The controversial $500,000 payment at the heart of the Mambilla Power Project dispute has triggered fresh calls for investigation of former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, with the Independent Media and Policy Initiative (IMPI) urging the Federal Government to commence proceedings against him before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).

IMPI’s demand followed its review of the over 600-page ruling of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) arbitration tribunal, which, according to the policy group, raised “significant red flags” over the payment made to Jennifer Douglas, Atiku’s former wife, by Leno Adesanya, promoter of Sunrise Power and Transmission Company Limited.

The group said the circumstances surrounding the transaction, particularly its timing, the explanations offered for the money and Atiku’s influence in the Federal Government at the time, demanded answers beyond the contractual dispute determined by the arbitration tribunal.

In a policy brief signed by its Chairman, Dr Omoniyi Akinsiju, IMPI described the $500,000 transaction as the “crux” of the Mambilla-ICC saga, arguing that its implications went beyond the arbitration proceedings to questions of public accountability and the integrity of the original concessioning process.

“For us, the crux of the Mambilla-ICC saga is the $500,000 cash transfer and the purpose it was supposed to serve in securing the Mambilla Power Project concession,” IMPI said.

The group’s concerns centre on the tribunal’s rejection of Adesanya’s defence concerning the payment and what it described as the absence of bona fide commercial documentation supporting the transaction.

IMPI argued that although the ICC proceedings did not establish criminal liability against Atiku, the tribunal’s findings provided sufficient grounds for Nigerian authorities to investigate whether the payment was connected to the controversial concession of the 3,960MW Mambilla Hydroelectric Power Project.

The timing of the transaction, the group said, is particularly troubling.
IMPI asked whether it was merely coincidental that the $500,000 was transferred to Douglas’ account about two weeks before Sunrise Power submitted its tender for the multi-billion-dollar project and less than four months before the controversial Build, Operate and Transfer (BOT) contract was purportedly issued by the then Minister of Power and Steel, Olu Agunloye.

The policy group also pointed to what it described as contradictory accounts concerning the source of the money, including information given to the ICC tribunal by Adesanya and her position when questioned by United States investigators over suspicious inflows into her CitiBank account in 2010.

The contradictions, it said, heightened the need for a fresh examination of the transaction.

IMPI also rejected the argument that Atiku’s non-membership of the procurement panel effectively removes him from scrutiny.

Atiku had maintained, in his response to the APC Presidential Campaign Council‘s demand for his resignation, that he was not a member of the official procurement panel and that the Minister of Power signed the award letter.

But IMPI argued that formal membership of the procurement panel was not the only relevant consideration when examining possible executive influence.

It cited the ICC tribunal’s observation that Atiku wielded a “considerable degree of power and influence” over federal administrative affairs in early 2003.

The group further noted that Atiku led high-level trade and infrastructure delegations to China involving stakeholders connected with the Mambilla project, arguing that his broader executive influence therefore required scrutiny.

According to IMPI, the tribunal’s findings raise the possibility of indirect influence-peddling, even though a direct quid pro quo was not established in the arbitration.

The group said: “An unverified $500,000 financial flow between a bidder and a key figure exercising overall executive influence raises legitimate administrative suspicion of indirect influence-peddling, even where direct instruction (the quid pro quo) cannot be proved beyond reasonable doubt.”

It added that the tribunal’s rejection of Adesanya’s explanation of the payment represented a “critical diagnostic indicator” that warranted investigation into the administrative process surrounding the project.

IMPI said: “When an international arbitration body like the ICC red-flags a conduct in a transaction, it signals a potential risk of illegality, such as corruption, bribery, fraud, or money laundering.”

The organisation, however, stopped short of suggesting that the ICC had found Atiku guilty of any criminal offence, stressing that the arbitration was primarily concerned with contractual liabilities between the Federal Government and Sunrise Power.