Coy seeks to stop FG’s recovery of N39.1bn metering project fund

A Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed February 4 for hearing in the suit filed by a metering company, Ziklagsis Network Ltd, to stop the Federal Government of Nigeria, the Federal Ministry of Power, and four others, from recovering the N39.1 billion meant for a mass metering contract. The suit, in which Ziklagsis Network […]

A Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed February 4 for hearing in the suit filed by a metering company, Ziklagsis Network Ltd, to stop the Federal Government of Nigeria, the Federal Ministry of Power, and four others, from recovering the N39.1 billion meant for a mass metering contract.

The suit, in which Ziklagsis Network Ltd is seeking N1.1 billion in damages and the cost of filing against the Federal Government of Nigeria, the Federal Ministry of Power, the Minister of Power, the Debt Management Office, Providus Bank Ltd, and De-Haryor Global Services Ltd, for their alleged interference with the project, was brought on their behalf by their counsel, Wole Olanipekun (SAN).

In the suit, No. FHC/ABJ/CS/576/2024, Ziklagsis contends that based on articles 3, 4,5,6,10, and 18(i),(ii),(iii),24 and 29(ii) of the Judgement Compromise Agreement it entered with the Federal Ministry of Power on August 28, 2017, the ministry and the federal government had no powers to tamper, confiscate, seize, withhold, divert, convert and appropriate the sum of N39,171,985,233.95 granted it for the supply or provision of electric meters in Nigeria.

The company, which pointed to the COVID-19 pandemic as the cause of its non-execution of the contract, further submitted that there are calculated attempts by the federal government and the Ministry of Power to frustrate and sabotage its efforts in the performance of the terms of the Revalidated Tripartite Agreement as modified by the Addendum No. 2, “which attempts are done in utter bad faith with the ultimate end of truncating and or divesting the plaintiff of the benefit of the project.”

Ziklagsis further submitted that the defendants frustrated efforts to execute the project by refusing to release the funds despite it being awarded the contract and receiving the presidential approval the compliance on its part.

In their joint response to the suit, the federal government and the minister of Power asked the court to dismiss the suit, arguing that they acted in accordance with the agreement

In a counter-affidavit, Providus Bank, through its lawyer, Adesegun Ajibola (SAN), described parts of Ziklagsis’ affidavit in support of the originating summons to be false and full of half-truths to mislead the court.

It added that the company, being only a fixed deposit account customer seeking higher interest on the deposit than offered by Polaris Bank, Providus is not aware of the terms of the agreement it reached with the federal government.

Similarly, in a counter affidavit, an electricity installation company, De-Haryor Global Services Ltd, informed the court that the suit was “brought in bad faith, and the court should not lend support for the plaintiff (Ziklagsis)’s action but should rather condemn it.”

In a reply through its counsel, Marcus Abu, Esq of the Justice Advocates, De-Haryor submitted that the contract was awarded to Ziklagsis to cushion the effects of the hardship faced by Nigerians, who were reeling under the estimated energy billing through the deployment of free pre-paid meters.

 

De-Haryor added that Ziklagsis has not placed anything on the ground in the court to demonstrate what it has done pursuant to its Exhibit ZNL 5 agreement while De-Haryor, on the other hand, has substantially executed the contract it has with it.

 

“By the provision of Article 5(d) of the JCA, the plaintiff (Ziklagsis) was given two years of moratorium within which to supply or provide electric meters in Nigeria according to the JCA,” De-Haryor’s lawyer submitted.

 

The company added, “Meanwhile, the plaintiff (Ziklagsis) did not invest any funds in the performance of the same but the 1st and 3rd defendants (federal government and Minister of Power) had already given the sum of over N39 billion to the plaintiff for the execution of the metering project. Rather than perform its obligation under the contract, the plaintiff deposited the said sum in a fixed deposit.”