The Nation Newspaper

Tag: shell

  • Shell loses bid to stop lawmakers’ summons

    Justice Binta Murtala-Nyako of the Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a suit filed by Shell Nigeria Exploration and Production Company Limited (SNEPCO) seeking to stop the House of Representatives from conducting investigative hearing on a petition.

    The judge held that the House has the power under Section 88 of the 1999 Constitution to look into the petition sent to it as it relates to the application of an Act of National Assembly.

    The court also agreed with the Speaker and the House that the suit as constituted was inchoate and premature and that Shell should appear before the House and answer questions arising from the petition by a non-governmental organisation (NGO).

    Justice Nyako said what the House extended to Shell was just an invitation and that it was within its powers to do so.

    According to her, it was only if in the course of responding to the petition, the House delves into the way and manner Shell runs its affairs that it could be said that the House was going beyond its limits.

    The Court consequently dismissed the suit with no order as to costs.

    Shell was accused in the petition of breaching the provisions of Nigerian Oil and Gas Industry Content Development Act in the award of contract for the provision of Marine Patrol Vessels in Rivers State.

    In its originating summons filed last May 4 by its counsel, Chief Dafe Akpedeye (SAN), Shell prayed the court to determine whether, from the combined construction of sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) the House or its Committee is vested with constitutional powers to investigate the petition which touched on the conduct of its private business as a private entity.

    Shell also sought orders of perpetual injunction restraining the Speaker and the House from acting through any committee from commencing or continuing with the investigative hearing of the petition from the Youth Coalition for Change.

    The NGO accused Shell of alleged denial of invitation to indigenous contractors to tender for Shell’s contract for procurement of Marine Patrol Vessels.

    Shell also sought for an injunction restraining the Speaker, the House and its committees from issuing or further issuing any summons or invitation to any of its agent, staff or directors to appear before it in connection to an investigative hearing of the petition.

    In their defence filed by Chief Emeka Ngige (SAN), the Speaker  and the House of Representatives contended that based on the provisions of Sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution, the House can exercise oversight functions on anything related to provisions of the Nigerian Oil and Gas Industry Content Development Act which was enacted by the sixth National Assembly.

    They further contended that that the invitation to Shell did not amount to usurpation of the judiciary’s functions.

    The lawmakers argued that it was a total misconception of the doctrine of separation of powers for Shell to refuse to honour an invitation to appear before the House and defend itself.

    They further contended that there was nothing to suggest that the Speaker and the House were exercising judicial powers by merely seeking to know whether the allegation against Shell was true or false, adding that it did not matter that Shell is a private limited liability company seeking to buy marine patrol vessels for the protection of its business.

    According to them, as long as the contract comes within  the confines of the  provisions of Nigerian Oil and Gas Industry Content Development Act 2010, the National Assembly has the amplitude of powers to deal with the petition.

    The Speaker and the House further contended that Shell was in an undue haste in rushing to court to stop the House Committee on public petitions from performing its oversight functions.

    The defendants urged the Court to dismiss the suit for being premature and inchoate.

  • Crude oil theft: FG amends charge against Shell

    Crude oil theft: FG amends charge against Shell

    The Federal Government has amended its suit against Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria and its subsidiary, Shell Western Supply & Trading Limited, over alleged crude oil theft

    The plaintiff’s counsel, Mr. Ituah Imhanze told Justice Mojisola Olatoregun of the Federal High Court in Lagos of an application to make changes to the statement of claim.

    The judge granted the application, but noted that there had been no remarkable progress in the suit since it was filed.

    The federal government is claiming $406.8million from the defendants, which it said is the shortfall of money remitted to the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).

    The money was said to be for crude oil lifted in 2013 and 2014.

    The plaintiff accused the company of not declaring or under-declaring crude oil shipments during the period.

    It said following forensic analysis of bills of laden and shipping documents, it discovered that Shell allegedly cheated Nigeria of the revenue.

    The plaintiff said a consortium of experts tracked the global movements of the country’s hydrocarbons, including crude oil and gas.

    The plaintiff averred that the undeclared shipments between January 2013 and December 2014 brought the total value of the entire shortfall to $406.75 million.

    The defendants were said to have failed to respond to a letter seeking clarifications on the discrepancies.

     

  • Malabu: Abacha’s son, Obasanjo’s associate fault Agip’s, Shell’s claim to OPL 245

    •Plaintiffs seek order stopping exploration in area covered by licence

    Son of the late Head of State General Sani Abacha, Mohammed and a known associate of former President Olusegun Obasanjo, Otunba Oyewole Fasawe, have gone before the Federal High Court in Abuja to, among others, seek an order voiding the ownership claim of two foreign oil firms over Oil Prospecting Licence (OPL) 245.

    The foreign firms – Shell Nigeria Exploration and Production Company Ltd (SNEPCO) and Nigerian Agip Exploration Company (NAECO) – are claiming ownership of OPL 245.

    Last Friday, a Federal High Court in Abuja vacated order of temporary forfeiture on the OPL 245, earlier granted in favour of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on January 26, 2017.

    Mohammed and Fasawe, in a suit, which they instituted last Friday in the name of Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd, also want the court to, among others, issue an order perpetually restraining all defendants in the suit and their agents “from carrying out any exploration or prospecting activities in connection with or in relation to the area covered by OPL 245.”

    Mohammed said he owns 50 per cent shares in Malabu Oil, and Fasawe is representing a firm, Pecos Energy Ltd, said to own 20 per cent share in Malabu Oil. Named as defendants, in the suit instituted via writ of summons, are Federal Government of Nigeria, Minister of Petroleum Resources, Shell Nigeria Ultra-Deep Ltd, SNEPCO, NAECO, EFCC and Etete.

    They contend, through the plaintiff, that the claim of SNEPCO and NAECO to OPL 245 is based on an alleged illegal agreement between the Federal Government of Nigeria and Minister of Petroleum Resources and SNEPCO and NAECO on the other hand on April 29, 2011.

    The plaintiff stated that the purported agreement was executed without the consent and knowledge of its (Malabu Oil’s) major investors – Mohammed and Pecos Ltd. It faulted former Petroleum Minister Dan Etete’s claim to being a director in Malabu Oil, with 30 per cent shareholding.

    Mohammed, in his witness statement, chronicled how, despite Malabu Oil’s subsiding interest in OPL 245, the licence was allegedly handed to SNEPCO and NAECO by the FGN under an arrangement which had the foreign oil firms paid $1.3 billion, without the involvement of the original investors of Malabu Oil.

    He said at the incorporation of Malabu Oil in 1998, it had a total share capital of 20 million ordinary shares, with him (Mohammed) holding 10 million, Amafagha Kweku (holding six million) and Hindu Hassan (holding four million).

    He said Malabu Oil’s share structure has remained unaltered, except with the transfer of Hindu Hassan’s four million shares to Pecos Energy.

    Mohammed said, although OPL 245 was duly awarded to Malabu Oil in 2008 after its payment of the necessary fees, the allocation was revoked by the Federal Government in 2001, but was reallocated to Malabu Oil in 2010 through an out- of-court settlement agreement.

    He added: “While the allocation to the plaintiff of OPL 245 was subsisting, the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th defendants – FGN, Shell Ultra-Deep, SNEPCO, NAECO – and the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) entered into what they called ‘Block 245 Resolution Agreement’ dated April 29, 2011.”

    Mohammed added that part of the terms of the April 29, 2011 agreement was that the FGN “shall allocate OPL 245 to the 4th and 5th defendants (SNEPCO and NAECO) without the knowledge or consent of the plaintiff.

    “In spite of the acknowledgement of the subsisting rights and interest of the plaintiff in OPL 245, the plaintiff was not a party to, but was deliberately and purposefully excluded from the Block 245 resolution agreement of 29th April 2011 to enable the parties agree among themselves to allocate OPL 245 to the 4th and 5th defendants,” he said.

    Mohammed stated that in line with the April 29, 2011 agreement, SNEPCO and NAECO allegedly agreed to pay $1.3 billion to Etete “purportedly in the name of the plaintiff, but through the 1st defendant acting as a facilitator.

    “Sometimes in May 2011, the 4th and 5th defendants paid the sum of $801,540,000 into the 1st defendant’s escrow account with J. P. Morgan Chase Bank,” he said.

    Mohammed added that sometime between August and September 2011, the FGN allegedly directed the payment of $801,540,000, from the escrow account, into two bank accounts purportedly opened by Etete or at his instance.

    Mohamed said Etete served as the sole signatory to the accounts and that he expended the money paid into the accounts with the exclusion of the plaintiff.

    The plaintiff wants the court to declare that its rights and interest over OPL 245 still subsists.

    It also seeks a declaration that the FGN’s allocation of OPL 245 to SNEPCO and NAECO through a letter dated May 11, 211, by the petroleum minister was null and void.

    The plaintiff wants an order compelling the defendants and their agents to “forthwith, restore to the plaintiff, its rights to the exclusive possession of OPL 245”.

    None of the defendants has responded to the suit, which is yet to be assigned to any judge.

  • Shell votes $25b for capital projects

    Shell votes $25b for capital projects

    Royal Dutch Shell is earmarking $25 billion for capital investment this year, its Chief Executive Officer, Ben van Beurden has said.

    The Shell chief in the company’s 2016 annual report stated that the firm will maintain strict capital discipline and expect capital investment to be around $25 billion this year, which is at the lower end of the company’s $25-30 billion range for 2017-2020. “Our priority is to reduce debt following the BG deal and support shareholder returns into the future,” he said.

    According to him, Shell remains ready to invest in the most competitive projects.

    He said: “But we are working to reshape Shell into a more focused and resilient company by capping our investments for the next few years, while continuing to drive down costs and to sell assets.

    “Following the integration of BG, our Integrated Gas business has become an engine for generating cash and returns. The increased strength of our global gas business, combined with our other cash engines, should deliver rising free cash flow from around 2020.

    “We plan to continue prioritising growth in our deep-water and chemicals businesses beyond 2020. But we expect them to become major cash engines over the next decade. This should enable Shell to achieve the scale and profitability that will help us to adapt and thrive in the transition to a lower-carbon global energy system.

    “The evolving energy landscape offers exciting potential for future growth and further integration in our business. That is why we created a New Energies business in 2016 to explore and develop attractive commercial opportunities. We expect demand for oil and gas to continue to grow. But we also intend to build upon our portfolio and will continue to look at the potential of low-carbon biofuels, hydrogen, solar and wind as the energy transition unfolds. Our New Energies business intends to act with conviction and commercial realism – when the value for shareholders and society is clear.”

    “In the meantime, Shell’s existing oil and gas portfolio will help drive growth in free cash flow over the next few years, across a range of possible oil prices. The integration of BG has also reinforced the foundations for generating competitive returns from our core oil and gas businesses over the longer term. We have set an ambitious and clear path for the years ahead. We revitalised Shell in 2016 and I am confident that 2017 will be another year of progress in building our world-class investment case.”

    The Shell chief stated the company continued to streamline its downstream business–including divestments in Japan, Denmark and Malaysia – as part of its ongoing effort to improve efficiency by lowering costs and concentrating on our most competitive businesses.

    “Our divestment drive gained momentum during the year and we plan to continue selling assets in 2017 as part of our overall divestment programme of $30 billion for the 2016-18 period,” he added.

    The company’s income for the 2016 financial year was $4.8 billion compared with $2.2 billion in 2015. Earnings on a current cost of supplies basis were $3.7 billion, compared with $4.2 billion in 2015. It also distributed $15 billion to shareholders in dividends in 2016.

    Its overall production averaged 3.7 million barrels of oil equivalent per day (boe/d), compared with 3.0 million boe/d in 2015. This increase was largely driven by the acquisition of BG.

    Refining margins were weaker in our downstream business, while a modest rise in crude oil prices gave some support to our upstream earnings as the year progressed. This again shows the strength of the integrated energy company model.

  • Alleged $801m bribe: Shell, Etete, Adoke face charges

    Alleged $801m bribe: Shell, Etete, Adoke face charges

    EFCC set for trial of ex-ministers, businessman, others over Malabu Oil deal

    All  is set for the legal battle over the alleged $801million Malabu oil deal bribe.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) yesterday filed charges against a former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Chief Dan Etete, a former Attorney-General of the Federation, Mr. Bello Adoke (SAN) and a businessman, Aliyu Abubakar.

    Also charged are eight others.

    The others are: Shell Nigeria Exploration Production Company Limited;  Nigeria Agip  Exploration Limited; ENI SPA; Malabu Oil and Gas Limited; Ralph Wetzels (ex- director of SNEPCO), Casula Roberto (Italian) and director of AGIP; Pujatti Stefeno(Italian) and director in AGIP; and Burafato Sebastiano (Italian).

    A United Kingdom (UK) anti-corruption group, Global Witness, claimed that $523million of the bribe was paid  to some fronts of a former president.

    The charge sheet,  dated February 28,  states that all the accused persons will be arraigned before the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja Division.

    No date has been fixed for their arraignment.

    All the 11 suspects will face three charges bordering on alleged official corruption of about $801million.

    According to the charges filed by the EFCC  legal team, comprising Johnson Ojogbane, H.M. Mohammed and Victor Ukagwu, all the accused persons are to face trial for alleged:

    • conspiracy, contrary to Section 26 of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000 and punishable under Section 12 of the same Act; and
    • official corruption contrary to Section 9 of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000 and punishable under Section 9 (b) of the same Act.

    The particulars of the offence are as follows:

    “That you Shell Nigeria Exploration Production Company Limited, Nigeria Agip  Exploration Limited, ENI SPA, Ralph Wetzels (whilst being director of SNEPCO), Casula Roberto (Italian) whilst being the director of AGIP; Pujatti Stefeno (Italian) while being the director in AGIP; Burafato Sebastiano(Italian), while being a Director with AGIP; Douzia Louya Etete(a.k.a Dan Etete); Mohammed Bello Adoke; Aliyu Abubakar and Malabu Oil and Gas Limited sometime in 2011 in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court conspired amongst yourselves to commit felony to wit: Official corruption and thereby committed an offence.

    “That  you Douzia Louya Etete(a.k.a Dan Etete), Mohammed Bello Adoke; Aliyu Abubakar and Malabu Oil and Gas Limited sometime in 2011 in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court corruptly received the aggregate sum of $801million in relation to the grant of Oil Prospecting Licence in respect of OPL 245 from Shell Nigeria Exploration Production Company, Nigeria Agip Exploration Limited and ENI SPA and thereby committed an offence.

    “That you Shell Nigeria Exploration Production Company Limited, Nigeria Agip  Exploration Limited, ENI SPA, Ralph Wetzels(whilst being Director of SNEPCO), Casula Roberto(Italian) whilst being the Director of AGIP; Pujatti Stefeno(Italian) while beinmg the Director in AGIP; Burafato Sebastiano(Italian), while being a Director with AGIP; Douzia Louya Etete(a.k.a Dan Etete); Mohammed Bello Adoke; Aliyu Abubakar and Malabu Oil and Gas Limited sometime in 2011 within the jurisdiction of this court corruptly gave the aggregate sum of $801million to Douzia Louya Etete(a.k.a Dan Etete) , Mohammed Bello Adoke; Aliyu Abubakar and Malabu Oil and Gas Limited on account of the grant of Oil Prospecting Licence in respect of OPL 245 and thereby committed an offence.”

    This is the second time some of the accused persons will be facing trial.

    The EFCC on  December 20, 2016 filed nine charges bordering on alleged mismanagement of $1,616,690,656.78 Malabu Oil cash against Adoke, Etete, Abubakar, Malabu Oil and Gas Limited; Rocky  Top Resources Limited; Imperial Union Limited; Novel Properties and Development Company Limited, Group Construction Limited and Megatech Engineering Limited.

    The nine-count charge was filed  at the Federal High Court, Abuja.

    The charges came barely 48 hours after ENI SPA insisted that the sale of OPL 245(Malabu Oil Block) was not fraudulent.

    The Board of Directors of Eni(Nigeria Agip Exploration Limited) claimed that all transactions relating to the $1,616,690,656.78 Malabu oil block were clean.

    The oil firm said it arrived at the conclusion after commissioning  forensic investigations into the controversy over the sale of the oil block.

    It said an  independent United States law firm conducted the investigations and returned a not guilty verdict.

    The statement said: “Eni’s Board of Directors today takes note of the outcome of further forensic investigations into the 2011 transaction between Eni and Shell and the Nigerian Government for the acquisition of the OPL 245 licence in Nigeria.

    The investigations were conducted by an independent US law firm. They were commissioned by Eni’s Board of Statutory Auditors and Watch Structure.

    “The investigations examined the new materials and further information filed by the Milan prosecutors as part of the closure of the investigation in December 2016.

    “The law firm confirms the conclusions reached by previous investigations in 2015, stating that there is no evidence of corrupt conduct in relation to the transaction.

    Eni’s Board of Directors confirmed its total confidence that neither the company nor its CEO Claudio Descalzi were involved in alleged illicit conduct under investigation.”

    Global Witness had alleged that about $523million of the $1.1billion paid by Shell and Eni for Malabu Oil Block (OPL 245) went to some fronts of a former president.

    It said the deal deprived the country of a sum equivalent to 80% of its 2015 health budget in a country where more than 60% of the population live in poverty.

    The group made the disclosures in a statement by its Director, Simon Taylor.

    It also wrote a letter to the EFCC not to waiver in its determination to probe the sale of the oil block.

    The statement said: “We applaud the Nigerian authorities for fighting back against corruption without fear or favour, making sure there are real consequences for taking part in shady deals like with OPL 245.”

    “The lucrative OPL 245 oil block was allocated in 1998 for $20m – a fraction of its value now – to Malabu Oil & Gas, a company secretly owned by the then oil Minister, Etete.

    “The OPL 245 block, off the coast of Nigeria is owned 50-50 by Shell and Eni and contains probable reserves of 9.23 billion barrels of oil, representing potentially massive bookable reserves for the companies.

    “Shell currently holds 11.75 billion barrels of proven oil equivalent reserves and Eni holds 6.89 billion barrels of proven oil equivalent reserves.

    “The block was eventually passed on to Shell and Eni in 2011 in exchange for a payment of $1.1bn which flowed to Malabu rather than to the Nigerian state.

    “The former Minister of Justice Adoke by his own account acted as a broker in the deal. This deal deprived the country of a sum equivalent to 80% of its 2015 health budget in a country where more than 60% of the population live in poverty.

    ”Shell and Eni have always denied that they knew the money they paid would go to Malabu, but documents seen by Global Witness show that the companies in fact constructed the deal knowing that the money would flow ultimately to Malabu.

    “Prosecutors in the UK have previously alleged that $523m of Shell and Eni’s payment went to alleged “fronts for former President of Nigeria (names withheld) as part of a deal that was effectively a “smash and grab” on Nigeria.

    In a separate letter, the group praised the Acting EFCC chairman, Mr. Ibrahim Magu for the “sterling investigatory work” by the commission on the Malabu oil deal.

    The letter said Global witness was “ delighted to read press reports that former Attorney-General Mohammed Bello Adoke, Chief Etete and others have been implicated  by the EFCC for fraud and money laundering in respect of the OPL 245 oil deal.

    The letter added: “We would like to take this opportunity to reiterate our admiration for the sterling investigatory work by the EFCC, under your leadership, that has brought this case to court.

    “We believe that the case will send a powerful message to the world that Nigeria is intent on prosecuting corruption without fear or favour.”

    The anti-corruption group however noted the reactions of some key actors in the Settlement Agreement on the oil block.

    It added: “In a statement, Mohammed Adoke said ‘I hope to at the appropriate time make myself available to defend the charge for what whatever its worth.’ He also emphasised that he did not benefit from the deal, which he said saved the government from a breach of contract suit in which Shell was claiming $2 billion.

    “He called the charges “orchestrated plans to bring me to public disrepute in order to satisfy the whims and caprices of some powerful interests on revenge mission.”

    “Shell has insisted that they did not pay Malabu directly and that all payments went to an escrow account held by the Government of Nigeria.

    “In a response to a request for comment from Global Witness in April 2015, Shell said “We do not agree with the premise behind various public statements made by Global Witness about Shell companies in relation to OPL 245.” It has not responded to more recent requests to comment.

    Eni responded to questions on the deal in May 2016 saying “Independent enquiries and the investigations commissioned by Eni’s Watch Structure and Board of Statutory Auditors from specialized American law firms have found no evidence of illegal conduct on the part of the Company.”

    “Antonio Tricarico of Re:Common said “The Italian Government must ask serious questions of the involvement of Senior Eni executives in a deal that has now lead to senior Nigerian officials being charged with criminal offences.”

  • 19 academics conduct research in Shell

    Nineteen academics from various universities in Nigeria have begun research attachments in several fields of study in the latest phase of the sabbatical and internship programme of Shell Petroleum Development Company Nigeria Limited (SPDC) Joint Venture, which was introduced in 1980.

    The eight professors and 11 research interns began their programmes last month, seeking to build industry knowledge and understanding in such fields as biodiversity, petroleum engineering, geophysics, impact assessment, community health and oil and gas exploration.

    According to Shell spokesperson, Bamidele Olugbenga Odugbesan, the recipients are from the University of Benin, University of Ibadan, Niger Delta University, University of Ilorin, University of Lagos, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, Ahmadu Bello University, Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, University of Calabar and University of Nigeria, Nsukka.

    “Our research and internship programmes are key aspects of our effort to contribute to the development of higher education in Nigeria,” said Igo Weli, General Manager External Relations.

    He continued: “It is a mutually beneficial relationship. SPDC obtains specialised and cost-effective services from the professors and senior lecturers, while they in turn acquire industry experience and exposure to new technologies that can be ploughed back to the university community.

    For a period of one year, the professors on sabbatical will conduct research in identified areas and share their findings with SPDC. Part of the internship programme involves Master’s degree students who are also offered one-year placements to acquire work experience in SPDC.

    “The other set of internships are from the Shell Centre of Excellence at the University of Benin who will spend six months, enabling them to gain critical working experience and be exposed to Shell’s working culture and ethics. Recruitment for sabbatical and research internship scheme begins with advertisements in national and local newspapers in March with interviews in July each year,”

  • Shell sponsors 19 Nigerians on research

    Shell sponsors 19 Nigerians on research

    Nineteen academics from different universities in Nigeria have begun research attachments in several fields of study in the latest phase of the sabbatical and internship programme of Shell Petroleum Development Company Nigeria Limited (SPDC) Joint Venture.

    The programme was introduced in 1980.

    The eight professors and 11 research interns began their programmes last month, seeking to build industry knowledge and understanding in such fields as biodiversity, petroleum engineering, geophysics, impact assessment, community health and oil and gas exploration.

    The recipients are from the University of Benin, University of Ibadan, Niger Delta University, University of Ilorin, University of Lagos, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, Ahmadu Bello University, Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, University of Calabar and University of Nigeria, Nsukka.

    “Our research and internship programmes is a key aspect of our effort to contribute to the development of higher education in Nigeria,” said Igo Weli, General Manager External Relations.

    “It is a mutually beneficial relationship. SPDC obtains specialised and cost-effective services from the professors and senior lecturers, while they in turn acquire industry experience and exposure to new technologies that can be ploughed back to the university community. “

    For a period of one year, the professors on sabbatical will conduct research in identified areas and share their findings with SPDC.

    Part of the internship programme involves Master’s degree students, who are also offered one-year placements to acquire work experience in SPDC. The other set of internships are from the Shell Centre of Excellence at the University of Benin, who will spend six months, enabling them to gain critical working experience and be exposed to Shell’s working culture and ethics. Recruitment for sabbatical and research internship scheme begins with advertisements in national and local newspapers in March with interviews in July each year.

  • Malabu: Shell, Agip battle Fed Govt over OPL245 P6

    Malabu: Shell, Agip battle Fed Govt over OPL245 P6

    Shell Nigeria Exploration and Production Company (SNEPCO) Limited and Nigeria Agip Exploration Limited, two multi-national companies named in the Malabu Oil deal, have challenged the January 26, orders granting temporary control of Oil Prospecting Licence (OPL) 245 to the Federal Government.
    Both companies, accused by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) of involvement in some fraudulent transactions in relation to the transaction, were in control of the OPL 245 (the subject of the Malabu Oil deal) before the January 26 orders.
    The order, obtained ex-parte by the EFCC, among others, allows the Department of Petroleum Resources (DPR) to manage the OPL 245 on behalf of the Federal Government, pending the conclusion of investigation and prosecution of “SNEPCO, Agip and other individuals named in connection with acts of conspiracy, bribery, official corruption and money laundering” contained in some charges already filed in court.
    Shell and Agip have however filed applications seeking the vacation of the order, arguing that the court was misled into granting it.
    When the case was called yesterday before Justice John Tsoho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, lawyers to Shell and Agip – Konyinsola Ajayi (SAN) and Babatunde Fagbohunlu (SAN) – informed the court about their pending applications.
    EFCC lawyer Jonson Ojoggbane confirmed that both applications were served on him, but that he was yet to respond to them. He sought a short adjournment to enable him address the applications and put forward the EFCC’s position to enable the court reach a just conclusion.
    Although Ajayi and Fagbohunlu agreed to come back next week, the judge informed parties about his official engagement next week outside the country. He adjourned till February 27 for hearing of the applications.
    At yesterday’s proceedings were some individuals linked to the deal, including the son of the late General Sani Abacha, Mohammed, and businessman Otunba Oyewole Fasawe, among others.
    The EFCC, while applying for the order, explained the alleged role played by Shell and Agip in the transaction, through which some highly placed Nigerians, including ex-ministers, and multinational oil companies purportedly defrauded the country of billions of dollars.
    The commission also revealed how former Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) Mohammed Adoke allegedly aided the payment of $1.2b bribe to ex-Petroleum Resources Minister Dan Etete, using his position in former President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration.
    EFCC stated, in a supporting affidavit, that: ”Sometime in April 1998, Malabo Oil and Gas Limited was incorporated in Nigeria with shareholders’ namely: Mohammed Sani (fronting for the late General Sani Abacha), Kwekwu Amafegha (representing Dan Etete, the then Minister of Petroleum Resources) and Hassan Hindu (on behalf of Ambassador Hassan Adamu).
    “In April 1998, the company was incorporated, the Federal Ministry of Petroleum Resources offered the company deep water oil block prospecting licence in respect of OPL 245 in line with the Federal Government’s indigenous policy in the upstream sector.
    “The oil prospecting licence, against all known government’s regulations, was awarded to Malabu Oil and Gas even before a formal application was submitted by the company.
    “In June 1998 Gen Sani Abacha died and between 1999 and 2000, the corporate status and shareholding structure were altered severally through forged resolutions which eventually divested Mohammed Sani of their shares, while new shareholders and directors were appointed fraudulently.
    “At the time the company, namely Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd was incorporated, Gen Sani Abacha and Dan Etete were Head of State and Minister of Petroleum Resources, while Hassan Adamu was Nigerian Ambassador to the United State of America between 1996 and 1999,” the EFCC said.
    It added that as at when they incorporated Malabu Oil, the Gen Abacha, Etete and Adamu were barred by extant laws from engaging in any form of business by virtue of their offices.
    “They used their positions to confer unfair advantage on themselves and cronies in allocating OPL 245 to themselves without due process. The company contracted Shell Petroleum and SNEPCO, in a joint venture scheme, for the purpose of prospecting and operating the said licence given by the Federal Government of Nigeria.”
    The EFCC said Shell know that the allocation of the oil well and the procedure adopted by the owners of Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd were fraught with fraud, but went ahead to consummate the transaction.
    The agency went on: “Sometime on 2nd July 2001, the Federal Government withdrew the title and allocation of OPL 245 to Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd on the directive of Mr. Funso Kupolokun, the then Presidential Adviser on Petroleum to President Olusegun Obansajo after which same was reallocated to Shell Nigeria Ultra Deep Ltd.
    “Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd sued the Federal Government over the revocation, but the suit was later withdrawn and settled out of court by the parties and the said oil well was reallocated to Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd.
    “Shell and Agip again went into a fraudulent agreement with Malabu Oil and Gas, in which the companies will pay signature bonus of $210m to the Federal Government of Nigeria while $1.2b would be paid to the owners of Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd.
    “Shell Petroleum was later to explain that the payment was for compensation, but investigation conducted revealed that the money was bribe to Dan Etete and his cronies.
    “Shell was aware at the time of consummating this transaction that Dan Etete, the owner of Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd, was already a convict and hence, was not willing to pay the said sum of $1.2b directly to Dan Etete and or Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd directly.
    “One Mohammed Adoke was the Federal Government counsel in series of arbitration instituted by Shell in London on the said oil well and, who later became the Attorney General of the Federation, conspired with Shell/Agip to route the payment of the $1.2b bribe money through Federal Government Escrow Account with JP Morgan Chase bank.”
    Adoke, the EFCC said, had written a letter dated 9th February 2011 seeking the advice of the Department of Petroleum Resources (DPR) on whether to consummate the transaction involving Shell Ultra Deep Sea, Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd, NNPC, Nigeria Agip Exploration and production Company (SNEPCO).
    The DPR on April 1, 2011 advised against the transaction on the ground that it was highly prejudicial to the Federal Government’s interest.
    Despite the advice, Adoke approved the payment of the $1.2b bribe money through Federal Government Escrow Account with JP Morgan Chase Bank in London, the agency said, adding: “Sometime in May 2011 Nigeria Agip Exploration and SNEPCO instructed Chase Bank to release $1,092,040,000 into Escrow Account of the Federal Government.
    The money, on Adoke’s instruction, the EFCC claimed, was transferred from the Escrow Account to two banks accounts operated by Dan Etete and Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd.
    The EFCC went on: “The said amount was later laundered with several accounts of individuals and different companies. Investigation further revealed that the Federal Government was defrauded by SPDC and Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd by under paying $210m as signature bonus on OPL 245.
    “Investigation conducted revealed that Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd and SPDC secured OPL245 through fraudulent scheme involving high scale bribery and corruption by top management of the company.
    “Information available to the applicant (EFCC) is to the effect that a London judge, sitting in the Southwark Crown Court refused to release to Dan Etete and Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd $85m which is connected to the said fraudulent transaction by Shell Nigeria, Nigeria Agip Exploration and Malabu Oil and Gas in respect of OPL245.
    “The $85m formed part of the proceeds of the fraudulent transaction between Shell Nigeria, Nigeria Agip Exploration and Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd. The said sum was seized as a result of request by Italian prosecutors.”

  • Malabo oil scam: Shell, Agip ask court to dismiss forfeiture order

    Shell Nigeria Exploration and Nigeria Agip Exploration have asked the Federal High Court, Abuja, to discharge the order of forfeiture on OPL 245 granted the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    Justice John Tsoho on January 26 granted an order of interim forfeiture of Oil Prospecting Licence (OPL 245) to the Federal Government pending investigation and prosecution of suspects in the $1.1 billion Malabu oil scam.

    At the resumed hearing of the matter on Tuesday, the prosecuting counsel, Mr. Johnson Ojogbane, told the court that he was unable to respond to the two applications filed by the applicants on the matter.

    Ojogbane said his inability was, “due to circumstances beyond our control.”

    He applied for an adjournment to enable the prosecution to respond to the two applications.

    Counsel to Shell, Prof. Olaniwun Ajayi (SAN), told the court that he has filed two applications on the matter.

    Ajayi said the first application was seeking the discharge, dismissal or striking out of the order of forfeiture to the federal government which the court made pending the conclusion of the matter.

    The second, he said, prayed for an order staying or suspending the effects of the interim order made in favour of the EFCC, directing that OPL 245 be managed by the Department of Petroleum Resources (DPR).

    NAN

  • Shell to invest $25b in three years

    Shell to invest $25b in three years

    • Eyes $30b assets divestments

    The Royal Dutch Shell Plc will invest about $25 billion in various projects across its global operation this year, and will sustain such investment to 2020, its Chief Executive Officer Ben van Beurden, has said.
    He spoke at the company’s announcement of its 2016 fourth quarter and full year financial results at the weekend.
    He said: “Looking ahead, we will further focus the portfolio and strengthen the company’s financial framework in 2017. Our strategy is starting to pay off and in 2017 we will be investing around $25 billion in high quality, resilient projects. I’m confident 2017 will be another year of progress for Shell to become a world-class investment.’’
    He noted that earnings were impacted by charges of $0.5 billion related to deferred tax reassessments which were not included as identified items, adding that operating expenses were lower, more than offsetting the impact of the consolidation of BG. Depreciation and net interest expense increased, mainly resulting from the BG acquisition. Earnings also reflected higher taxation
    Full year 2016 CCS earnings attributable to shareholders excluding identified items were $7.2 billion compared with $11.4 billion in 2015. Fourth quarter 2016 CCS earnings attributable to shareholders excluding identified items were $1.8 billion compared with $1.6 billion for the fourth quarter 2015, an increase of 14 per cent, he stated.
    “We are reshaping Shell and delivered a good cash flow performance this quarter with over $9 billion in cash flow from operations. Debt has been reduced and, for the second consecutive quarter, free cash flow more than covered our cash dividend.
    “Production and LNG volumes included delivery from new projects, with ramp-up continuing in 2017 and 2018. Meanwhile, we are operating the company at an underlying cost level that is $10 billion lower than Shell and BG combined only 24 months ago. We are gaining momentum on divestments, with some $15 billion completed in 2016, announced, or in progress, and we are on track to complete our overall $30 billion divestment programme as planned,” he said.
    On assets divestment, Beurden said: “Asset sales have an important role to play in all of these strategic themes, as we re-shape the company. Our asset sales programme is expected to total $30 billion for 2016 to 2018 combined. We completed $5 billion large divestments in 2016, announced a further $5 billion and are making significant progress on more than $5 billion of other deals.
    “At the end of 2016, we completed the sale of our shareholding in Showa Shell for around $1.4 billion. We recently announced that SABIC will acquire Shell’s 50 per cent share in the SADAF petrochemicals joint venture for around $800 million. A few days ago we signed agreements to sell a package of UK North Sea assets to Chrysaor for a total of up to $3.8 billion, and with Kufpec for the sale of our interest in the Bongkot field and adjoining acreage off-shore Thailand for $900 million.
    “These transactions show the clear momentum behind Shell’s global, value-driven, $30 billion divestment programme and are consistent with the company’s strategy to high-grade and simplify its portfolio following the acquisition of BG. We seek to generate value, simplify the portfolio and reshape Shell. Simon will cover more details later in the presentation. This is a value driven -not a time –driven -divestment programme. We are confident that we will deliver.
    “We’ve been reducing Shell’s capital investment in a steady and measured way over the last few years. We are planning to spend between $25 and $30 billion each year until 2020.”