The controversy surrounding the alleged $6 billion Mambilla Power Project fraud took a deeper dimension as the Federal High Court sitting in Apo, Abuja, continued hearing the case involving former Minister of Power and Steel, Olu Agunloye. The case, already one of the most closely monitored legal battles in Nigeria’s power sector history, witnessed fresh disclosures from a third prosecution witness, Umar Hussein Babangida, who told the court that former President Olusegun Obasanjo voluntarily offered to testify when required. This revelation has intensified public interest in the decade-long dispute, the authenticity of approvals, and the true history behind Nigeria’s most ambitious hydroelectric project.
According to the prosecution witness, Obasanjo made his position clear in a letter dated November 27, 2023, addressed to the Attorney General of the Federation. The letter stated his readiness to appear before any court, arbitration panel, or national forum to shed light on the Mambilla project. This willingness, according to Babangida, was not forced or influenced but came directly from the former president himself, who viewed the matter as one of significant national importance. His readiness to clarify issues has raised questions about the events that occurred in the final months of his administration and the actions taken by the former minister now standing trial.
The Mambilla Hydroelectric Power Project has long been surrounded by controversy, delays, and accusations. As one of Nigeria’s largest proposed energy infrastructures, projected to produce over 3,000 megawatts of power, the project was expected to transform the nation’s electricity supply. But instead of becoming a symbol of national development, it has become entangled in disputes, legal battles, and allegations of corruption, turning it into one of Nigeria’s most contentious power projects of the last two decades.
In his testimony, Babangida narrated his interactions with the former president during an investigative session and emphasized that Obasanjo categorically stated that no contract approval was granted to Sunrise Power and Transmission Company during his tenure. According to the witness, Obasanjo noted that while he was aware of the proposal, it did not receive the Federal Executive Council’s final approval, and therefore no valid contract existed under his administration. This statement directly contradicts the defense’s claims that the Mambilla contract received proper authorization before Obasanjo left office.
The witness further referred to a letter dated April 7, 2003, written by the defendant, Agunloye, to President Obasanjo. In the letter, Agunloye reportedly requested that Sunrise Power and Transmission Company be considered for the construction of the Mambilla Hydroelectric Power Station. The president’s response at that time reflected neither full approval nor outright rejection. Instead, he instructed the minister to present the matter before the Federal Executive Council for comparison with alternative power options, notably coal-fired thermal plants projected to generate between 4,000 and 5,000 megawatts. This instruction indicated that the process was still under evaluation and had not reached the stage of approval.
The prosecution relies heavily on this line of argument, asserting that Agunloye proceeded to issue a contract award without fulfilling the necessary administrative procedures, approvals, or legal requirements. The amended seven-count charge against the former minister includes allegations of official corruption, abuse of office, and fraudulent award of a multibillion-dollar contract without the authority of the Federal Executive Council or the president.
The defense, on the other hand, continues to insist that the actions taken by their client were consistent with the authority delegated to him at the time and that the contract was not fraudulent as claimed. Their position emphasizes that the former minister acted within the scope of his powers and that the subsequent controversies were a result of administrative ambiguities and political interpretations rather than intentional wrongdoing.
During cross-examination, the witness was asked whether Obasanjo harbored any personal grievances against Agunloye. Babangida responded by stating that he could not recall any personal issues being mentioned by the former president. He clarified that his account was based strictly on documented interactions and the questionnaire completed during their investigation. This response is significant because the defense has occasionally suggested that political relationships and personal disagreements may have influenced the direction of the accusations. But the witness’s statement underscores that Obasanjo’s position was based on factual recollection rather than personal sentiment.
One of the most striking aspects of the witness’s testimony was the assertion that Obasanjo denied any awareness of a purported contract award issued on May 27, 2003. This date, according to some documents linked to the case, is cited as the day the Mambilla contract was allegedly awarded to Sunrise Power. However, Obasanjo stated during interrogation that he had no knowledge of such an award and that the Federal Executive Council did not approve it at any point. This revelation raises questions about how the contract documents came into existence, who signed off on them, and whether the award was genuine or fabricated.
As the trial unfolds, Nigerians continue to follow the developments with keen interest, partly because of the caliber of individuals involved and partly because the Mambilla Project has long been viewed as a critical missing link in the country’s power infrastructure. For decades, successive administrations have promised to deliver stable electricity, yet the Mambilla project — often described as a “dream project” — has remained stalled, bogged down by lawsuits, accusations of contract breaches, international arbitration cases, and political controversies.
The project has been the subject of disputes not only within Nigeria but also internationally, with Sunrise Power repeatedly claiming that their contract was valid and that the Nigerian government acted in bad faith. Their claims led to arbitration cases and threats of billions of dollars in damages. This legal saga has only deepened the mystery surrounding what truly happened during the transitional period between 2002 and 2003 when the initial proposals for the project were being evaluated.
The current trial of Olu Agunloye represents a significant moment in the decades-long controversy. It is perhaps the first time that the courts are scrutinizing the events that occurred during that period with such detail and intensity. The revelation that Obasanjo is willing to testify should the need arise suggests that Nigerians may soon hear firsthand accounts from key players who were directly involved in the decision-making process at the time.
If Obasanjo eventually appears in court as a witness, it would undoubtedly reshape the momentum of the case. His testimony could either strengthen the prosecution’s argument that no approval was ever granted or challenge the narrative being put forward by the defense. Regardless of how the proceedings unfold, the former president’s involvement adds a layer of gravity to the trial, reinforcing the national importance of uncovering the truth.
Beyond the courtroom, many Nigerians are also reflecting on the broader implications of the trial. For them, the Mambilla controversy is not just about allegations of corruption — it symbolizes the structural weaknesses that have plagued Nigeria’s power sector for decades. Mismanagement, political interference, bureaucracy, and lack of transparency have repeatedly stalled promising energy projects, leaving millions of citizens in darkness and businesses struggling under the burden of unreliable electricity supply.
The outcome of the trial could set an important precedent for accountability in large government projects. If the courts determine that the contract was fraudulently awarded, it would reinforce the need for strict oversight and adherence to due process in government contracting. On the other hand, if the defense successfully proves that the contract award was legitimate, attention may shift to other bottlenecks and administrative decisions that caused the project to fail.
For now, the public awaits further developments, especially as more witnesses are expected to testify and additional documents examined. The case continues to expose layers of complexities behind the Mambilla project, with each hearing bringing the country closer to understanding what truly transpired behind closed doors over twenty years ago.
The nation’s hope is that the truth, once fully revealed, will pave the way for progress — not only in this particular case but also in the broader quest for a functional and transparent power sector. The Mambilla Hydro Project remains a beacon of promise, and many Nigerians believe that resolving the controversies surrounding it is the first essential step toward finally bringing the project to life.
The trial of Olu Agunloye is far from over, but what is becoming increasingly clear is that this case is more than a legal battle between a former minister and the state. It is a defining moment for Nigeria’s justice system, its energy sector, and its commitment to transparency in public office. And with former President Obasanjo ready to testify when called upon, the stage is set for one of the most consequential testimonies in recent political and legal history.
If you want image generation, Open Graph tags, or SEO keywords, just tell me.
Comments
Post a Comment
Comment