Domestic airlines ask court to terminate FG-Ethiopian deal

About eight local airlines and their association, including Azman Air, Air Peace, Max Air, Topbrass Aviation and United Nigeria Airlines on Friday took the Federal Government and its foreign technical partner and majority shareholders to court over the national carrier project.

Nigerian Air, Ethiopian Airlines, Minister of Aviation, Hadi Sirika, and Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, as defendants in the suit filed in the Federal High Court of Nigeria in the Lagos Judicial Division.

The suit seeks for the national carrier deal to be stopped and the withdrawal of the Air Transport License already issued to Nigeria Air by the Federal Government/Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority among others, alleging that the license did not pass through normal security clearance.

They alleged that the company which served as the Transaction Adviser was linked to the aviation minister and that it was incorporated last year.

Recall that Federal Government in September this year named Ethiopian Airlines Consortium as preferred bidder for Nigeria Air. The announcement was made in Abuja by the Minister of Aviation, Hadi Sirika.

They also seek N2bn only as damages “for the injury suffered by the Plaintiffs and still suffering as a result of the wrongful exclusion of the Plaintiffs, wrongful action; unlawful bidding and selection processes and their wrongful projection of the plaintiffs as not having properly, rightly and timely bid for the Nigeria Air project.”

The court summoned Sirika and other defendants named in the suit to cause an appearance to be entered for them to the summons within 30 days after service of the summons on them.

The court said the summons was for the determination of several questions. It outlined the questions to include, “1. Whether on proper construction of the Companies and Allied Matters Act 2020, SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) Nigeria Consolidated Rules & Regulations 2013 (as amended in 2022), Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission Act, International Civil Aviation Organisation Convention, Civil Aviation Act, Public Procurement Act, Concession Regulatory Commission (Est.) Act, 2005, Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act, Procurement Processes for Public Private Partnership in the Federal Government under the National Policy on Public Private Partnership (N4P) and Nigeria Civil Aviation Regulations, 2015 and other regulatory statutes on aviation, companies and investment laws in Nigeria; the action, conduct and or decisions in the sale of the shares and operations of the 1st defendant is not invalid, null & void.

“2. Whether on construction of International Civil Aviation Organisation Convention, among others, the entire administrative actions and decisions of the third and fourth defendants in the sale of the shares of the 1st defendant to the 2nd defendant and its consortium is not invalid, void and of no effect having regard to the process embarked upon and the extant local and international laws and regulations on aviation including the terms and condition stated in the request for proposal.

“3. Whether, on a construction of Section 78 (1) & (2) of the Companies and Allied Matters Act 2020, Rule 406(2) of SEC Nigeria Consolidated Rules & Regulations 2013 (as amended in 2022), section 20 of the Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission Act, Article 7 of the International Civil Aviation Organization Convention, section 33 of the Civil Aviation Act Cap C13 LFN 2004 (as amended in 2006); the 2nd Defendant and its consortium were competent and qualified to bid for shares in the 1st Defendant and commence business accordingly.

“4. Whether, on a construction of Sections 4 & 5, among others, of the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (Est.) Act, 2005; Sections 24 & 27, among others, of the Public Procurement Act; and Clauses 2, 3 and 4 of the Procurement Processes for Public Private Partnership in the Federal Government under the National Policy on Public Private Partnership, sections 76-81 of the Federal  Competition and Consumer Protection Act; the selection of the 2nd Defendant and its consortium as the sole bidder in the bidding exercise for the Nigeria Air Project conducted by the 1st, 3rd& 4th Defendants is proper, lawful and valid?

“5. Whether the entire process for the sale and transfer of shares of the in the 1st Defendant to the 2nd defendant and its consortium by the 3rd and 4th Defendants is in line with the provisions of the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (Est.) Act, 2005, Federal  Competition and Consumer Protection Act, International Civil Aviation Organisation Convention, the National Policy on Public Private Partnership, sections 76-81 of the Federal  Competition and Consumer Protection Act and does not affect the entire process including the selection, approval or grant to the 2nd Defendant and its consortium by the 3rd and 4th Defendants is not invalid and thereby entitling the entire process to fresh bidding  exercise?”

Exit mobile version