A United Kingdom judge has revealed that the timely interventions of the Vice President of Nigeria, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo was instrumental to Nigeria securing a favourable judgment against Process and Industrious Development Limited (P&ID).
Sir Ross Cranston of the UK High Court of Justice Queen’s Bench Division Commercial Court explained that the Vice President was a regular fixture all through process, noting that, the Vice President’s “fraud on the nation” statement in June 2018 turned the case against P&ID in Nigeria’s favour.
Reacting to the verdict, the Presidency said it welcomed the judgment by the UK Court granting Nigeria’s application for an extension of time and relief from sanctions in a $10 billion arbitration case with Process and Industrious Development Limited (P&ID) in Nigeria.
The Presidency said, “In our view, the judgment is right, just and provides a strong prima facie case that the fraudulent gas deal with P&ID and the subsequent judgment debt of $10 billion against Nigeria was a clear attempt to cheat the country of billions of dollars by a company that had not invested one Naira in our country.
According to the judgment read by Cranston, the Vice President’s involvement began in 2017 after he was intimated by the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice of Nigeria, Abubakar Malami.
P&ID and the Osinbajo factor
“Following a meeting, on 13 March 2017 Mr Malami wrote to Vice President Osinbajo, who was acting president at the time, exploring five “scenarios” and making recommendations on each.
“The first was to negotiate a reasonable settlement. The second was to undertake a “forensic and extensive examination of the original contract, Award and other Processes to discover loopholes to upset or vary the Award.” The merits were said to be that a loophole might be discovered, for example fraud, technical grounds or a conflict of interest of the arbitrators.
“The other options were to inquire whether there was the possibility of an appeal, an investigation by the EFCC and a challenge to the recognition and enforcement of the award.
The judge explained that Mr Malami wrote further to the Vice President on 17 March 2017, following a meeting on 13 March where the scenarios in the 13 March letter were “extensively deliberated”.
“Scenario 1 was now expressed as “the urgent need” (emphasis in original) to negotiate a settlement. The scenario about involving the EFCC was that it should be directed to undertake a discreet investigation of the matter, and also to ascertain the personalities and beneficiaries behind P&ID.
“There was a further letter from Mr Malami to the Vice President dated 29 March 2017. On 6 April 2017 the Vice President approved in manuscript on the letter its proposal to pursue settlement negotiations.
“There followed on 16 May 2017 (and afterwards) without prejudice settlement discussions with P&ID. After P&ID stated in September 2017 that it intended to enforce the Final Award, on 7 December 2017 the Vice President granted approval to negotiate further. However, settlement negotiations broke down.
“The Attorney General, Mr Malami, together with then Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, Mr Emmanuel Kachikwu wrote to the Vice President on 23 May 2018 in light of US enforcement proceedings which P&ID had initiated, recommending the reopening of negotiations with P&ID while efforts were being made as regards the enforcement proceedings.
He explained that the Vice President involvements was not restricted to his role as acting President alone. “On 12 June 2018 the Vice President’s office reported that he had agreed with the recommendation and would take up the matter with the President.
“That same day, 12 June 2018, the Vice President wrote to the President recommending the reopening of negotiations with P&ID. The President approved this recommendation on 26 June 2018.
Then the Attorney General and then Minister of State for Petroleum Resources had written to the Vice President on 23 May 2018 recommending further negotiations with P&ID. The Vice President had agreed, adding in manuscript on the letter that he was still of the opinion that the underlying transaction was “a fraud on the nation”, and that perhaps there might be “a need to independently review this view and investigate the entire affair more diligently”.