ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

By Gloria Ikibah

The House of Representatives has begun consideration of a petition stemming from a long-running dispute between Abuja Power Company Limited and the Federal

over the proposed Gurara II Hydropower Project in Niger State.

At a hearing in Abuja, the committee chairman said the disagreement between APCL and the Federal Government, represented by the Minister of Water Resources and Sanitation, falls clearly within the legislature’s oversight responsibilities. He disclosed that the panel received a formal petition from APCL through its legal representatives concerning the stalled project.

Lawmakers explained that the Gurara II project, also known as the Burara II Hydropower Project, is a proposed multipurpose dam located in Niger State. The project site lies within a Federal Government irrigation dam corridor along the Burari Jere Junction axis, leading towards Kaluniga and Kampacheng.

Appearing before the committee, the Minister of Water Resources and Sanitation, Prof. Joseph Terlumun Utsev, confirmed that he was representing the Federal Government. Abuja Power Company was represented by its legal team and a company director, Prof. George Momen, who stood in for the firm’s managing director.

Presenting the petition, lead counsel to APCL, Oluwemi Okunbi, SAN, told lawmakers that the dispute revolves around the Gurara II project, which he said was initiated by his client as far back as 2004.

He informed the committee that APCL obtained a Certificate of Occupancy from the Niger State Government to develop the project, but alleged that the title was later revoked following interventions by federal officials seeking to transfer the project to another company.

According to him, APCL was forced to seek judicial redress on two occasions to restore the revoked title, a process that significantly delayed the project. He explained that the Gurara development was designed as a multipurpose venture, combining irrigation, power generation and hospitality facilities, with expected benefits for host communities and the broader economy.

Okunbi further told the panel that APCL made repeated efforts to resolve the matter amicably with the Ministry of Water Resources and other relevant authorities, including the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation, noting that the dispute was of national importance and should not be allowed to drag on through prolonged court battles.

In its petition, APCL outlined three key prayers, “First, it urged the committee to note that the concession or public-private partnership (PPP) arrangement allegedly awarded to a Chinese firm, CGC Nigeria Limited, violated the Public Procurement Act, the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (ICRC) Act and regulations governing unsolicited proposals.

“Secondly, APCL asked that CGC Nigeria Limited be restrained from taking further steps on the project unless equivalent terms were first offered to APCL as the original project initiator”.

In the alternative, the company requested that if the ministry opted not to proceed with APCL’s unsolicited proposal, APCL should be adequately compensated in line with extant laws, and that the project be advertised and procured through a competitive bidding process.

Prof. Momen, speaking briefly, confirmed that the prayers reflected APCL’s position.

In his response, the Minister of Water Resources and Sanitation explained to the committee that Gurara II is a proposed 360-megawatt multipurpose dam conceived after the completion of the Gurara I project. He said the development was designed to support electricity generation, irrigate about 8,000 hectares of farmland, boost fisheries, provide flood control and promote tourism.

He told lawmakers that in 2010 the ministry engaged three consortiums to carry out technical assessments of the project, with the intention that it would be funded by the Federal Government. However, funding limitations later forced the ministry to adopt a selective procurement process, which resulted in the award of the project to CGC Nigeria Limited after technical and financial evaluations.

According to the minister, Abuja Power Company Limited surfaced only after the procurement process had been concluded, laying claim to a prior land allocation and expenses allegedly incurred on the project. He said that after assuming office, he invited both APCL and the Chinese firm for discussions and advised them to reach an understanding on compensation.

The situation, he noted, became more complicated when APCL took the matter to court, making it impossible for the ministry to pursue settlement discussions while litigation was ongoing.

During the hearing, several lawmakers questioned whether proper due diligence was carried out, who legally owned the project, the role played by the Niger State Government and whether APCL acted with lawful authority or merely as a volunteer when it commenced work at the site.

Other members cautioned the committee against venturing into issues already before the courts, warning that such action could interfere with ongoing judicial proceedings.

The committee is expected to study all submissions before it, including court processes and official correspondence, before deciding on the next steps in resolving the prolonged dispute surrounding the Gurara II Hydropower Project.