News

Vigeo Legal Advisers Write NERC, Caution Against ‘Illegal’ Takeover Of BEDC

Published

4 years ago

September 3, 2022

Legal advisers to Vigeo Power Limited, the core investors in Benin Electricity Distribution Company, BEDC Plc have cautioned the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) to refrain from “illegal means to alter the composition of the board of directors of the company (BEDC).”

INFO DAILY had reported that NERC, in a letter issued September 1, 2022, had said it had affirmed a new Board of Directors and Management of the Benin Electricity Distribution Company, BEDC, headed by Henry Ajagbawa

The NERC in the said statement had reiterated that the BEDC “is a distribution licensee of NERC and by virtue of powers vested in the Commission by the Electric Power Sector Reform Act (“EPSRA”), regulatory instruments issued pursuant to EPSRA and the terms and conditions of the licence issued to BEDC; NERC is the primary authority that is vested with powers to statutorily recognise the board/management of BEDC as an operator in the Nigerian Electricity Supply Industry (NESI)”.

The Commission further stated that the BEDC is a jointly owned venture with Vigeo Power Ltd holding an equity of 60% and 40% being held by BPE on behalf of the Federal and State Governments.

The statement disclosed that “One of the shareholders in Vigeo Power Ltd, Vigeo Holdings Ltd, subscribed to its shares vide a loan from Fidelity Bank Ltd”, adding that “In the light of a default in servicing the said loan, the bank has exercised its rights to repossess these shares that were provided as security for the acquisition of the loan”.

But in a letter written to NERC and attention to Chairman of NERC, Engr. Sanusi Garba and Mr. Dafe Akpeneye, with the headline, “RE: NOTICE TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC ON THE LEGITIMATE AND STATUTORILY RECOGNISED BOARD OF DIRECTORS /MANAGEMENT OF BEDC ELECTRICITY PLC,” a copy of which was made available to INFO DAILY, Kunle Adegoke, SAN, said though the letter said to have emanated from NERC was unsigned, it is contemptuous for the regulatory body to have done any publication when the matter is already in a court of competent jurisdiction.

Adegoke, SAN, noted in the letter: “Whilst we have assumed that the Contemptuous Publication did not emanate from NERC, not least because it is unsigned, and will amount to a direct affront to the court (for the reasons stated below), we are, out of abundance of caution, and for the avoidance of doubt, constrained to state as follows:

“We are aware that the Commission is conscious of the fact that NERC is the 2nd Defendant in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1113/2022 between Vigeo Power Limited v. Fidelity Bank Plc; National Electricity Regulatory Commission and 6 Ors. which is pending before the Honourable Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court, Abuja (the FHC Action) and in which orders of injunction have been granted restraining your Commission from: altering or taking further steps towards altering the management and Board of BEDC; registering or recognising the appointment of Messrs K. C. Akuma, Adeola Ijose, Henry Ajagbawa and Yomi Adeyemi as directors of BEDC pending the determination of the Motion on Notice which is scheduled to be heard on the 5th day of October, 2022.”

Adegoke SAN further argued that, “It is self-evident that the said interim orders are extant and have continuous effect, and none of the acts restrained thereby can be said to have been completed, particularly in view of the present and futuristic effect of the orders.”

According to him, “As NERC is very well aware, the pendency of the FHC Action is sufficient to compel any law-abiding institution (particularly a public institution under the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari, who seeks to promote the primacy of Rule of Law) to act with restraint, and not to project an image of lawlessness to the general public by acting contrary to the orders of the court and violating the sanctity of pendency of proceedings which both amount to contempt of court.

“We also note the inaccurate analysis of the effect of the court order in the Contemptuous Publication. Being a party to the FHC Action, the appropriate step to be taken by NERC is to ventilate its grievance with the order before the court, and not denigrate it, as has been purportedly done in the Contemptuous Publication.

“It is on record that whilst NERC is represented by counsel in the FHC Action, it has not (at least as of the last sitting of the Court on the 22nd day of July, 2022) filed any process in the suit and neither has it filed any application to seek that the orders of court were wrongly procured or to have the Court set same aside.”

“We further note the assertion in the Contemptuous Publication that the security created over the shares of one of our client’s shareholders had been enforced, and that the Commission acted in accordance with its business continuity rules.

“In connection with the issue of the security over the shares, we wish to reiterate that the matter is currently the subject of an action before The Hon. Justice Bogoro in FHC Lagos, and the Commission will do well not to comment on an issue that is sub judice. And with respect to the putative powers of NERC to remove directors of licensees, the Commission should be reminded that the power was struck down and declared unlawful in the case of FHC/ABJ/653/2018 – Ibadan Electricity Distribution Company v Minister of Power & NERC.

“As previously mentioned, we feel certain that no law-abiding public officer or public institution could have authorised the issuance of unsigned Contemptuous Publication. If the Contemptuous Publication is being wrongly attributed to the Commission, we urge the Commission to publicly disassociate itself from the publication.”

“However, in the unlikely event that the Contemptuous Publication was authorised by NERC, the Commission should be reminded of the grave consequences that follow disobedience of court orders.

“In this regard, the Commission should also be reminded of the contempt proceedings that are currently pending against it in the FHC Action for gross violation of the orders of court and your counsel was in court when the court directed all defendants in the suit to first comply with the orders of court on the 22nd day of July, 2022.”

The lawyer noted that, “We should mention that we are not unaware of the Commission’s plan to collaborate with some elements to invade the premises of BEDC and forcefully impose the illegal directors on the company notwithstanding the absence of authority to impose directors on a company regulated by law. We will urge the Commission to refrain from such action.”

News

Xenophobic Attacks: Oshiomhole Tells FG To Retaliate Against South African Companies In Nigeria

Published

16 hours ago

May 5, 2026

Editor

Senator Adams Oshiomhole has called on the Federal Government to retaliate against South African businesses operating in Nigeria following the recent attacks on Nigerians in South Africa.

Speaking during plenary on Tuesday, Oshiomhole said the Federal Government should consider revoking the working license of South African owned companies such as MTN and DSTV.

He argued that Nigeria must respond firmly to what he described as persistent hostility against its citizens.

“I am not going to shed tears. If you hit me, I hit you. I think it is appropriate in diplomacy. It is an economic struggle,” Oshiomhole said.

He argued that while some South Africans accuse Nigerians of taking their jobs, Nigerians should return home and take over employment opportunities created by major South African companies operating in the country, including MTN and DSTV.

“When we hit back, the President of South Africa will not only talk but will also go on his knees to recognise that Nigeria cannot be intimidated.

“We will not condone any life being lost. If a crime has been committed under the South African law they have the right to bring any such person to justice, but to kill our people as if we are helpless, we will not allow that,” Oshiomhole added.

DAILY POST reports that several Nigerians in South Africa have reportedly been attacked, and their businesses destroyed, in ongoing xenophobic attacks in the country.

News

IGP Orders Officers Display Name Tag On Uniform, Gives Update On State Police

Published

17 hours ago

May 5, 2026

Editor

The Inspector General of Police, IGP, Tunji Disu, has ordered all police personnel to always have their name tags on their uniforms for easy identification.

Disu disclosed that only police personnel who are undercover are exempted from displaying their name tags.

Speaking on Tuesday, Disu said: “All police officers should have their name tags. All of us on the high table have our names apart from the undercover among us so if you look at all the Commissioners of Police we have our name tags, so it’s not our standard.

News

Court Orders SERAP To Pay DSS Operatives N100m For Defamation

Published

22 hours ago

May 5, 2026

Editor

The High Court of the Federal Capital Territory has ordered a non-governmental organization, the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, SERAP, to pay N100 million as damaged to two operatives of the Department of the State Services, DSS, for unjustly defaming them in some publications.

The court also ordered SERAP to tender public apologies to the defamed officers,
Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele, in two national newspapers, two television stations and its website.

Besides, the organization was also ordered to pay the two operatives N1 million as cost of litigation and 10 percent post-judgment interest annually on the judgment sum until it’s fully liquidated.

Justice Yusuf Halilu of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory gave the order on Tuesday while delivering judgment in a N5.5 billion defamation suit instituted against SERAP by the DSS operatives.

The judge found SERAP liable for unjustly defaming the two DSS operatives with allegations that they unlawfully invaded its Abuja office, harassed and intimidated its staff, in September 2024.

In the offending publication on its website and Twitter handle, SERAP alleged that the two operatives unlawfully invaded and occupied its office with sinister motives.

The judge held that the publication was in bad taste especially from an organization established to promote transparency and accountability, as nothing in the publication was found to be truthful.

The DSS staff had listed SERAP as 1st defendant in the suit marked CV/4547/2024. SERAP’s Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, was listed as the 2nd defendant.

In the suit, the claimants – Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele – accused the two defendants of making false claims that they invaded SERAP’s Abuja office on September 9, 2024..

Counsel to the DSS, Oluwagbemileke Samuel Kehinde, had while adopting his final address in the mater urged the judge to grant all the reliefs sought by his client in the interest of justice.

He admitted that although the names of the two claimants were not mentioned in the defamation materials, they had however established substantial circumstances that they are the ones referred to in the published defamation article by SERAP on its website.

The counsel submitted that all ingredients of defamation have been clearly established and the offending publication referred to the two officials of the secret police.

However, SERAP, through its counsel, Victoria Bassey from Tayo Oyetibo, SAN, law firm, asked the court to dismiss the suit on the ground that the two claimants did not establish that they were the ones referred to in the alleged defamation materials.

She said that SERAP used “DSS officials” in the alleged offending publication, adding that the two claimants must establish that they are the ones referred to before their case can succeed.

Similar arguments were canvassed by Oluwatosin Adefioye who stood for the second defendant, adding that there was no dispute in the September 9, 2024 operation of DSS in SERAP’s office.

He said that since SERAP in the publication did not name any particular person, the claimants must plead special circumstances that they were the ones referred to as the DSS officials.

Besides, he said that there is no organization by name Department of State Services in law, hence, DSS cannot claim being defamed adding that the only entity known to law is National Security Agency.

The claimants had in the suit stated that the alleged false claim by SERAP has negatively impacted on their reputation.

The DSS also stated, in the statement of claim, that, in line with the agency’s practice of engaging with officials of non-governmental organisations operating in the FCT to establish a relationship with their new leadership, it directed the two officials – John and Ogunleye – to visit SERAP’s office and invite them for a familiarization meeting.

The claimants added that in carrying out the directive, John and Ogunleye paid a friendly visit to SERAP’s office at 18 Bamako Street, Wuse Zone 1, Abuja on September 9 and met with one Ruth, who upon being informed about the purpose of the visit, claimed that none of SERAP’s management staff was in the country and advised that a formal letter of invitation be written by the DSS.

John and Ogundele, who claimed that their interactions with Ruth were recorded, said before they immediately exited SERAP’s office, Ruth promised to inform her organisation’s management about the visit and volunteered a phone number – 08160537202.

They said it was surprising that, shortly after their visit, SERAP posted on its X (Twitter) handle – @SERAPNigeria – that officers of the DSS are presently unlawfully occupying its office.

The claimant added, “On the same day, the defendants also published a statement on SERAP’s website, which was widely reported by several media outfits, falsely alleging that some officers from the DSS, described as “a tall, large, dark-skinned woman” and “a slim, dark skinned man,” invaded their Abuja office and interrogated the staff of the first defendant (SERAP).

John and Ogundele stated that “due to the false statements published by the defendants, the DSS has been ridiculed and criticised by international agencies such as the Amnesty International and prominent members of the Nigerian society, such as Femi Falana (SAN)”.

“Due to the false statements published by the defendants, members of the public and the international community formed the opinion that the Federal Government is using the DSS to harass the defendants.”

They added that the defendants’ statements caused harm to their reputation because the staff and management of the DSS have formed the opinion that the claimants did not follow orders and carried out an unsanctioned operation and are therefore, incompetent and unprofessional.

The claimants therefore prayed the court for the following reliefs: “An order directing the defendants to tender an apology to the claimants via the first defendant’s (SERAP’s) website, X (twitter) handle, two national daily newspapers (Punch and Vanguard) and two national news television stations (Arise Television and Channels Television) for falsely accusing the claimants of unlawfully invading the first defendant’s office and interrogating the first defendant’s staff.

“An order directing the defendants to pay the claimants the sum of N5 billion as damages for the libellous statements published about the claimants.

“Interest on the sum of N5b at the rate of 10 percent per annum from the date of judgment until the judgment sum is realised or liquidated.

“An order directing the defendants to pay the claimants the sum of N50 million as costs of this action.”