THE All Progressives Congress (APC) Presidential Campaign Council has called on African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, to withdraw from the race following revelations contained in the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) arbitration over the long-running Mambilla Hydroelectric Power Project dispute.
News Point Nigeria reports that the campaign council, in a statement on Friday by its spokesman, Dr Dele Alake, seized on the tribunal’s examination of a $500,000 payment made in January 2003 by Sunrise Power and Transmission Company Limited promoter, Leno Adesanya, through an offshore company to Jennifer Douglas, then wife of Atiku, who was Vice President of Nigeria at the time.
The campaign alleged that the transaction and circumstances surrounding the disputed award of the Mambilla Build-Operate-Transfer contract raised questions about Atiku’s role in the affair and his suitability for the presidency.
The ICC tribunal, however, did not make a finding that Atiku received a $500,000 bribe.
Reports on the final award show that the tribunal examined the payment and rejected Adesanya’s explanation that it represented a foreign-exchange transaction carried out for Atiku, citing the absence of corroborating documentary or witness evidence.
The controversy followed Nigeria’s victory in the arbitration instituted by Sunrise over the Mambilla project, with the ICC tribunal rejecting claims that exposed the country to billions of dollars in potential liabilities.
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu had on Thursday hailed the tribunal’s decision that rejected Sunrise’s $680 million settlement-related demand, connected to another arbitration in which the company was claiming more than $2.7 billion in compensation and interest over the Mambilla project.
Against the backdrop of the ruling, the APC campaign alleged that Atiku had compromised Nigeria’s interests and should consequently abandon his latest presidential ambition.
“The APC Campaign calls on Abubakar Atiku to do himself a rare honour by bowing out of the presidential race, as the $500,000 bribe is just the tip of the iceberg of the revelations to come about his monumental corruption”, Alake said.
The campaign alleged that Atiku and former Minister of Power and Steel, Olu Agunloye, worked together in the events surrounding the disputed award of the power project to Sunrise in 2003.
It further claimed that the contract was executed in the closing months of the first term of the administration of former President Olusegun Obasanjo despite objections surrounding the transaction.
The Presidency, in its account of the arbitration on Thursday, said the dispute dated back to an “illegal 2003 contract” for a 3,050-megawatt hydroelectric plant in Taraba State under a Build-Operate-Transfer arrangement and maintained that the Federal Executive Council never authorised the contract.
The APC campaign linked the disputed contract to the $500,000 transferred to Douglas on January 30, 2003, through China Castle Investments Limited, an offshore company controlled by Adesanya.
Details of the ICC award reported on Friday showed that the tribunal considered the proximity between that transaction and the purported award of the BOT contract to Sunrise on May 22, 2003.
Adesanya acknowledged making the payment but maintained during the proceedings that it was a foreign-exchange transaction undertaken for Atiku.
The tribunal said it could not accept that explanation because of a lack of contemporaneous documentary evidence and corroborating testimony from either Atiku or Douglas.
The tribunal also noted that the payment came from China Castle rather than Moneyline Ventures, through which Adesanya said he operated a bureau de change business, and that China Castle was not licensed to conduct foreign-exchange transactions.
The APC campaign nevertheless characterised the payment as a bribe and accused Atiku of helping to expose Nigeria to potentially huge financial liabilities.
“By collecting a $500,000 bribe from Leno Adesanya to approve a Build-Operate-Transfer contract to a company with no scintilla of experience in hydro power generation, Atiku has proven he is one of the enablers of local and international predatory and exploitative entities out to defraud our country”, the campaign alleged.
It also criticised the former Vice President for not appearing as a witness in the Paris arbitration, contrasting his absence with the participation of former Presidents Olusegun Obasanjo and Muhammadu Buhari.
President Tinubu had specifically commended Obasanjo and the late Buhari for testifying in the case, alongside former ministers Babatunde Fashola and Suleiman Adamu and other witnesses and experts who participated in Nigeria’s defence.
The APC campaign also recalled a United States Senate investigation into suspicious transfers involving Douglas, arguing that the latest disclosures revived longstanding questions surrounding Atiku’s financial dealings.
It further cited criticisms of Atiku contained in Obasanjo’s memoir, My Watch, to buttress its claim that the former Vice President should not seek Nigeria’s highest office.
Turning to Taraba State, the campaign accused Atiku of sharing responsibility for the prolonged delay of the Mambilla project, saying residents should take the latest revelations into account in assessing the controversy surrounding the project.
The Mambilla dispute has remained one of Nigeria’s longest-running international arbitration battles.
Sunrise had sought $680 million as settlement and interest in one proceeding while pursuing more than $2.7 billion in compensation and interest in another dispute connected with the project.
The ICC tribunal’s latest award rejected Sunrise’s claims, while reports on the final decision said Sunrise and Adesanya were also ordered to reimburse Nigeria about $11.82 million, representing 75 per cent of the country’s legal fees and expenses in the arbitration.
Tinubu had described the decision as clearing the biggest legal obstacle that had held back the Mambilla project for years, while pledging that Nigeria would honour legitimate obligations to genuine investors but continue to resist claims against the country’s commonwealth that the government considers opportunistic.