Connect with us

Breaking News

Court Strikes Out NNPCL’s Bid To Dismiss Dangote Refinery’s N100b Import License Suit

Published

on

The Federal High Court in Abuja has struck out the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited’s (NNPCL) preliminary objection challenging the competence of the N100 billion import license suit instituted by Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE.

Justice Inyang Ekwo passed the ruling after hearing oral submissions from the legal teams of Dangote Refinery, NNPCL, and other parties involved.

Nairametrics previously reported that, during court proceedings on January 30, 2025, NNPCL’s lawyer, Ademola Abimbola, SAN, opposed the refinery’s request to amend its court filings.

Brief Facts of the Case

Nairametrics previously reported that Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE filed a suit seeking to void import licenses issued to NNPCL, Matrix Petroleum Services Limited, A.A. Rano Limited, and four other companies for importing refined petroleum products.

The refinery argues that these products are already being produced domestically without shortfalls.

In suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/1324/2024, Nairametrics reported that Dangote Refinery is seeking N100 billion in damages against the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) for allegedly continuing to issue import licenses to NNPCL, Matrix, and other companies to import petroleum products such as Automotive Gas Oil (AGO) and Jet Fuel (aviation turbine fuel) into Nigeria.

Dangote Refinery’s suit claims that the continued importation of petroleum products persists “despite the production of AGO and Jet-A1 that exceeds the current daily consumption of petroleum products in Nigeria by the Dangote Refinery.”

The defendants in the case include NMDPRA, NNPCL, AYM Shafa Limited, A.A. Rano Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited.

In its originating summons dated September 6, 2024, seen by Nairametrics, the plaintiff’s lawyer, George Ibrahim, SAN, argued that NMDPRA allegedly violated Sections 317(8) and (9) of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) by issuing import licenses for petroleum products, which should only be granted when there is a proven shortfall in supply.

However, the legal team representing Matrix Petroleum Services Limited, A.A. Rano Limited, and AYM Shafa Limited—led by Ahmed Raji, SAN—filed a motion urging the court to dismiss the suit.

They argued that only NMDPRA and NNPCL are legally empowered to determine petroleum product shortfalls in Nigeria, not Dangote Refinery.

Meanwhile, NNPCL’s counsel, Ademola Abimbola, SAN, filed a preliminary objection, arguing that the plaintiff erroneously sued “Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation,” a non-existent entity, instead of the correctly registered “Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited.”

Abimbola also contended that until NMDPRA decides to implement the “Backward Integration Policy” in the downstream petroleum sector, it is not obligated to restrict the issuance of petroleum product import licenses solely to cover shortfalls in local refinery production.

The Backward Integration Policy, a provision in the PIA, encourages investment in local refining facilities by granting import licenses for refined products only to companies involved in domestic refining.

NNPCL urged the court to hold that implementing a Backward Integration Policy in the downstream petroleum sector is a prerequisite before Dangote Refinery can challenge NMDPRA’s continued issuance of import licenses to the second to seventh defendants.

Abimbola further urged the court to rule that Dangote Refinery has no legal standing to institute this suit.

In its counter-affidavit and written address filed on Friday, and seen by Nairametrics, George Ibrahim argued that a close examination of the originating summons, affidavit, and attached documents clearly shows that the plaintiff’s grievance concerns the “flagrant disobedience of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) by a statutory body created to implement the Act.”

He urged the court to reject NNPCL’s claim that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate the implementation of a Backward Integration Policy by NMDPRA.

He contended that a policy created by a government institution cannot override the provisions of an Act.
Ibrahim further submitted that NNPCL has no legal basis to argue that “the plaintiff failed to show the implementation of a Backward Integration Policy by NMDPRA” since it does not represent NMDPRA in this matter.

“The NNPCL is merely a busybody and a meddlesome interloper, and its arguments on this issue should be disregarded,” he submitted.

At the hearing in February 2025, Abimbola urged the judge to affirm his objection and strike out the refinery’s suit for lack of jurisdiction.

Alternatively, Abimbola asked the court to strike out NNPCL’s name from the case, arguing that it discloses no cause of action.

On his part, Ibrahim asked the court to dismiss NNPCL’s objection and allow the amendment of his originating processes and subsequent determination of his case.

After hearing submissions from both sides, the judge fixed today for ruling.

Breaking News

Reps Plenary Turns Chaotic As Motion To Rescind Electoral Act Amendment Sparks Row

Published

on

By

The House of Representatives descended into a rowdy session on Tuesday during an emergency plenary called to reconsider the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill, 2025.

The chaos was triggered by a motion to rescind the bill’s earlier passage from December 23, 2025, which had mandated the real-time electronic transmission of election results to the IReV portal.

During plenary, Francis Waive, chairman of the house of representatives committee on rules and business, moved a motion for the house to reverse its decision on the bill which was passed on December 23, 2025.

When Tajudeen Abbas, speaker of the house, put the motion to a voice vote, the “nays” were louder than the “ayes”, but he ruled that the ayes had it.

The ruling triggered protests from lawmakers, who began hollering in objection. Abbas subsequently called for an executive session, but the proposal was also rejected.

Despite the resistance, the speaker moved the house into an executive session.

When the green chamber passed the electoral act in December, it adopted a proposal mandating the real-time transmission of election results to the Independent National Electoral Commission’s result viewing portal (IReV).

Continue Reading

Breaking News

El-Rufai Alleges Ribadu Behind Airport Arrest Attempt, Reveals Next Move

Published

on

By

Former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai, has accused National Security Adviser, NSA, Nuhu Ribadu of being behind the attempt to arrest him at the Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport in Abuja on Thursday, shortly after he returned from a trip to Cairo, Egypt.

El-Rufai made the allegation while speaking with former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, who paid him a solidarity visit at his residence on Thursday night.

According to him, operatives of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, ICPC, working with the Department of State Services, DSS, and not the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, confronted him at the airport and attempted to take him into custody.

“It turned out that it’s the ICPC that procured DSS to abduct me and hands me over to them. The ICPC has never invited me.

“We just understand that it’s the ICPC not EFCC that’s responsible for what happened today and the ICPC chairman is acting of the direct order of Nuhu Ribadu,” El-Rufai said.

Responding, Atiku expressed sympathy with the former governor and stressed the need for political unity ahead of the next general election.

The ex-Vice President noted that opposition forces must organize themselves to challenge President Bola Tinubu in 2027.

“We must come together and form very viable opposition because Tinubu is determined to turn Nigeria into a one party state,” Atiku said.

Continue Reading

Breaking News

Nnamdi Kanu Challenges Life Sentence, Files Appeal Against Terrorism Conviction

Published

on

By

Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has officially filed a notice of appeal challenging his conviction and multiple sentences.

 

Kanu insisted that the trial was riddled with fundamental legal errors and amounted to a miscarriage of justice.

In the notice of appeal dated February 4, 2026, Kanu said he was appealing against his conviction and sentences on seven counts, including terrorism-related offences, for which he received five life sentences and additional prison terms after being found guilty on November 20, 2025.

“I, Nnamdi Kanu, the Appellant, having been convicted and sentenced… do hereby give notice of appeal against my conviction,” the document stated.

Kanu was convicted for offences including “committing an act preparatory to or in furtherance of an act of terrorism,” “making a broadcast… with intent to intimidate the population,” and “being the leader and member of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), a proscribed organisation in Nigeria,” among others.

Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, delivered the judgment on November 20, 2025, sentencing Kanu to five life terms for terrorism-related offences, 20 years’ imprisonment for being the leader of the proscribed IPOB, and five years’ imprisonment with no option of fine for importing a radio transmitter without a licence.

In his grounds of appeal, the IPOB leader accused the trial court of failing to resolve what he described as a “foundational disruption of the original trial process” following the 2017 military operation at his Afara-Ukwu residence.

“The learned trial judge erred in law by failing to resolve the procedural and competence consequences of the foundational disruption of the original trial process in September 2017,” Kanu argued.

He also contended that the court proceeded to trial and judgment while his preliminary objection challenging the competence of the proceedings remained unresolved.

“The learned trial judge did not hear or determine the objection,” the appeal document stated, adding that judgment was delivered “while the objection remained pending and undetermined.”

Kanu further faulted the court for delivering judgment while his bail application was still pending, arguing that this affected the fairness of the trial process.

He also claimed that the trial court convicted him under a law that had already been repealed, stating that “the learned trial judge erred in law by convicting and sentencing the Appellant under the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act, 2013, notwithstanding its repeal by the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, prior to judgment.”

Kanu further argued that he was subjected to double jeopardy, contrary to Section 36(9) of the 1999 Constitution, after being retried on facts he said had earlier been nullified by the Court of Appeal.

He also complained that he was denied fair hearing, claiming that he was not allowed to file or present a final written address before judgment was delivered.

Among the reliefs sought, Kanu asked the Court of Appeal to allow the appeal, quash his conviction and sentences, and “discharge and acquit the Appellant in respect of all the counts.”

He also informed the appellate court of his desire to be present at the hearing of the appeal, stating, “I want to be present at the hearing of the appeal because I may be conducting the appeal in person.”

Kanu is currently being held at a correctional facility in Sokoto State, after his application to be transferred to a different facility in either Niger or Nasarawa State was denied.

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending