Legal representatives for former minister Olu Agunloye have challenged statements made by former governor Liyel Imoke regarding the procurement and approval process of the controversial Mambilla hydroelectric power project.
The questioning focuses on Imoke’s testimony concerning the Federal Executive Council’s (FEC) decision to decline the contract. During the proceedings, Imoke maintained that he only became aware of the FEC’s refusal to approve the project after reading the minutes of a council meeting held on 21 May 2003.
Agunloye’s legal team is scrutinising this claim as part of an effort to probe the legality and the justification behind the award of the controversial Mambilla power project. The central issue revolves around whether the contract award followed standard administrative protocols or if there were lapses in communicating the council’s decisions to the relevant ministers.
Scrutiny of the 2003 FEC decision
The legal confrontation seeks to establish a clear timeline of when the various parties involved were officially notified of the FEC’s stance. By questioning Imoke’s reliance on the 2003 meeting minutes, the defence is attempting to determine if the decision-making process during that period was transparent and whether the refusal of the contract was properly documented and communicated.
The Mambilla hydroelectric project, located in Taraba State, is intended to be a critical component of Nigeria’s energy infrastructure. However, the project has been historically mired in legal disputes, procurement concerns, and significant delays. The current proceedings highlight the long-standing tensions regarding how the project was initially structured and approved.
Imoke’s assertion that he derived his knowledge of the council’s deliberation from the May 2003 minutes has raised questions about the official notification procedures used by the government at the time. The legal team for Agunloye is looking to verify if the lack of direct communication regarding the FEC’s refusal contributed to the administrative complications that have dogged the project for decades.
The court is expected to continue examining the official records from the 2003 deliberations to resolve the discrepancies in the testimonies provided. The outcome of this legal battle will likely clarify the accountability of officials involved in the project’s early stages and may influence how past government contract approvals are reviewed in future legal challenges.
Explore more News stories from Business Elites Africa.
