The Nation Newspaper

Tag: NIMASA

  • NIMASA: NLNG’s demand of N101b an affront to judicial system

    NIMASA: NLNG’s demand of N101b an affront to judicial system

    Despite the decision of the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency ( NIMASA ) to challenge the judgment of a Federal High Court declaring its collection of some money from the Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas (NLNG) Limited as illegal, the liquefied gas giant is asking for a refund of $315 million, writes EMEKA UGWUANYI.

    The Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) has appealed the judgment of the Federal High Court, Lagos in the matter between Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas (NLNG), Attorney General of the Federation, Global West Vessels Specialists Ltd and NIMASA.

    The agency filed the appeal with an application to stay the execution of the judgment and restrain NLNG, pending the determination of the appeal. The appeal – and stay – was filed even before receiving the Certified True Copy of the judgment 14 days after it was delivered in line with legal provisions. This proactive step of the Agency was taken to forestall any negative action, yet the NLNG ignored this court action and commenced a media trial.

    In the grounds of Appeal by NIMASA’s legal team, the agency complained that the learned trial Judge erred when in breach of NIMASA’s constitutional and fundamental right to fair hearing refused to consider and pronounce on its arguments, on the issues for determination and its counter claim filed in opposition to the amended originating summons.

    It also complained  that the learned trial Judge erred in law in entertaining and granting the reliefs contained in NLNG’s amended originating summons wrongly used to commence the proceedings without converting it to a writ of summons, ordering pleadings and calling on the parties to lead oral evidence to prove their cases since their affidavits were irreconcilliably in conflict.

    The legal team noted that the above grounds led to the error of the court which occasioned miscarriage of justice to NIMASA.

    NIMASA stated that the demand of N101 billion from it as the judgment debt by the NLNG, after becoming aware of the agency’s appeal is wrong and considered an affront to Nigeria’s judicial system.  NLNG should allow the law take its full course and stop the media trial of a dispute that is before the court.

    According to the Director-General of the agency, Dr. Dakuku Peterside, “We feel there is an orchestrated publicity campaign to wrongly sway public opinion on the judgment. We therefore wish to reiterate that all levies and dues NIMASA collects are in line with the Act setting up the agency which is later in time to the NLNG Act, which makes the payment of NIMASA’s statutory levies enforceable on all NLNG vessels”.

    NLNG last week issued a demand notice for the sum of $315,598,823.29 judgment debt to NIMASA.

    The sum, it said, represents the payments made under protest to the Agency by NLNG since 2013, as well as direct and shipping losses incurred by NLNG due to the initial two-day blockade of the Bonny Channel by NIMASA in May 2013.

    The General Manager, External Relations, Kudo Eresia-Eke,  said the development followed the decision on October 3, 2017 by the Federal High Court, Lagos that NLNG was not liable to make the said payments to NIMASA, and that all such payments already made by NLNG to NIMASA should be refunded forthwith.

    The court presided over by Justice M. B. Idris further held that NIMASA was wrong in blockading the Bonny Channel for the purpose of enforcing the payments against NLNG.

    Eresia-Eke said: “The Federal High Court ruling transcends being simply a legal victory for NLNG. It must be viewed for what it really is: A resounding message from Nigeria to the global investment community. The message is that we can be trusted to keep our sovereign word and that Nigeria remains open for business, partnership and investments.”

    NIMASA had alleged that NLNG was liable to pay  three percent gross freight  levy on its international inbound and outbound cargo, Sea Protection Levy, two percent cabotage surcharge as well as other sundry claims, all of  which NLNG disputed.

    NLNG, in 2013 filed the case at the Federal High Court against NIMASA, seeking a judicial determination on, among other things, the legality or otherwise of the levies sought to be imposed on NLNG by NIMASA, and the consequent blockade of the Bonny Channel by NIMASA and its agent as a result of the dispute.

    NLNG had also sought a court order restraining NIMASA from further blockade of the channel.   An Interim Injunction granted in favour of NLNG by the Federal High Court was disobeyed by NIMASA, which again blockaded the Bonny Channel over a three week period while the matter was pending, thereby preventing NLNG vessels and other vessels doing business with the Company from entry and exit through the Channel.

    On the day the judgment was given, Peterside expressed the agency’s dissatisfaction with the judgment of Justice Idris.

    Six years before the crisis blew open in 2013, the leadership of NIMASA ‘pursued’ the NLNG Limited for levies, which Africa’s premier LNG company saw no legal basis for.

    In June 2013, after NIMASA blockaded its vessels from taking liquefied gas to its customers overseas, NLNG ran to the court again.

    Before that, the Federal Government set up a mediation committee in May 2013, with the then Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice Adoke Bello as the panel’s legal adviser. An agreement was reached that NLNG should pay the outstanding levies from September 2009.

    It paid $20 million in protest and approached the court for a judicial interpretation of the dispute.

    On September 19, 2013, the court started a process for the ‘proper interpretation’ the relevant sections of the enabling laws of both parties.

    NIMASA did not just keep quiet after NLNG returned to court in a suit in which NIMASA was not joined as a party. The Nation learnt NIMASA was not joined because its Act says it must be given prior notice before being a party in a suit.

    The second 2013 blockade by the waterways police led to the NLNG agreeing to pay NIMASA $140 million. It said the payment was in protest. The filings in court make interesting reading for anyone interested in the uses and abuses of power, the dilemmas caused by ambiguous laws and the tactics parties have been compelled to employ to outsmart each other. They also show the need for laws not to be written in ambiguous language.

    The NLNG/NIMASA saga began in 2007 when the maritime regulator expected NLNG to start paying levies. By NIMASA’s calculation, NLNG’s tax holiday lapsed in 2007. NLNG saw no sense in NIMASA’s claim. As far as it is concerned, the Act setting it up exempts it from NIMASA’s levies. NIMASA says it has always acted in line with its enabling law.

    Section 15(a) of the NIMASA Act 2007 stipulates: “The agency shall be funded by monies accruing to the agency from the following sources: 3 per cent of gross freight on all international inbound and outbound cargo from ships or shipping companies operating in Nigeria to be collected and paid over to the agency to meet its operational cost.”

    Section 2(2) of the Act states that exemptions are only granted to “war ships and military patrol ships”.

    NIMASA says NLNG vessels do not fall within those exempted from the levies and that the tax holiday granted it was time-bound.

    The NLNG Act 2004 predates the NIMASA Act 2007. Section 7(7) of the NLNG Act 2004 states: “No export duties, taxes, or other duties, levies, charges, or imposts of a similar nature shall be payable or imposed on the exports of liquefied natural gas or other hydrocarbons produced by the company.”

    To add to the confusion, paragraph 3, Schedule 2 of the NLNG Act states: “Neither the company nor its stakeholders shall in any way be subject to new laws, regulations, taxes, duties, imposts or charges of whatever nature which are not applicable generally to companies incorporated in Nigeria.”

    Yet, according to NIMASA Act 2007, it has right to collect levies from ships and small ships “registered in Nigeria and also to ships, small ships and crafts flying a foreign flag in the exclusive economic zone, territorial and inland seas, inland waterways and in the ports of the Federal Republic of Nigeria”.

    It also collects levies from shipping companies/ship operators, manning agents and seafarers on the government’s behalf. It is with these funds generated that the agency develops and polices the maritime sector. NIMASA does not receive any government allocations, said a source.

    The incentives granted NLNG, said NIMASA, are not meant to be in perpetuity. The agency points at Section 2 of the NLNG Act which limits the tax holiday of the company to 10 years or when the cumulative average sales price of the liquefied natural gas reaches $3 in million metric British Thermal Units (MMBTU).

    NIMASA said its market intelligence shows that as at January 2004, which was the fifth anniversary of the production of the NLNG, the milestone for the expiration of the exemption period had been surpassed by 200 per cent.

    By July 12, 2013 when the NLNG agreed to pay to NIMASA, the company said it has lost over N76 billion ($475 million).

    With NIMASA’s challenge of Justice Idris’ judgment, another chapter in battle has just begun. It is not clear when it will another.

  • NLNG demands $315m refund from NIMASA

    NLNG demands $315m refund from NIMASA

    Despite the decision of the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) to challenge the judgment of a Federal High Court declaring its collection of some money from the Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas (NLNG) Limited as illegal, the liquefied gas giant is asking for a refund of $315 million, writes EMEKA UGWUANYI.

    The management of Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas Limited (NLNG) has issued a demand notice for $315,598,823.29 judgment debt to the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA).

    The sum represents the payments made under protest to the Agency by the NLNG since 2013, as well as direct and shipping losses incurred by NLNG due to the initial two-day blockade of the Bonny Channel by NIMASA in May 2013.

    The General Manager, External Relations, Kudo Eresia-Eke,  said the development followed the decision on October 3, 2017 by the Federal High Court, Lagos that NLNG was not liable to make the said payments to NIMASA, and that all such payments already made by NLNG to NIMASA should be refunded forthwith.

    The court, presided over by Justice M. B. Idris, held that NIMASA was wrong in blockading the Bonny Channel for the purpose of enforcing the payments against NLNG.

    Eresia-Eke said: “The Federal High Court ruling transcends being simply a legal victory for NLNG. It must be viewed for what it really is: A resounding message from Nigeria to the global investment community. The message is that we can be trusted to keep our sovereign word and that Nigeria remains open for business, partnership and investments.”

    NIMASA had alleged that NLNG was liable to pay  three percent gross freight  levy on its international inbound and outbound cargo, Sea Protection Levy, two percent cabotage surcharge as well as other sundry claims, all of  which NLNG disputed.

    NLNG, in 2013 filed the case at the Federal High Court against NIMASA, seeking a judicial determination on, among other things, the legality or otherwise of the levies sought to be imposed on NLNG by NIMASA, and the consequent blockade of the Bonny Channel by NIMASA and its agent as a result of the dispute.

    NLNG had also sought a Court Order restraining NIMASA from further blockade of the Channel.   An Interim Injunction granted in favour of NLNG by the Federal High Court was disobeyed by NIMASA, which again blockaded the Bonny Channel over a three week period while the matter was pending, thereby preventing NLNG vessels and other vessels doing business with the Company from entry and exit through the Channel.

    On the day the judgment was given, NIMASA Director-General Dr Dakuku Peterside expressed the agency’s dissatisfaction with the decision of Justice Idris.

    A statement by the agency’s spokesman, Isichei Osamgbi, said: “Consequently, Dr Dakuku has stated the management’s intention to appeal the judgment. The agency’s legal team are waiting for the certified true copy of the judgment, which we will study and respond as appropriate.”

    The problem predated Peterside. It started in 2013 when the agency requested the NLNG to pay all statutory levies accruable to the agency, including the 3% levy on gross freight on inbound and outbound international cargo, 2% Cabotage levy and Sea Protection levy. NIMASA insisted that the NLNG was not exempted from payments of statutory levies after its tax holiday ended.

    “NIMASA has portfolios of statutory revenues that it collects from shipping companies/ship operators, manning agents and seafarers. This the agency pays into the coffers of the government. It is within these funds generated that the agency uses to develop and police the maritime sector. NIMASA does not receive any government allocations,” said the agency.

    Six years before the crisis blew open in 2013, the leadership of NIMASA ‘pursued’ the NLNG Limited for levies, which Africa’s premier LNG company saw no legal basis for.

    In June 2013, after NIMASA blockaded its vessels from taking liquefied gas to its customers overseas, NLNG ran to the court again.

    Before that, the Federal Government set up a mediation committee in May 2013, with the then Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice Adoke Bello as the panel’s legal adviser. An agreement was reached that NLNG should pay the outstanding levies from September 2009.

    It paid $20 million in protest and approached the court for a judicial interpretation of the dispute.

    On September 19, 2013, the court started a process for the ‘proper interpretation’ the relevant sections of the enabling laws of both parties.

    NIMASA did not just keep quiet after NLNG returned to court in a suit in which NIMASA was not joined as a party. The Nation learnt NIMASA was not joined because its Act says it must be given prior notice before being a party in a suit.

    The second 2013 blockade by the waterways police led to the NLNG agreeing to pay NIMASA $140 million. It said the payment was in protest. The filings in court make interesting reading for anyone interested in the uses and abuses of power, the dilemmas caused by ambiguous laws and the tactics parties have been compelled to employ to outsmart each other. They also show the need for laws not to be written in ambiguous language.

    The NLNG/NIMASA saga began in 2007 when the maritime regulator expected NLNG to start paying levies. By NIMASA’s calculation, NLNG’s tax holiday lapsed in 2007. NLNG saw no sense in NIMASA’s claim. As far as it is concerned, the Act setting it up exempts it from NIMASA’s levies. NIMASA says it has always acted in line with its enabling law.

    Section 15(a) of the NIMASA Act 2007 stipulates: “The agency shall be funded by monies accruing to the agency from the following sources: 3 per cent of gross freight on all international inbound and outbound cargo from ships or shipping companies operating in Nigeria to be collected and paid over to the agency to meet its operational cost.”

    Section 2(2) of the Act states that exemptions are only granted to “war ships and military patrol ships”.

    NIMASA says NLNG vessels do not fall within those exempted from the levies and that the tax holiday granted it was time-bound.

    The NLNG Act 2004 predates the NIMASA Act 2007. Section 7(7) of the NLNG Act 2004 states: “No export duties, taxes, or other duties, levies, charges, or imposts of a similar nature shall be payable or imposed on the exports of liquefied natural gas or other hydrocarbons produced by the company.”

    To add to the confusion, paragraph 3, Schedule 2 of the NLNG Act states: “Neither the company nor its stakeholders shall in any way be subject to new laws, regulations, taxes, duties, imposts or charges of whatever nature which are not applicable generally to companies incorporated in Nigeria.”

    Yet, according to NIMASA Act 2007, it has right to collect levies from ships and small ships “registered in Nigeria and also to ships, small ships and crafts flying a foreign flag in the exclusive economic zone, territorial and inland seas, inland waterways and in the ports of the Federal Republic of Nigeria”.

    It also collects levies from shipping companies/ship operators, manning agents and seafarers on the government’s behalf. It is with these funds generated that the agency develops and polices the maritime sector. NIMASA does not receive any government allocations, said a source.

    The incentives granted NLNG, said NIMASA, are not meant to be in perpetuity. The agency points at Section 2 of the NLNG Act which limits the tax holiday of the company to 10 years or when the cumulative average sales price of the liquefied natural gas reaches $3 in million metric British Thermal Units (MMBTU).

    NIMASA said its market intelligence shows that as at January 2004, which was the fifth anniversary of the production of the NLNG, the milestone for the expiration of the exemption period had been surpassed by 200 per cent.

    By July 12, 2013 when the NLNG agreed to pay to NIMASA, the company said it has lost over N76 billion ($475 million).

    In a statement by its General Manager, External Relations Kudo Eresia-Eke, the then NLNG Managing Director, Mr. Babs Omotowa, said: “We feel we have no other option than to now make these payments under protest. In doing this, we have taken into account the overriding national interest; in particular to stem the huge financial and reputation loss the country has suffered as a reliable LNG supplier, a destination for foreign investment and a nation of the rule of law.

    “NLNG still strongly believes that it has a very strong case to be exempted from the NIMASA levies under the terms of the NLNG Act and will continue with its substantive case in court to obtain a judicial determination of whether or not such levies are due to be paid. It is for this reason that the payments that NLNG is making will be made on an ‘under protest’ basis.

    “Our position has nothing to do with how much NLNG is being charged by a relevant agency but with the legality or otherwise of such a charge or levy, in order for us to ensure that all our payments are made within the ambit of what is lawful.

    “As a law abiding company, NLNG has always paid its taxes, including those due after its tax holidays since 2009. It therefore has no issues with legally required tax payments but with levies, from which it is clearly exempt by virtue of the NLNG Act.”

    NIMASA accused NLNG of twisting the truth. It said contrary to NLNG’s claim, it did not flout any court order as it was not a party to the court case that led to the 2013 exparte injunction by the Federal High Court, sitting in Lagos.

    It said it was unfair of the NLNG to claim being a Federal Government agency, because of the 49 per cent shareholding. NLNG, said NIMASA, is a limited liability company incorporated under the Nigerian laws with majority shareholding by foreign entities and should pay all levies set out by the law.

    A truce was brokered by NLNG’s counsel Olawale Akoni (SAN) through letters dated July 5 and July 12, 2013.

    The July 12, 2013 letter said: “Subject to NLNG continuing to make payment for all applicable NIMASA levies (three per cent NIMASA levies and Sea Protection levy), NIMASA undertakes not to detain NLNG-owned or chartered vessels.

    “NLNG undertakes to pay outstanding levies attributable to the Freight on Board (FoB) and Cabotage vessels if they fail to make payment within three months of the date of this letter.

    “Going forward, NIMASA is at liberty to collect these levies directly from the FOB and Cabotage vessels without further recourse to NLNG.”

    According to the letter, signed by Omotowa, the NLNG had already made payment of $20million to NIMASA for the three per cent NIMASA levy.

    Said the letter: “This sum will be deducted from the amount stated as due in your (NIMASA) letter. As agreed between NIMASA and NLNG, an oral application shall be made to the court by our lawyers which shall not be opposed by NIMASA lawyers and other lawyers in the ongoing suit to allow for the above payments to be made.”

    Mike Igbokwe (SAN), who was NIMASA’s lawyer, told the court about the agreement in July 2013, asking that the letters be adopted by the court as consent order.

    Igbokwe said: “My Lord, there have been some positive developments in respect of this suit and the applicants which had led to exchange of correspondence and telephone discussions between the plaintiff (NLNG), the first defendant (Attorney-General) and NIMASA and which were conveyed to the second defendant (Global West) counsel.

    “The discussions involved counsel for all parties. I have before me a letter dated 12th July 2013, written to NIMASA by the plaintiff containing the agreement that had been reached between the plaintiff and NIMASA which the Attorney-General and Global West had already been informed about. “We have agreed that the contents of this letter which NIMASA and the plaintiff intend to start implementing today should form the basis of a consent order to be made by the Honourable Court.

    “On the basis of the letter, we urge the court to make a consent order. On behalf of the plaintiff, I confirm that the parties have had discussions and there have been exchange of correspondence.”

    Justice Idris Mohammed said: “The letters dated July 5, 2013 and July 12, 2013 are hereby made the consent order of this court.”

    Now, NLNG has won in court and wants all the money it has paid returned to it. By its calculation, $315m has so far been paid. Though it is not clear if notice of appeal is tantamount to stay of execution, NIMASA certainly will not just give in. With its decision to challenge Justice Idris’ judgment, the end of the matter is not here. Chances that the Supreme Court will end it all are very high. That may take some more years.

  • Akpobolokemi ordered to explain role in alleged N2.6b fraud

    Akpobolokemi ordered to explain role in alleged N2.6b fraud

    A Federal High Court in Lagos has ordered a former Director-General of the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA), Patrick Akpobolokemi, to explain his role in an alleged N2.6billion fraud.

    Justice Ibrahim Buba overruled and dismissed the ‘no case’ submission filed by Akpobolokemi and five other co-defendants.

    The other defendants are: Ezekiel Agaba, Ekene Nwakuche, Governor Juan and two firms, Blockz and Stonz Ltd and Al-Kenzo Logistic Ltd.

    The judge ordered them to enter their defence on October 30.

    Justice Buba said the arguments on the no-case submission by defence counsel, Joseph Nwobike SAN, was without merit.

    He upheld the argument of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) through its counsel Rotimi Oyedepo that a prima facie case had been established against the defendants.

    Justice Buba held: “From the evidence of the first prosecution witness, it is well established that all the defendants have a case to answer.

    “The exhibits tendered and testimonies of other witnesses have established that there is a prima facie case against the defendants. I see no merit in this application. This application lacks merit, so, it is overruled. The defendants should open their defence to prove their innocence”.

    On December 4, 2015 the EFCC arraigned the defendants on a 22-count charge of diverting N2.6b from NIMASA coffers between December 2013 and May 2015.

    The anti-graft agency claimed that the funds were approved by ex-President Goodluck Jonathan for the implementation of a security project.

    The alleged offences contravene Section 8 (a) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006.

    The defendants pleaded not guilty.

    The prosecution closed its case after calling 12 witnesses.

    But the defendants, rather than open their defence, filed no-case submissions, claiming that the EFCC failed to link their clients with the alleged funds diversion.

    Specifically, Nwobike said Akpobolokemi could not be liable because ex-President Jonathan, and not Akpobolokemi, approved the security project and the money disbursed.

    Other defendants’ counsel, Mr. Seni Adio (SAN), Ige Asemudara and Emeka Onyeke similarly urged the court to hold that the prosecution failed to link their clients to the alleged crime.

    But opposing the application, the prosecution maintained that the testimonies of the 12 witnesses called and the 77 exhibits tendered had successfully linked Akpobolokemi and others to the alleged fraud.

    Oyedepo argued that Akpobolokemi, as head and chief accounting officer of NIMASA at the time of the alleged fraud, could not “by any stretch of imagination, claim to be innocent.”

    He said even though it was ex-President Jonathan who approved the security project and sanctioned the disbursement of the funds, Akpobolokemi was the head of NIMASA who constituted a committee to handle the project and also approved funds for the activities of the committee.

  • Niger Delta: Every part of the country matters – Osinbajo

    Niger Delta: Every part of the country matters – Osinbajo

    VICE President Yemi Osinbajo assured that Niger Delta people will benefit maximally from the wealth and natural resources of their land.

    He said every part of the country mattered to the President Muhammadu Buhari administration.

    Osinbajo spoke yesterday on Bonny Island, the headquarters of Bonny Local Government Area of Rivers State while inaugurating the construction of the strategic 40-kilometre Bonny-Bodo-Ogoni Road, conceived by the Gen. Yakubu Gowon’s regime but abandoned.

    The road is to be jointly financed by the Federal Government and the Bonny-based Nigerian Liquefied Natural Gas (NLNG) Company Limited.

    The vice president, who arrived Port Harcourt International Airport, Omagwa at 12:05 p.m., was accompanied by Minister of Power, Works and Housing Babatunde Fashola; senator representing Rivers Southeast Senator Magnus Abe and Director-General of the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) Dr Dakuku Peterside.

    Cross River State Governor Ben Ayade received Prof. Osinbajo at the airport with Secretary to the Rivers State Government (SSG) Chief Kenneth Kobani.

    In Bonny, Osinbajo said: “November 1 will make it exactly one year after Niger Delta leaders, under the aegis of the Pan-Niger Delta Forum (PANDEF) met with President Muhammadu Buhari, where he discussed the new vision of his administration with them.

    “On my own part, I have toured many Niger Delta communities to tell them about the new vision of the present administration, ably led by President Buhari.

    Yemi Osinbajo at Niger Delta
    Vice President, Prof. Osinbajo was welcomed by Cross River State Governor Ben Ayade at the Airport

    “Under the new vision, the people of Niger Delta will benefit maximally from the wealth that comes from their land. Every part of Nigeria matters to us as a government. What this country produces will be enough for all of us, if we manage the resources prudently.”

    The vice president also stated that the new road would create jobs in and around Bonny and Bodo communities.

    He said: “This road will create jobs for engineers, it will create jobs for artisans and it will create jobs for food vendors. The construction of this road will transform a lot of lives in and around Bonny and Bodo communities.

    “The construction of this road will alleviate the suffering of many travellers to and from Bonny Island. I rejoice with the people of Bonny and Bodo over the flag-off of the construction of this road project.”

    Rivers State Governor Nyesom Wike reiterated that over the years, residents of Bonny were yearning for the construction of the road to link the coastal community with the upland areas of the state.

    Wike was represented by Deputy Governor Ipalibo Harry-Banigo.

    Fashola said: “This 40-kilometre Bonny-Bodo Road will have three bridges in between. A 1,000-metre bridge will across Ogbogbo Creek, a 640-metre bridge will be against Nabie Creek, and a 550-metre bridge will be against the Ake Creek.”

  • Court rules on Akpobolokemi’s no-case submission October 16

    Court rules on Akpobolokemi’s no-case submission October 16

    A Federal High Court in Lagos has fixed October 16 for ruling on the no-case submission made by former Director-General of the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA), Patrick Akpobolokemi and five others.

    Justice Ibrahim Buba fixed the date on Friday after hearing arguments on the no-case submission by the defence counsel, Mr. Joseph Nwobike (SAN).

    The accused persons were arraigned by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on December 4, 2015 for allegedly diverting N2.6 billion from the coffers of NIMASA between December 2013 and May 2015.

    The EFCC claimed that the funds were approved by ex-President Goodluck Jonathan for the implementation of a security project.

    Also charged with Akpobolokemi were – Ezekiel Agaba, Ekene Nwakuche, Governor Juan, Blockz and Stonz Limited and Al-Kenzo Logistic Limited.

    The accused people had pleaded not guilty to the 22 charges pressed against them.

    The prosecution had opened its case and during trial, called 12 witnesses and tendered 77 exhibits in a bid to establish prima- facie case against the accused persons.

    After the prosecution closed its case, the accused, through their lawyers, filed no-case submissions, contending that the prosecution failed to established a prima-facie case against them to warrant their entering any defence.

    Arguing Akpobolokemi’s no-case submission, Nwobike contended that the EFCC failed to link his client with the alleged diversion of funds from NIMASA.

    Nwobike pointed out that his signature to such effect was never shown to the court.

    The counsel said the first accused could not be held liable because he did not approve the security project and the money disbursed.

    Nwobike also described the evidence given against the accused by the prosecution witness as mere hearsay, which he said, had no legal weight before the court.

    He, therefore, urged the court to come to the conclusion that the first accused could not be called upon to enter any defence because no prima-facie case had been established against him.

    In response, the EFCC counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo, maintained that the testimonies of the 12 witnesses and the 77 exhibits tendered had successfully linked Akpobolokemi to the alleged fraud.

    He argued that being the head and chief accounting officer of NIMASA at the time of the alleged fraud, Akpobolokemi could not by any stretch of imagination claim to be innocent.

    He argued that even if it was the former President that approved the security project, Akpobolokemi was the head of NIMASA at the time, who constituted a committee to handle the project and also approved funds.

    He submitted that the prosecution had established that rather than its intended purpose, the funds were illegally converted to the personal use of the accused.

    NAN

  • NLNG wins suit against NIMASA over statutory levies

    NLNG wins suit against NIMASA over statutory levies

    •Dakuku: we’ll appeal verdict

    A Federal High Court sitting in Lagos yesterday delivered judgment in favour of Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas Limited (NLNG) in a case against Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) over applicability of levies.

    NLNG General Manager, External Relations Kudo Eresia-Eke said this yesterday in a statement.

    Eresia-Eke said NIMASA had alleged that NLNG was liable to pay three per cent gross freight  on its international inbound and outbound cargo, Sea Protection Levy, two per cent cabotage surcharge on all activities carried out for and on its behalf, as well as other sundry claims – all of which NLNG disputed.

    In his judgment, Justice M.B. Idris held inter alia that NLNG was not liable to make the said payments to NIMASA and that all such payments already made by NLNG to NIMASA should be refunded to NLNG forthwith.

    Justice Idris said NIMASA was wrong in blockading the Bonny Channel for the purpose of enforcing the payments against NLNG.

    NLNG, in 2013, filed the case at the Federal High Court against NIMASA, seeking a judicial determination on, among other things, the legality or otherwise of the levies sought to be imposed on NLNG by NIMASA, and the consequent blockade of the Bonny Channel by NIMASA and its agents as a result of the dispute.

    NLNG had also sought a court order restraining NIMASA from further blockade of the channel.

    An interim injunction granted in favour of NLNG by the Federal High Court was disobeyed by NIMASA, which again effected a blockade of the Bonny Channel for over a three-week period while the matter was pending.

    The action prevented NLNG vessels and other vessels doing business with the company from gaining entry and exit through the channel.

    NIMASA filed a counterclaim, restating its entitlement to receive payment of the levies from NLNG.

    However, the Federal High Court judgment reinforces NLNG’s position that by the provisions of the applicable laws, the company was not subject to payment to NIMASA of the three per cent gross freight as well as the Sea Protection Levy.

    It said the two per cent Cabotage Levy was inapplicable because NLNG’s vessels are not involved in coastal trade or cabotage.  This decision also affirmed the sanctity of the guarantees and assurances conferred on the company and its shareholders by the Federal Government, on the strength of which the shareholders made their investments from which the country has reaped immense returns.

    NLNG said as a law-abiding company and a good corporate citizen, it was committed to conducting its business in accordance with the laws.

    But NIMASA Director General Dr. Dakuku Peterside yesterday expressed the agency’s dissatisfaction with the judgment.

    Consequently, Dakuku said his management would appeal the judgment.

    He noted that “the agency’s legal team is waiting for the certified true copy of the judgment, which we will study and respond as appropriate”.

    NIMASA, while requesting NLNG to pay all statutory levies in 2013, said the NLNG was not exempted from payments of statutory levies after its tax holiday ended many years ago.

    NIMASA has portfolios of statutory revenues that it collects from shipping companies/ship operators, manning agents and seafarers. This the agency pays into the coffers of the government. It is within these funds generated that the agency uses to develop and police the maritime sector. NIMASA does not receive any government allocations.

     

  • NIMASA’s worthy example

    While government institutions should be about serving the people and not mainly for profit making, logic also says that such institutions should strive not to operate at a loss. However, over the recent years, many Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) in the country seem to have worn the toga of revenue drains.

    But recently, two agencies – Joint Admissions Matriculation Board (JAMB) and Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) – broke the evil jinx and actually made reasonable contributions to the federal purse.

    It’s easy to understand JAMB’s profitability. With Nigeria’s huge youth population, coupled with the hunger for education, it was expected to deliver more earning to the treasury as citizens embrace it. NIMASA of course, given its mandate and the virility of Nigeria’s maritime space, is also expected to make good revenue. But before this current dispensation, these two agencies were not profitable.

    And so when the Federal Government via the Ministry of Finance and the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation recently commended NIMASA for its revenue performance in the past one year, it came to many Nigerians as a pleasant surprise.

    While addressing a conference on compliance with the Fiscal Responsibility Act in Abuja, Finance Minister Kemi Adeosun, had singled out and commended NIMASA as one of the agencies doing well in terms of revenue generation and remittances to the federal government’s Treasury Single Account (TSA). Though she didn’t mention the figures then, NIMASA later declared that it remitted N9.975bn and $46.025 million in 2016 as against N4.955bn remitted in 2015.

    Truth is, Nigerians have always known many government institutions as mere conduits for corruption. That Adeosun made NIMASA the poster boy for the MDAs should not come as a surprise to industry watchers. And now, following this development, the federal government wants to probe the previous heads of both NIMASA and JAMB regarding their revenue drive.

    “Unlike NIMASA and the Joint Admission Matriculation Board (JAMB), some agencies and departments are operating in such a manner that returned minimal funds to government,” said Adeosun.

    “To this effect, a circular has been issued restricting allowable expenses in line with reforms occurring across government businesses, as compliance checks would be undertaken regularly to ensure that all agencies and departments adhere to the new requirements.”

    Mrs Adeosun also noted that the current management of NIMASA has introduced processes that blocked loopholes and thus increased revenue generation, subsequently improving its reputation and leading to confidence from stakeholders in the maritime sector.

    Tagging along with Adeosun’s position was the Accountant-General of the Federation (AGF), Ahmed Idris, who commended NIMASA.

    He said: “It was also the first time in recent years that NIMASA will remit huge revenue into the government coffers.”

    Idris also urged other MDAs to be more creative in their revenue generation drive so as to meet their targets and collectively earn revenue to fund the 2017 budget.

    If the transformation at NIMASA appears as magic, it may simply mean that the Director General, Dakuku Peterside, is a magician. But his magic of increased revenue generation most probably lies in identifying and blocking loopholes responsible for siphoning of government funds, thereby improving its reputation which ensures confidence from stakeholders in the maritime sector.

    Even though the current management reduced its operational cost, it generated more money at six months than it did in the past two years. What was different? This time, the major difference would appear to be infusion of new ideas by the Peterside-led management.

    Since the President appointed Peterside as NIMASA Director-General on March 10, 2016, Peterside had always reiterated that the maritime sector, if properly harnessed, can successfully fund a huge component of the total budgetary requirement of the country.  And aside being recognised for transforming NIMASA and increasing the agency’s contributions to Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF), Peterside has been recognised on other fronts.

    In April this year at the third conference of the Association of Africa Maritime Administrations, AAMA, in Abuja, Peterside was unanimously elected first President of AAMA at the end of the conference, putting Nigeria atop Africa’s maritime podium.

    And recently, Peterside informed stakeholders at a forum in Lagos that the agency has begun the automation of all its processes in order to allow for probity and accountability.

    He also disclosed that the agency had devolved more powers to its zonal offices to allow for early conclusion of transactions to ultimately plug revenue leakages and that NIMASA is now operating 24 hours in line with the Ease of Doing Business initiative of the federal government.

    NIMASA has also concluded plans to disburse $100 million Cabotage Vessel Financing Fund (CVFF) to indigenous ship owners at a single digit interest. Peterside disclosed this last month during a stakeholders’ session organised by the Nigerian Ship Finance Conference and Exhibition, NISFCOE. With the high interest in the country, this move will boost stakeholder confidence.

    “We would match the CVFF fund with some money coming from the financial institutions”, Peterside had said.

    “This will crash the rate of borrowing, and that is why we are passionate about disbursing CVFF to bring our own funds to come almost at the cost of nothing and match it with their own fund coming at the rate of 25 percent. The first thing that would happen is that the rate would crash from 25 percent to a one digit interest rate.”

    “CVFF is lying at the Central Bank of Nigeria under TSA arrangement, we are working hard to disburse it, and it is over a hundred million dollars. We are in talks with the Central Bank of Nigeria; we want to change the terms of trade from Free-on-board (FOB) to Cost-Insurance and Freights (CIF), but how many persons are prepared for this regime? If we get NNPC to change the terms of trade and we are getting the support of the Presidency, if we get it changed, how many of us are ready?”

    That Nigeria has potential and virile leaders to make her truly a great on the world platform is a fact. The way it stands now, parties profiting from the hitherto lackadaisical operation mode at NIMASA will not be happy at the change there. Those voices must not be considered as the agency is for not for the profiteering of cabals but for the good of all Nigerians. So far, Peterside’s strides at NIMASA have earned him commendations from both President Muhammadu Buhari and Vice President Yemi Osinbajo. NIMASA and the country need such people.

     

    • Odafe writes from Lagos.

  • NIMASA pays N9.975b, $38m into Consolidated Revenue Fund

    The Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) has within one year and one month contributed N9.975 billion to the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF). Within this period, the agency has also paid $38,272,12.12 million to the CRF, The Nation has learnt.

    The agency on June 1, last year paid N5 billion into the CRF as “part payment of operating surplus for 2015 and 2016”. It followed up on June 2, last year with N4.975b “payment made into the CRF 2016 operating surplus”.

    The agency paid $7 million on November 22, last year as “part payment of 2016 operating surplus”. On April 19, this year, NIMASA made another payment – $15 million  – to the CRF.

    The agency on July 18 paid $16.272.121.12 million into the CRF as “payment of 2017 operating surplus”.

    Minister of Finance Kemi Adeosun on September 13 praised the management of the agency, led by Dr. Dakuku Peterside, for shoring up its contributions to the federal purse. She also praised the Joint Admissions and Matriculations Board (JAMB) for contributing N5 billion to the CRF this year, adding that this was a giant leap from the N3 million yearly highest ever contribution from the agency.

    She did not give the amount contributed by NIMASA.

    Mrs. Adeosun, who spoke at a workshop in Abuja on compliance with the Fiscal Responsibility (FRA) Act, said the management of NIMASA brought down operational cost and was able to generate more money by half year than it did in the two preceding years.

    ”Unlike NIMASA and the Joint Admission and Matriculation Board (JAMB), some Agencies and Departments are operating in such a manner that returned minimal funds to government. To this effect, a circular has been issued restricting allowable expenses in line with reforms occurring across government businesses, as compliance checks would be undertaken regularly to ensure that all Agencies and Departments adhere to the new requirements.”

    The Accountant General of the Federation (AGF), Mr. Ahmed Idris, also said despite the general downturn in accruable revenue to government due to the economic situation, the remittances to the CRF by NIMASA this year had been the highest by the Agency in recent years.

    “It was also the first time in recent years that NIMASA will remit huge revenue into the government coffers,” he said.

    For 2015, NIMASA’s contributions to the CRF was only N2 billion and $15m. There was also the payment of $24,025, 017.90, described as “direct debit by CBN on NIMASA accounts”. About half of 2015 was under the Dr. Goodluck Jonathan administration. President Muhammadu Buhari appointed Peterside as director-general on March 10, 2016.

  • NIMASA… What has changed since Buhari took over

    NIMASA… What has changed since Buhari took over

    Minister of Finance Mrs Kemi Adeosun has revealed that the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) and the Joint Admissions and Matriculations Board (JAMB) have remitted more money to government coffers than they previously did. The minister said JAMB paid N5b this year. She was silent on what NIMASA paid. Facts available to The Nation show that NIMASA within one year and one month paid N9.975b and $37,272,12m into the Consolidated Revenue Fund. OLUKOREDE YISHAU looks at what has changed in NIMASA to warrant this leap.

    The Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) was seen as the home of free funds. Revelations in court have shown how some people got money for work either not done or done half way. Witnesses’ accounts show inflation of contracts and all kinds of malfeasances and public funds ended up being used for personal needs and greed.

    Minister of Finance Mrs Kemi Adeosun’s revelation on September 13 that the agency under the leadership of Dr. Dakuku Peterside has significantly increased its remittances into the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF) was like a confirmation that all was not well with the agency.

    Mrs. Adeosun, who spoke at a workshop in Abuja on compliance with the Fiscal Responsibility (FRA) Act, said the management of NIMASA brought down operational cost and generated more money by half year than it did in the two preceding years.

    “Unlike NIMASA and the Joint Admission Matriculation Board (JAMB), some Agencies and Departments are operating in such a manner that returned minimal funds to the government. A circular has been issued restricting allowable expenses in line with reforms occurring across government businesses, as compliance checks would be undertaken regularly to ensure that all Agencies and Departments adhere to the new requirements,” Mrs Adeosun said.

    The Accountant General of the Federation (AGF), Mr. Ahmed Idris, also said despite the general downturn in accruable revenue to government due to the economic situation, the remittances to the CRF by NIMASA this year has been the highest by the agency when compared to corresponding period of recent years.

    “It was also the first time in recent years that NIMASA will remit huge revenue into the government coffers,” he said.

    Though both officials did not give the details of NIMASA’s remittances into the CRF, The Nation learnt that in the last one year and one month, the agency has contributed N9.975 billion to the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF). Within this period, the agency has also paid $37,272,12.12 million to the CRF.

    The agency on June 1, last year paid N5 billion into the CRF as “part payment of operating surplus for 2015 and 2016”. It followed up on June 2, last year with N4.975b “payment made into the CRF 2016 operating surplus”. The agency paid $7 million on November 22, last year as “part payment of 2016 operating surplus”. By April 19, this year, NIMASA made another payment. This time, it paid $15 million to the CRF. The agency again on July 18 paid $16.272.121.12 million to the CRF as “payment of 2017 operating surplus”.

    The Nation’s checks reveal that for the whole of 2015, NIMASA’s contributions to the CRF was only N2 billion, a staggering difference of about N8b. It also paid $15m, less than half of what has been paid in the last one year and one month.

    The period under review coincided with the appointment of Peterside as director-general. He was named the agency’s helmsman on March 10, 2016.  The president, who all through his campaigns showed his disdain for corruption, was scandalised by revelations from NIMASA.  He gave Transportation Minister Rotimi Amaechi a ‘marching order’ to end the malfeasances in NIMASA. The first step was the appointment of a director-general and a board to implement the president’s vision.

    The mantle to change the NIMASA narrative fell on Peterside, former Chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Petroleum (Downstream). One of the first challenges that confronted Peterside was an organisation with resourceful but unmotivated members of staff. To address this, the agency introduced a professional and leadership series to grow staff capacity.  Promotion to director cadre, which had not been done for over a decade, was carried out. Over 300 employees benefited from the exercise.

    The management came up with the Medium-Term Strategic Growth Plan covering three years. The plan has reform, restructure and repositioning as its core mission at the agency for sustainable growth and development of the maritime industry.

    The pillars on which the strategy was built are: survey, inspection and certification transformation programme; environment, security and search and rescue transformation programme; as well as capacity building and promotional initiatives.

    Other pillars are: Digital transformation strategy and structural and cultural reforms. The digital transformation strategy aimed at removing human interface with stakeholders and hastening of processes will see clients being able to register their vessels and do other transactions with NIMASA with a click of a button on their lap top.

    “In information driven age that we live in, access to information definitely enhance operations of any maritime Administration. Within six months in office, the Peterside-led management has upgraded Nigeria’s subscription of the Lloyds list intelligence to a full bouquet which is beyond the previous capacity of the sea searcher and this now guarantee unfettered access to current data in the maritime industry. This has improved on the volume and value of data available to Nigerian maritime stakeholders,” the agency explained.

    The management also realised that there must be devolution of powers to its zonal offices. Until that was done, most operations at the agency were centralised. Matters, such as sailing certificates and payment of bills by stakeholders were coordinated from the Lagos head office. This, no doubt, was cumbersome and must have led to loss of valuable business time and engendered less productivity. It now has zones headed by substantive directors. This, a source said, is to ensure that more responsibilities are carried out in the zones.

    “This will also reduce time to do business with the agency, thus improving efficiency. In this era of online communication, a semi-autonomous zonal structure will surely enhance the operation of the agency,” said the source.

    In January last year, the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) came up with the IMO member state Audit Scheme (IMSAS). This is a scheme developed by the IMO to assess the extent to which a member state complies with its obligations. Peterside saw the benefits in adhering to this scheme and less than three months after he came into office, he enlisted NIMASA. When the audit was carried out, Nigeria was rated highly.

    The manner the agency was run before the advent of the Buhari-administration also saw it losing face at the international maritime scene. For over half a decade, the country was not on the IMO Council. This saw it being relegated in international maritime politics. IMO is the United Nations (UN) specialised agency, responsible for the safety and security of shipping and prevention of marine pollution by ships.

    The agency’s bid to improve its international rating got a boost when the United States Coast Guard (USCG) visited the country to ascertain the level of security at the ports. NIMASA has been the Designated Authority (DA) for the implementation of the International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code in Nigeria since May 2013.

    The ISPS Code is an amendment to the Safety of Life and Sea (SOLAS) Convention (1974/1988) on minimum security arrangements for ships, ports and government agencies. This code, which came to life in 2004, prescribes responsibilities to governments, shipping companies, shipboard personnel and personnel to detect security threats and take preventative measures.

    Peterside, who described the USCG as the most valued partner in ensuring that the ports are safe for business, added that Nigeria places high premium on security issues, adding that the agency was leaving no stone unturned to achieve 100 per cent implementation of the ISPS Code in Nigeria.

    He said: “There is absolutely no doubt that we are determined to get it right; we only need support, assistance and all the encouragement we can get. We are determined to work with the USCG to get it right in order to ensure our ports are safe. Let me also reiterate that as a country, we appreciate the importance of getting security right at our ports, jetties and terminals and that we are committed to it.”

    The delegation, which was led by Commander Thomas Foster, hailed NIMASA for its strides in ensuring safety at the ports. Foster expressed satisfaction with the infrastructural development on ISPS Code implementation in the ports.

    “It appears that the energy that NIMASA has at the ports is very tremendous, as seen in all the ports visited in Lagos. The level of compliance has tremendously improved compared to our last visit. I therefore assure NIMASA that we will continue to work closely to achieve a safer ports, jetties and terminals in Nigeria”, Peterside said.

    Instructively, the Cabotage Law implementation has been given a breath of fresh air in the last one year. The Cabotage Vessel Financing Fund (CVFF). CVFF came into being with the promulgation of the Coastal and Inland Shipping Cabotage Act 2003. The fund was meant to help indigenous ship owners get capital to acquire vessels.

    “We have not realised the full potential of the Cabotage Act but we have moved a step ahead. Just to be sure that we are committed to the full implementation of the Cabotage Act, issues relating to waiver abuse are currently being dealt with accordingly,’’ he said.

    He added that the CVFF would only be disbursed to people that would put it into the use for which it is intended. He said applicants must have the requisite criteria as beneficiaries.

    “We will rigorously screen the applicants of the CVFF in order to ensure that the funds are disbursed to people who would use it for the purposes the funds are meant for,’’ he said.

    In the NIMASA under Buhari’s administration, abuse of waivers is being checked. A roadmap to realise the full potential of the CVFF is in the works. Peterside added that the CVFF would only be disbursed to people that would put it into the use for which it is intended. He said applicants must have the requisite criteria as beneficiaries.

    Dr. Peterside, who since assumption of office had always reiterated that the maritime sector if properly harnessed can successfully form a huge component of the country’s budgetary requirement, recently said that in order to allow for probity and accountability, the agency was automating of its processes. This, he said, has reduced human interface in the agency’s transactions, thus improved revenue generation. He added that the agency devolved more powers to its zonal offices to allow for early conclusion of transactions and plug revenue leakages.

    The new turn in the agency has made the Federal Executive Council (FEC) order investigation of the massive disparity in the remittance by JAMB and NIMASA. Mrs Adeosun said: “The highest amount that JAMB had ever remitted into the Consolidated Revenue Fund before this management was N3 million. This year so far they have done N5 billion and the Minister of Education reported that they have an additional N3 billion that they are ready to remit which will take this year’s figure alone to N8 billion and they have not increased their charges, they have not increased their fees. So, the question the council members were asking is, where was all this money before? So, the directive was given that we must call the heads of all these agencies and similar ones to account (for their financial dealings), and that is the directive we have been given and that is what we intend to do and it is a similar story with other agencies. These are the leakages which we have now come in and we are blocking.’’

  • Benue flooding: NIMASA boss laud VP over visit

    The Chairman, Governing Board of the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA), Maj.-Gen Jonathan India Garba (retd.) has commended the Federal Government for its commitment to the dredging of the River Benue.

    He applauded the president’s directive to the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) to provide emergency aid to the victims, saying it brought succour and prevented the situation from deteriorating even further.

    The NIMASA boss in a release signed by an aide, Adakole Ejegbudu, and made available to reporters yesterday said that “the gratitude of the entire people of Benue and other locations across the country affected by this years’s floods is eternal”.

    He lauded the Vice President Yemi Osinbajo (SAN) for his prompt visit to devasted areas of Benue State, in the aftermath of the recent flooding.

    “The visit of the Vice President, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo to Makurdi at the behest of the President showed the Presidency’s commitment to the well being of ordinary Nigerians and is in keeping with his loyalty and exemplary leadership demonstrated in the President’s absence.