£15bn Petro Union Fraud: Attorney-General Steps In

In a significant move to safeguard Nigeria from potential fraud, the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Chief Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), has led a team of senior lawyers to represent the Federal Government at a Supreme Court hearing over the Petro Union Oil and Gas Limited case.

The development marks the first time the Federal Government was represented at such a high level since the little-known company secured a judgment from the Federal High Court in Abuja for £2.556 billion.

However, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had concluded in its investigation report that Petro Union obtained the judgment by allegedly using a Barclays Bank UK cheque to draw from an account closed five years before it was presented.

The anti-graft agency’s finding led to the ongoing prosecution of the oil company’s directors before the Federal High Court in Lagos.

The directors, Prince Kingsley Okpala, Prince Chidi Okpalaeze, Prince Emmanuel Okpalaeze, and Abayomi Kukoyi (trading as Gladstone Kukoyi & Associates), are facing a 13-count charge of conspiracy, forgery, and fraud before Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke.

Chief Fagbemi’s appearance in the controversial case is particularly notable because it demonstrates the Federal Government’s resolve to fight the March 11, 2014, court order, which directed the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Union Bank of Nigeria, the Minister of Finance, and the Attorney-General to jointly pay Petro Union the judgment amount along with 15 per cent interest per annum.

Chief Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN) led the legal team for Union Bank, while the CBN’s legal representation was headed by Damian Dodo (SAN) alongside Mrs. Olabisi Soyebo (SAN) and others.

Chief Awomolo argued an application to amend the Notice of Appeal by adding eight additional Grounds of Appeal.

While the AGF and the CBN’s lawyers supported the motion, Petro Union’s legal team opposed it.

After listening to arguments on the matter from the lawyers, the Supreme Court reserved its ruling for a later date to be communicated to the parties.

The judgment sum against the Federal Government, CBN, and Union Bank now stands at over £15 billion, including interest—exceeding 50% of Nigeria’s foreign reserves.

Legal experts have compared this situation to the infamous $10 billion Process and Industrial Development (P&ID) case.

The troubling events leading to this judgment began in 1994 when Petro Union allegedly fraudulently obtained a cheque worth £2.556 billion from a Barclays Bank branch in the UK.

The company presented this cheque at a Union Bank branch in Lagos, claiming it was for a contract related to refinery construction and the establishment of a bank.

Subsequent investigations by the CBN and Union Bank unveiled that the cheque, dated December 29, 1994, and drawn in favour of Gladstone Kukoyi & Associates, was confirmed by Barclays Bank to be counterfeit.

Barclays Bank had also indicated that Gazeaft Limited, the issuer of the bill of exchange, did not have an account with them and was not listed as a registered company in the UK.

Despite these findings, Petro Union and its agents persisted in their claims that Union Bank had received £2,556,000,000.00 on their behalf and had transferred £2,159,221,318.54 to the CBN while retaining £396,778,681.46. This led to court actions against the CBN and Union Bank based on these dubious claims.

In a concerning development, Petro Union managed to secure a judgment by presenting an alleged statement of account from the CBN, neglecting the fact that a Central Bank serves as a banker to the government and banks, not to individual companies or persons.

Following these proceedings, both the CBN and Union Bank filed appeals to overturn the judgment, particularly as evidence of fraudulent motives began to emerge during the ongoing criminal prosecution of Petro Union and its executives at the Federal High Court in Lagos.

Additionally, information already presented to the Supreme Court suggests that Petro Union may have obtained the judgments at lower courts by allegedly providing evidence that appears to be based on falsehoods, forgery, misrepresentation of facts, and concealment.

Given Nigeria’s increasing debt profile, many observers are alarmed by the prospect of this additional £15 billion ‘debt’ looming over the nation. They are looking to the Supreme Court to deliver justice in this complex matter.