The Femi Otedola Crackdown at FirstBank – His Many Battles –

By Eric Elezuo

From the moment Geregu Power Plc boss, Mr. Femi Otedola, took over the leadership of Nigeria’s premier bank, FirstBank of Nigeria Plc as its Chairman, it was clear that there was bound to be a systemic change. This, according to source, was premised on his thorough methodologies in approaching administration, and the need for corporate sanitization, which has seen him climbed to the peak of entrepreneurship.

This, no doubt created a sobriquet to qualify his tenure as the highest shareholder in the apex commercial bank, as a no-nonsense person, and made the statement ‘the fear of Femi Otedola is the beginning of wisdom at First Bank, Nigeria’s oldest bank’ a reality.

As expected, the billionaire businessman wasted on time to begin a crackdown in the bank. In fact, a section of the populace had labeled it Otedola’s cleasing spree. As at date, many high profiled officers of the bank have been relieved of their positions while many other highbrow customers of the bank at the moment have one question or another to answer with the security agencies just as accusations and counter-accusations continue to fly in the media space, prompting brouhaha and discontent.

It is worthy of note that in its 130 years of chequered history, FirstBank has paraded a galaxy of financial wizards and iconic figures, including a former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), who is now the Emir of Kano, Sanusi Lamido Sanusi.

Observers, stakeholders and the general public are of the unanimous opinion that though the bank has gone through its fair share of boardroom turbulence, none has been as chaotic, and potentially catastrophic as the present one. A cross section of respondents told The Boss that the bank is probably on a precarious voyage if the principal stakeholders don’t come together to urgently arrest the speedy descent to economic tragedy. It is believed that a disarray FirstBank portends a disaster to the nation’s economy considering its pride of place as the oldest, and arguably the most experience bank in the country, and the sub-region.

So like an experienced headmaster, Mr Otedola, ever since he became the Chairman of the 130 years institution, has been wielding the big sticks on those he perceives as parasites feeding fat on the sweat and investments of shareholders. He is sparing nobody if actions that have taken place so far are anything to go by. And so less than two months after, his big stick has whipped the likes of the much respected Global Head of Marketing and Corporate Communications, Mrs. Folake Ani-Mumuney; the immediate past Managing Director, Mr. Adesola Adeduntan, erstwhile Managing Director, Dr. Olabisi Onasanya, Chairman, ThisDay Newspaper, Prince Nduka Obaigbena and a host of others. It is alleged that all these personalities have questions to answer as regards the lavishing of shareholders’ funds.

On December 2, 2024, the media space was awashed with news of the resignation of Folake Ani-Mumuney. It was later revealed by insiders that she was prevailed upon by Otedola to resign after 15 years of sitting atop the bank’s marketing and corporate communications. Her supposed ‘sack’ took the banking world by storm. She was known to be diligent and highly influential.

Reports that made the rounds alleged that Otedola was pissed when he learned that a whopping sum was spent on a send-off party for Adesola Adeduntan, the former MD of the bank who was reportedly forced to resign over alleged negligence in a N60 billion electronic fraud. While no statements have proved that Ani-Mumuney’s resignation is directly linked to the party, insider source told The Boss that Adeduntan and the communications expert shared a common administrative bond during his nine years tenure as MD.

The same report stated that Otedola, who was conspicuously absent at the party, declared the exercise as “insensitive and wasteful” considering that the clear direction and mandate of the bank lies behind recapitalising and repositioning the institution from excesses of past management.

The stick that fell on Ani-Mumuney, stakeholders foretold, was the beginning of more “drastic” decisions and actions Otedola had to take in succeeding days to return FirstBank on the track of impeccable banking “devoid of extravagance and waste of shareholders’ resources”.

While the top echelon of the bank was still recovering from the hammer that befell Ani-Mumuney, many of them were swept away as more restructuring policies were enforced. Reports had indicated that the bank’s top executives were asked to leave as part of its corporate restructuring and repositioning plan for 2025 following the confirmation of Olusegun Alebiosu as the MD/CEO in June last year. A total of about 100 senior staff members were said to have been affected in the organisational shakeup.

SHAREHOLDERS REACT, RALLY TO REMOVE OTEDOLA AS CHAIRMAN 

With the avalanche of sack that swept through the institution, many, who believed that Otedola is fighting on too many fronts, and had to be termed, plotted to have him removed as the Chairman of the bank, with non-executive director, Mr. Julius B. Omodayo-Owotuga.

The group of shareholders while calling for an immediate Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) in the next 21 days in line with section 215 (1) of CAMA, alleged that FBN has not known peace since the former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Godwin Emefiele, influenced Otedola’s acquisition of a significant amount of shares that led to his emergence as Chairman of FBN Holdings in January 2024.

They accused Otedola and his kitchen cabinet including Omodayo-Owotuga of seizing full control of the bank and doing as they please. They group expressed fear of disregard for corporate governance principles taking into account his private placement of N360 billion shares.

They further alleged that Otedola’s preference for private placement instead of right issue or public offer is seen as a ploy to gain control and run the financial institution as his private estate. The battle continues to rage as the quest to discover who holds the single largest share of the institution between Otedola and Oba Otudeko’s Barbican Capital.

But according to the audited accounts First Bank Holdings for 2023, Otedola was put as the single largest shareholder with a 9.41 percent stake in the financial institution. The billionaire businessman recently increased his shareholding by massive acquisition of more shares. At the moment, his exact stake is unclear.

However, data from the Central Securities Clearing System (CSCS), the widely accepted source for confirming share ownership, has Barbican Capital, which is affiliated with the Oba Otudeko-owned Honeywell Group, as the largest single shareholder with a 15.01 percent stake.

Records kept by the bank’s registrars, Meristem Registrars & Probate Services Ltd, also showed that Barbican Capital is the single largest shareholder with 5,386,397,202 shares (5.38 billion) as of May 23, 2024.

In another development, Barbican Capital had sued FBN Holdings for wrongly stating its shareholding in its audited financial statement. Another battle front.

Otedola’s next battle was at the doorstep of Chief Executive Officer, ThisDay and Arise News, Prince Nduka Obaigbena, who was accused of owing the bank a whopping $225.8 million through his General Hydrocarbons Limited. An allegation the Frontline journalist denied.

The meat of the matter became exposed  and escalated into a legal tussle following GHL’s request for a fresh $53 million facility to finance the development of Oil Mining Lease (OML) 120. Officials at First Bank have however, refused to honor the new loan request, citing concerns over GHL’s utilization of previous loans disbursed for the same project.

Nairametrics reported exclusively that the information was gleaned from a leaked letter purportedly signed by Obaigbena himself. The development has resulted into bitter accusations, lawsuits, and freezing orders, thereby deepening tensions not just between both companies, but also between the two personalities.

This refusal, coupled with growing mistrust, culminated in a Mareva injunction court ruling that temporarily froze GHL’s assets across multiple financial institutions in favour of FBN’s outstanding debt claims.

Irked by the development, Obaigbena published a notification, ostensibly to state his side of the story, with a solid premise that neither he nor GHL is owing FirstBank.

ALLEGATIONS OF DIVERSIONS OF MONIES BEFUDDLING, GHL RESPONDS 

General Hydrocarbons Limited categorically denied owing FirstBank Nigeria $225.8 million, stating that the company entered into an agreement with FBN over oil production and development of OML 120, and the project is active and still pending.

“We entered a legally binding, enforceable subrogation agreement with First Bank on May 29, 2021, with FBN agreeing to fund GHL’s exploration, production, and development of OML 120 in exchange for sharing profit from oil proceeds from the OML in a 50:50 ratio after statutory payments and taxes over 8 years.

“The FBN 50 percent share will then be used to pay down its non-performing loans of about $718 million, which was discounted to $60 million to resolve its solvency issues therefrom.

“In its quest to stay afloat, the FBN loan was sold at $600 million as an Eligible Banking Asset (EBA), with comfort from GHL; the FBN then collected the cash from Assets Management Company of Nigeria, (AMCON), with which they rebuilt the bank without meeting GHL’s needs.

“The FBN non-performing loan arose from FBN’s unsecured and reckless lending to Atlantic Energy under separate Alliance arrangements, events in which GHL had no connection with agreements made it clear that the non-performing loan had nothing to do with GHL beyond the fact that 50 percent of profits from OML 120 due to FBN under the Subrogation Agreement will be used by FBN 66ae nexus.

“It is important to note that FBN’s credit and risk team verified and approved all contracts and invoices due to the contractors engaged for the development and operations of the oil mining lease and made payments directly to these contractors and service providers.

“The allegations of a diversion of the monies advanced to GHL are therefore befuddling and without merit as to settle the hole created in its books by the Non-Performing Loan (NPL). For clarity, Atlantic Energy operated OMLs 26, 30, 34, and 42—very different from GHL’s OML 120 payment, which was made by FBN directly to service providers after vetting and approval by its credit and risk teams,” the statement reads.
In the last days, First Bank Nigeria Holdings has been enmeshed in controversies as its shareholders are divided over Otedola’s chairmanship.

COURT ACTIONS NECESSARY TO RECOVER DEPOSITORS’ FUNDS, OTEDOLA FIRES BACK

My attention has been drawn to articles published by ThisDay (on Thursday, January 9 and Friday, January 10, 2015), clearly instigated by Mr. Nduka Obaigbena, filled with baseless allegations aimed at smearing my reputation. It is unfortunate that Mr Obaigbena has resorted to such tactics simply because he has been asked to repay his $230 million loan.

This loan, facilitated with the help of the former Central Bank of Nigeria Governor, Mr Godwin Emefiele, was purportedly for the operation of an oil block which he obtained without competitive bidding.

However, the funds were diverted for personal use-funding Mr Emefiele’ presidential aspirations, acquisition of luxury properties abroad, the operation of a private jet, and an extravagant $68 million spent on jet rentals in just four years. Mr Obaigbena’s profligacy is well known, as is his penchant for using his media platforms to blackmail and silence those who hold him accountable.

As Chairman of First Bank Holdings, my primary responsibility is to protect the interests of the bank’s shareholders and depositors. The actions initiated in the courts are necessary to recover funds that belong to depositors and ensure corporate governance.

Mr Obaighena’s penchant of blackmailing people to escape accountability must end, especially when depositors’ money is at stake. My commitment to upholding the integrity of the financial system and protecting depositors outweigh any cheap attempts at blackmail.

Let me remind the public that my integrity is not in question. As Chancellor of Augustine University and a benefactor of Save the Children Fund, I continue to dedicate my wealth to noble causes. I will not allow unscrupulous elements to derail the efforts of First Bank to recover loans or jeopardize the financial security of our shareholders.

To all stakeholders, I assure you that I remain steadfast in my mission to protect First Bank’s integrity and ensure its continued success. Media blackmail will not deter me from this responsibility.

-Femi Otedola

In the same vein, FirstBank followed suit with a similar response, stating the reasons the bank took the legal option while assuring stakeholders of maximum service. It wrote:

WE’RE BENT ON RECOVERING DIVERTED PROCEEDS, FIRSTBANK RESPONDS

In a statement by the management however, FirstBank insisted that it has been on the right side of the law while assuring customers, stakeholders and friends of the bank of its unflinching stand in the provision of first class services.

The full statement is as follows:

Our attention has been drawn to recent media reports regarding a commercial transaction between First Bank of Nigeria Limited (FirstBank) and General Hydrocarbons Limited (GHL) that is currently a subject of litigation.

As a responsible and law-abiding corporate citizen of Nigeria with utmost respect for the courts, FirstBank will not be able to offer comments on issues which are pending for determination by the courts, as such issues are sub-judice.

However, we are constrained to issue the following clarifications to correct the sponsored but false narratives on the matter presented in some of the media publications.

There is a subsisting commercial transaction between FirstBank as lender, and GHL as borrower, where FirstBank extended several credit facilities to GHL for the development of some Oil Mining Lease assets.

These facilities are backed by very robust loan agreements executed by the parties in which the obligations of the parties are clearly defined and the security arrangement clearly spelt out.

While FirstBank has diligently performed its obligations under the loan agreements, at the root of the present dispute is FirstBank’s demand for good governance and transparency in the transaction, which GHL rejected.

Upon FirstBank’s realization of breaches on the part of GHL including diversion of proceeds, FirstBank requested that an independent operator mutually acceptable to both parties be appointed in line with the terms of the agreement, to operate the financed asset in a transparent manner that will bring greater visibility to the project, protect the interest of, and bring value to all stakeholders. Not only did GHL roundly reject this reasonable and fair request, rather GHL insisted that FirstBank avails it with more funding. GHL refused to execute the terms of offer stipulated by the Bank for the availment of additional funding but rather proceeded to commence needless Arbitral proceedings.

GHL issued a notice to initiate arbitration and has no substantive claim pending at the Federal High Court. GHL approached the Federal High Court solely to seek preservative orders pending arbitration. Some of the preservative orders sought by GHL were granted while others were denied.

FirstBank is the only party that filed a substantive claim against GHL at the Federal High Court and the subject matter of FirstBank ‘s claim is not identical with the dispute GHL submitted to arbitration because FirstBank’s claim is in respect of subsequent credit facilities granted to GHL and the offer letters and finance documents pertaining to the subsequent transactions clearly state that the disputes arising from the subsequent facilities are to be resolved by a court of competent jurisdiction in Nigeria and not by arbitration.

Consequently, it is incorrect to assert that FirstBank abused the process of the court.

GHL off-took crude from the Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) vessel and diverted the proceeds. The Bank had no choice as a secured lender, under these circumstances of continued breaches, non-payment of due obligations and attempts to shield the Bank away from agreed security and repayment sources, than to approach the court for legal remedies, to preserve assets, recover the diverted proceeds, prevent reoccurrences and safeguard FirstBank’s interest. It is clear to us that the courts do not support or protect illegalities and breaches of contracts.

FirstBank has a long and very rich history of supporting and providing for the financial needs of its customers over its more than 130 years of unbroken existence. FirstBank remains committed to ensuring that it continues to support legitimate business aspirations of its teeming customers. At the same time, FirstBank is committed to the building of a strong credit culture where borrowers pay their debts when they borrow and will always take appropriate steps, within the ambit of the law, to resist attempts by borrowers to repudiate their repayment obligations.

We wish to assure FirstBank’s numerous customers, stakeholders and the general public that FirstBank remains solid, calm, steadfast and unflinching in its resolve to continue to provide first-class services to its teeming customers within and outside the country.

FirstBank also wishes to respectfully thank our shareholders for the indicatively oversubscribed Rights Issue of its parent Company, First Holdco Plc (“FirstHoldco”), in the first round of its capital raise and looks forward to an equally successful final leg of the recapitalization exercise when it is announced by FirstHoldco

THE OBA OTUDEKO AND BISI ONASANYA CONNECTION

As already stated by some shareholders, who insisted that Otedola was fighting on many fronts, and in cognizance of Otedola’s admission that he was poise to confront anyone indebted to the bank, the news of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) filing a 13-count criminal charge against the Chairman, Honeywell Group, Oba Otudeko and a former Managing Director of First Bank, Olabisi Onasanya for allegedly obtaining the sum of N12.3 billion from First Bank, filtered into the public space.

They were to appear before Justice Chukwuejekwu Aneke of the Federal High Court, Lagos on Monday alongside, a former member of the board of directors of Honeywell Flour Mills Plc, Soji Akintayo and a company linked to Otudeko, named Anchorage Leisure Ltd.

All four were listed as defendants in the suit filed by an EFCC prosecutor, Bilkisu Buhari-Bala on January 16, 2025.

According to the EFCC, the four committed the fraud in tranches of N5.2 billion, N6.2 billion, N6.150 billion, N1.5 billion and N500 million, between 2013 and 2014 in Lagos.

In proof of the charge against the defendants, the EFCC listed Cecelia Majekodunmi, Ola Michael Aderogba, Abiodun Olatunji, Raymond Eze, Abiodun Odunbola, Farida Abubakar, Adaeze Nwakoby and Adeeyo David to give evidence of the fraudulent misrepresentation of the Defendants and tender relevant documents. Also listed were testimonies of representatives of Central Bank of Nigeria, representatives of Stallion Nigeria Limited and representatives of V-tech Dynamics Ltd.

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

Count 1 of the charge says that Chief Oba Otudeko, Stephen Olabisi Onasanya, Soji Akintayo and Anchorage Leisure Limited between 2013 and 2014 in Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court conspired amongst  yourselves to obtain the sum of N12,300,000,000.00 (Twelve Billion, Three Hundred Million Naira Only),from First Bank Limited on the pretence that the said sum represented credit facilities applied * for by V- Tech Dynamic Links Limited and Stallion Nigeria Limited, which representation you know to be false, and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 8(a) of Advance Fee Fraud and other Fraud Related Offences Act 2006 and punishable under Section 1(3) of the same Act.

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

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

County 4 reads, that you, Chief Oba Otudeko, Stephen Olabisi Onasanya, Soji Akintayo and Anchorage Leisure Limited on or about 26th day of November 2013 in Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court conspired amongst yourselves to use the total sum of N6,150,000,000,.00 (Six Billion, One Hundred and Fifty Million Naira Only.), which sum you reasonably ought to have known forms part of proceeds of your unlawful activities to wit: Obtaining by False Pretence and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Sections 18(a), 15 (2) (d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 (as amended) and punishable under Section 15(3) of the same Act.

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

During the session, the court addressed multiple motions, including the prosecutor’s request for a warrant of arrest, which the judge rejected due to the lack of formal service to the defendants. The judge granted an application for substituted service, and the case was adjourned to February 13 for arraignment.

I’VE FOUR DECADES OF IMPECCABLE PROFESSIONAL SERVICE, OLABISI ONASANYA RESPONDS