A years-long dispute between BUA Group and the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) over the termination of a port concession has resurfaced, sparking a heated exchange between the two parties.
The issue, which dates back to 2016, came to light again after BUA Group chairman Abdul Samad Rabiu penned an article marking President Bola Tinubu’s second year in office. In the article, Mr. Rabiu criticised the NPA’s decision to terminate BUA’s $500 million investment in Terminal B of the Port Harcourt Port during the tenure of Hadiza Bala Usman, the former NPA managing director.
According to Rabiu, the termination of the concession came without prior warning, jeopardising 4,000 jobs and raising questions about the motive behind the decision. He alleged that the termination was politically motivated and aimed at benefiting an associate of Usman.
In a swift response, Ms Usman, who now serves as special adviser on policy coordination to President Tinubu, labelled Rabiu’s claims as “blatant falsehoods.” She stated that BUA had failed to meet its contractual obligations, including the rehabilitation of critical infrastructure at the port, despite multiple warnings issued before she was appointed NPA managing director in 2016.
She added that BUA’s alleged defaults forced the NPA to issue notices of termination, a process she claimed was lawful and preceded by due process.
“Contrary to the claims of arbitrary action, the decision was based on years of documented defaults by BUA,” Usman said.
In a counterstatement, BUA accused Usman of ignoring contractual obligations and failing to invoke the dispute resolution clause outlined in the agreement. The company said it had engaged with the NPA on addressing infrastructure challenges and safety concerns but alleged that Usman unilaterally shut down the terminal.
BUA maintained that it had adhered to court orders and continued operations until 2019, when the terminal was decommissioned. It argued that Usman’s actions threatened investor confidence and undermined the sanctity of contracts in Nigeria.
The matter had previously gone to court, with BUA securing an injunction to prevent the termination. The dispute was also referred to arbitration, as stipulated in the concession agreement. However, the two parties failed to reach a resolution, leading to the intervention of then-President Muhammadu Buhari, who ordered the reinstatement of BUA’s rights after a legal review by the attorney general’s office.
Usman has accused BUA of manipulating facts and abusing its access to President Buhari to gain undue advantage. BUA, in turn, has accused Usman of personal animosity and breaching contractual terms.
Samad and Usman argue that the handling of the case could impact investor confidence.
While the NPA defends its actions as lawful and transparent, BUA insists that the termination was a misuse of authority.
The controversy remains unresolved, with both parties standing by their versions of events.
