 |
| Wale Babalakin |
-AMCON Boss, Mustapha Chike-Obi's Link
The recent fight that pitched two legal luminaries – Mr. Olisa Agbakoba and Dr. Wale Babalakin - both Senior Advocates of Nigeria, against each other may appear to have settled down, but the real reasons behind the ugly incident has been unearthed. Findings by The ELITES revealed that money (a fat pay day) and ethnic consideration are directly linked to the tussle.
It will be recalled that the ownership of the ultra-modern MMA2 in Lagos, which was built and is being operated by Babalakin's Bi-Courtney's Ltd was at the heart of the imbroglio between the two legal luminaries when the Assets Management Corporation of Nigeria attempted to take it over by obtaining a court order on September 22 through its lawyer, Agbakoba, over an alleged N50bn debt.
But events took a different turn on September 29 when Justice Ibrahim Buba of the Federal High Court in Lagos described AMCON's conduct as a gross abuse of court process, and threw out the order obtained by Agbakoba to attempt to effect the receivership over the airport terminal and three other companies belonging to Babalakin.
 |
| Olisa Agbakogba |
From a legal angle, it has since been established that Agbakoba obtained the order by concealing the existence of two court orders since 2011 in suit numbers: FHC/L/CS/1305/2011 and FHC/L/CS/1306/2011, which specifically restrained the Federal Government and AMCON from interfering with the operations and finances of Bi- Courtney Limited and its other associated companies.
Findings by The ELITES revealed that it was curious if not morally questionable that the same lawyer who represents a party in the settlement of a dispute would suddenly turn around to announce himself as the receiver of the companies under dispute once the settlement agreement broke down. This, according to observers and analysts, was precisely what happened in the AMCON vs Babalakin case. Agbakoba, who is AMCON’s lawyer and who hitherto had played a central role in the settlement agreement the two parties wanted to explore before negotiations broke down in July, would have assumed the role of the receiver to MMA2 and three other companies belonging to Babalakin if the court had not restrained him.
It was the popular columnist, Tunde Fagbenle, who first gave the hint that Agbakoba’s conduct when he had the well-reported altercation with Babalakin in court last month was not just suspicious but also sent signals that there was more to it than meets the eye. In his back-page column of Sunday October 19 in PUNCH, titled Wale Babalakin vs AMCON: Come off it, the respected writer recounted media reports that trailed the encounter between the two lawyer-businessmen. From
reports, an obviously disappointed and angry Agbakoba on sighting Babalakin after the Lagos Federal High Court judge had ruled against AMCON, shouted: “Wale, give me my money. I will collect my money from you and that’s final;” and to which an astounded Babalakin merely replied: “Why do you want to ruin me? You want to kill my businesses, I will never allow you.”
 |
| Mustapha Chike-Obi |
In the article, Fagbenle then made a loaded submission which tallies with the conclusions of many analysts. He wrote: “Agbakoba’s outburst and action appear to me suggestive of interest beyond the ordinary professional calling of legal representation of his client, AMCON…”
The question that begs answers, therefore, is which money did Agbakoba referred to? Was he the one being owed in his personal capacity or AMCON who had taken over the debts that Babalakin’s companies owed banks? Does Agbakoba have the right to pronounce otherwise when a competent court has already ruled against him?
The ELITES investigations revealed that Agbakoba might indeed be referring to the expected large sum that would have accrued to him in legal fees and commission on the recovered debt if AMCON had succeeded in either getting Bi-Courtney Ltd to pay up the debt outright or reached a settlement that would have spelt out the payment terms. Sources disclosed that Agbakoba’s fees and commission from the deal could be as high as 10% of the N50bn debt, which means that the 61-year-old lawyer would have netted a cool N5bn.
Even if his commission had been 1% of the recovered sum, outside of the legal fees, according to another source, Agbakoba would still have made N500.000m “And you know there is no way that he would not have negotiated more than 1% of the total sum as his own commission if he gets Dr. Babalakin to commit to a settlement or repayment,” the source said.
Ostensibly, a N500.000m commission or a N5bn windfall, according to the source, was sufficient for a respected lawyer like Agbakoba to lose his cool outside the court and betray his desperation as to what he “stands to personally lose” if the deal was called off or the court restrained AMCON as it did.
Yet, further investigations revealed that Agbakoba’s closeness to AMCON is not just about fat financial gains but familial connections as well. Sources alleged that Agbakoba is related to the Managing Director of AMCON, Mr. Mustapha Chike-Obi, on the maternal side. “Agbakoba can do no wrong with AMCON because of the suspicion that Chike-Obi’s mother was an Agbakoba too. So you have a situation of two people with shared family interest at loggerheads with a man from a different ethnic group. Your guess is as good as mine that they may want to do everything to muscle Babalakin into submission, which is really unfair and perhaps unethical,” a source revealed.
However, while the dust over the botched attempt to take over MMA2 seems to have settled, the figure that has become recurrent and upon which the ultimate resolution of the face-off rests is N132bn.
This is the total sum that Babalakin claims is being owed Bi-Courtney Limited by the Federal Government. It is the value of the total sum lost by Bi-Courtney up till 2012 and which was duly affirmed by the court as damages awarded against the Federal Government in 2012 for breaching the concession agreement with Bi-Courtney for the construction and operation of the MMA2 terminal.
Based on allegations that there were series of breaches on the part of FG (like allowing Arik and Virgin Nigeria to operate at the International wing of the airport and running the General Aviation Terminal as a direct competitor to MMA2), Bi-Courtney had approached the arbitration committee set up as part of the concession. The committee has three representatives from the FG and three from Bi-Courtney. Bi-Courtney's argument was that it was denied the exclusivity clause that was central to the concession agreement and several revenue sources arising there-from. The sum of N132.540.580.304.00 was estimated to be the worth of the revenue that Bi-Courtney had been denied.
Subsequently, Justice G.K Olotu of the Abuja Federal High Court on April 5, 2012 gave a judgment in favour of Bi-Courtney affirming that the government owes it N132bn. It is from that amount that AMCON, which had taken over the debts Bi-Courtney owed the consortium of Banks to build the airport terminal, to net off what is being owed.
The judge also directed the Justice Minister 'being the Chief Law Officer and legal representative of the Federal government of Nigeria' to set off from the above-mentioned sum of N132bn any claims agreed with the Plaintiff/Applicant (Bi-Courtney) to be due from the Plaintiff/Applicant to any agency of the Federal Government of Nigeria, including but not limited to AMCON.
Interestingly, that judgment is yet to be appealed or vacated. And though AMCON and Bi-Courtney attempted a settlement between 2013 and July this year, the settlement negotiations broke down and the court was duly informed. Bi-Courtney lawyers insist that spurious claims that the settlement agreement was signed ought to be ignored because the conditions precedent were not fulfilled and the agreement cannot be deemed enforceable.
As the issue generates more media scrutiny, analysts are won’t to ask pertinent question arising from the situation so far: that does it not amount to victimization and witch-hunting to attempt to arm-twist an investor to service a debt that is far less than what it is being owed and when in actual fact the debts in question could not be serviced abinitio because the Federal Government breached the terms of reference.
And that is such perfidy is not addressed and court rulings are ignored with impunity, what hope do private investors and legitimate business owners have in Nigeria?
No comments:
Post a Comment