Sale of NECOM house: Matters arising
According to the liquidator, the list of such non-core assets was prepared for the BPE by a professional team that worked in conjunction with NITEL’s management and was approved by the company’s board before being handed over to him. Said Adekonola: “Upon the receipt of the list of assets so transferred, I advertised this list […]
According to the liquidator, the list of such non-core assets was prepared for the BPE by a professional team that worked in conjunction with NITEL’s management and was approved by the company’s board before being handed over to him.
Said Adekonola: “Upon the receipt of the list of assets so transferred, I advertised this list for sale in national newspapers on May 2, 2007.” Justifying the sale of NECOM House and other non-core assets that used to belong to NITEL, the liquidator pointed to the various publications in the national newspapers advertising the sales as a testimony to the fact that the exercise was devoid of any underhand dealing.
Let’s assume his premise to be true but how does Adekonola explain the fact that the deed of assignment between the liquidator and West African Aluminium Products Plc was dated May 16, 2007. Yet in his advertorial, he points out that NECOM House was sold in August 2008. Which date should the public believe? It should be pointed out that if we accept the date of the deed of assignment, it means that the liquidator sold NECOM House while the advert he had published still had two weeks to expire (as it was to expire on May 31, 2007). What was the essence of the advertisements if the transaction was concluded when the advertised date for submission of bids still had two weeks to expire? Why the hurry given that payment was not effected until 2008, over 12 months after the deed of assignment was dated. And the payment was effected in two tranches.
In his advertorial, the liquidator failed to address the issue of disobeying a presidential directive. It is apt to note that the deed of assignment is dated the same day (May 16, 2007) that then President Olusegun Obasanjo gave the directive re-classifying NECOM House as a core asset.
Adekonola has likened the questioning of the transaction to blackmail, adding that such attempts would not have existed if he had agreed to sell off the sky-scraper for a paltry N100 million against the eventual princely sum of N4 billion realised from the sale. He misses the point again. There was a presidential directive (which he has not denied) instructing that NECOM House has been re-classified as a core-asset and that it should be sold to the then core investor of NITEL, Transcorp, for a token sum. In other words, the intention of Government is for the property to revert to owners of NITEL and not to make heavy killing from the sales. Adekonola told the Committee of Inspection (COI) meeting of July 11, 2007 that “if the said property was purchased by any other bidder, it may affect the business of NITEL/Transcorp. He further informed the committee that NITEL/Transcorp Plc have offered to pay N100 million for the property but that he had asked them to improve on their offer.” Yet, he now makes the claim that NECOM House is not important to the owners of NITEL. In his words, SAT-3 cable terminated at an annex of the NECOM House, not at the building itself.”
In his advertorial, Adekonola fails to inform at which meeting of the COI, which oversees the liquidation process, it was approved that he sells NECOM House.?Or is he suggesting that he does not need the approval of the COI?
It is important to make corrections to his assertions. Yar’ adua did not revoke the sale of Kaduna and Port Harcourt refineries or Egbin plant. In reporting on the sale and its controversy, The Punch of July 19, 2007 stated thus, Blue Star Oil Services Limited, the consortium that acquired controlling stakes in the Port Harcourt and Kaduna refineries, has pulled out of the deal. Consequently, the consortium is demanding a refund of the $721m it paid for the acquisition of the refineries, with interests accruable.
It is important to note that the minutes of the COI meeting of 11th July, 2007 stated that “the liquidator informed the committee that at a meeting held with the DG of BPE, he was handed over a presidential approval which had been given before the former President left office, to the effect that NECOM House be given to NITEL/Transcorp after payment of a token for the property on the ground that SAT-3 cables terminated at NECOM House.” So, why is Adekonola imputing ‘purported’ and “alleged to emanate’ with respect to the presidential directive.
If he had concerns over the presidential directive, on what basis did the liquidator enter into negotiation with Transcorp on the appropriate price for NECOM House? The negotiation broke down when Transcorp offered its price of N100 million for NECOM House. This is important as Transcorp did not bid during the period the liquidator’s advert ran.
Adekonola is obsessed with the money he realized in respect of NECOM House but the sale is being called to question over the fact that the liquidator sold with knowledge of the presidential directive reclassifying NECOM house as core operational asset of NITEL/Mtel and that there is no record or evidence of approval by the COI for the Liquidator to sell NECOM House.
What Adekonola should have done was that as soon as the he and the COI became aware of the presidential directive on the re classification of NECOM House and considering that the liquidation is a voluntary liquidation initiated by the Federal Government through NCP/BPE, he and the COI should have sought and obtained an order of the court to implement the reclassification of NECOM House.
Ifeanyi Ogbe is a public affairs analyst based in Abuja