A telecommunications infrastructure company, Pan African Towers Limited, has dragged its former Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer, Azeez Olayode Amida, before the Federal High Court in Lagos over alleged financial misconduct, abuse of office and breach of fiduciary duties.

According to court documents obtained by our correspondent at the Federal High Court in Lagos, the company is seeking the recovery of almost a billion naira allegedly spent by the former CEO on unauthorised expenses.

The firm is also demanding N200m general damages, N200m special damages and N50m as the cost of the action, while asking the court to disqualify Amida from serving as a director in any Nigerian company for 10 years.

A review of the court filings showed that the company accused the former chief executive of “misappropriating the Plaintiff’s properties in his custody and appropriating benefits beyond those issued to his office by the Company,” especially during a period that the company was struggling to increase its asset base and improve its services to customers.

The company further alleged that Amida “acted in breach of his fiduciary duty to the Plaintiff Company and prioritised his personal interests over those of the Plaintiff company.”

The suit contained detailed allegations of personal spending allegedly charged to the company, including payments for domestic staff, police escorts, massage therapy sessions, private travel, hospitality bills and gadgets.

In a witness statement on oath filed alongside the suit, the deponent, claimed that internal investigations uncovered payment records, invoices, emails, and WhatsApp chats allegedly linking the former CEO to the expenditures.
“The Defendant appropriated the Plaintiff’s assets and funds for his personal benefit,” the deponent stated in the sworn deposition.

A

According to the filings, the company alleged that four domestic workers linked to the former CEO were placed on its payroll between July and October 2024 despite not working for the firm.
The witness statement further alleged that Amida used N9.02m belonging to the company to procure solar power equipment for his residence.

Court documents also alleged that the former CEO diverted a power-generating set acquired for the company’s operations for personal use.
“The Defendant also, without authorisation from the Plaintiff’s Board and outside his compensation package, diverted to his personal use, a power generation set originally procured by the Plaintiff for its operations,” the witness stated.

The company further alleged that the defendant arranged police escorts and personal security personnel for himself and his family at the company’s expense.

According to the filings, weekly massage therapy sessions allegedly procured for the former CEO between October and November 2024 costing the company over millions of Naira.
The court papers also showed that the plaintiff accused the former managing director of using part of the company’s office space for his private business, Showtime Flag Football Limited.

The company alleged that the defendant allocated about 20 square metres of office space to the venture and sponsored its activities with company funds running into almost N50m.

The witness further stated in the deposition that, “The Defendant allocated physical space on the Plaintiff’s official premises to personnel of a personal business owned and controlled by the Defendant and ensured that the Plaintiff sponsored activities of this personal business.”

The filings further alleged that the former CEO converted a Mikano Maxus T60 truck procured for company operations into part of his personal convoy.

The plaintiff also accused him of procuring personal information technology equipment worth N10.48m through a vendor and invoicing the purchases to the company. Some of these items were allegedly delivered to ladies.
The court documents revealed that the company accused Amida of appropriating N30.24m a year for health insurance coverage for himself and his family despite a board-approved limit of N5m.

The plaintiff also alleged that the defendant repeatedly exceeded a N5m monthly hospitality spending cap with expenses allegedly incurred at lounges, clubs and social spots.

Beyond the financial allegations, the company accused the former CEO of bullying employees and creating a hostile work environment.

“The Defendant victimised several of the Plaintiff’s staff and subjected various Plaintiff’s staff who dared to challenge him to public humiliation, which led to high staff attrition,” the witness statement added.
According to the court filings, the company said a whistleblower report received on July 29, 2024, prompted an investigation by the board audit committee.

The suit stated that the board eventually let go the former CEO on November 1, 2024, after he allegedly failed to provide satisfactory explanations to the allegations levelled against him.
As of the time of filing this report, no response from the defendant had been filed before the court.

According to court filings, Amida’s severance obligations under a Mutual Separation Agreement executed following his exit from the company in November 2024 remain unpaid nearly eighteen months later.

Despite the fact that the matter commenced before the National Industrial Court since June 2025, Pan African Towers has reportedly not filed a substantive defence to indicate its refusal to fulfil the obligations in dispute. Instead, the company has pursued a preliminary objection on ground that Hamida did not comply with the mandatory provision for mediation and alternatively pursue his remedy through arbitration rather than litigation.

The matter came before Honourable Justice Essien of the National Industrial Court, Lagos Division, on Tuesday, where counsel for Pan African Towers, Mr. Mofesomo Tayo-Oyetibo with Chukwudi Nwudike and Amira Omodu urged the Court to decline jurisdiction pursuant to Clause 13A and or refere the matter to arbitration vide 13B of the Mutual Separation Agreement.

Counsel representing Amida from Pinheiro LP, Bolu Agbaje Akadri, leading Emeka Ekweozor and Ukamaka Ali opposed the application, arguing that multiple attempts had previously been made to resolve the matter, including formal demands for performance under the agreement, before the court.

During proceedings, the Court reportedly queried the absence of a substantive defence alongside the preliminary objection, describing the approach as procedurally improper before electing to hear the application.

It is Amida’s position that attempt was made in line with the Mutual Separation Agreement to have the matter resolved amicably with no success whilst reliance on arbitration which is optional under the agreement at this stage appears inconsistent with prior conduct, noting that no meaningful steps had allegedly been taken to initiate arbitration proceedings before the matter was brought before the Court.

“The substance of the dispute remains unanswered,” Amida’s states. “The concern is whether procedural manoeuvres are being deployed to postpone accountability rather than resolve the issues in contention.”

The dispute is attracting increasing attention within legal, business, and corporate governance circles due to its potential implications for executive separation agreements, contractual enforcement, and dispute resolution mechanisms within Nigeria’s corporate environment.
Observers note that the eventual outcome could influence how arbitration clauses, executive transition obligations, and post transaction disputes are approached in future corporate matters. The matter remains before the Court.