abduction: the notorious jihadist known as Sadiku.

He infamously held up a train from the capital in 2022 and netted hefty ransoms for the release of government officials and other well-off passengers.

Boko Haram, which has waged a bloody insurgency since 2009, is strongest in northeast Nigeria.

But a cell in central Niger state operates under Sadiku’s leadership. The St. Mary’s pupils and staff were freed after two weeks of negotiations led by Nuhu Ribadu, Nigeria’s National Security Adviser, with the government insisting no ransom was paid. Nigeria’s State Security Service flatly denied paying any money, saying “government agents don’t pay ransoms”.

However, four intelligence sources familiar with the talks told AFP the government paid a “huge” ransom to get the pupils back. One source put it at 40 million naira per head – around $7 million in total.

Another put the figure lower at two billion naira overall. The money was delivered by chopper to Ali Ngulde, a Boko Haram commander in the northeast, three sources told AFP.

Due to the lack of communications cover in the remote area, Ngulde had to cross into Cameroon to confirm delivery of the ransom before the first group of 100 children were released.

Nigeria has long been plagued by mass abductions, with criminals and jihadist groups sometimes working together to extort millions from hostages’ families, and authorities seemingly powerless to stop them.

Source: Africanews