LIVE UPDATES
For most discerning Nigerians, there is something undeniably conjectural about the claims and counter-claims concerning the seizure of three Nigeria's presidential jets by a French court over an alleged contract breach between Ogun State government and a Chinese firm, Zhongshan Fucheng Industrial Investment Company Limited.
The news of the court's ordered seizure of the jets – a Dassault Falcon 7X, a Boeing 737, and an Airbus 330 has hit most Nigerians like a thunderbolt.
The situation has become one of the most conundrums for legal experts, diplomats, politicians, captains of industry and other well-meaning Nigerians to solve.
It is expected that Nigerians cannot take the situation as if nothing has happened because the three seized jets were all procured with the taxpayers' money and it is only natural for the Nigerian people to know what went amiss and what has been done by the relevant authorities on the vexed judgment that has yet to be set aside.
The Ogun State government and Zhongshan Fucheng were said to have been locked in a long-drawn battle over the management of an export processing zone in the South-West state.
In 2007, the Ogun State Government entered into a joint venture agreement with Zhongshan and another company to create the Ogun Guangdong Free Trade Zone Company.
But in the first half of 2016, the agreement between the parties broke down, leading to Zhongshan filing lawsuits in Nigerian federal and state courts to seek reinstatement of its contractual rights which failed woefully.
The Chinese firm, dissatisfied with the outcomes of its litigations in Nigeria, took the case before the French court where the company was awarded damages.
The court then prohibited Nigeria from moving or selling the three presidential jets until the Chinese firm was fully paid the $74.5m awarded as damages by the court.
Two former governors of Ogun State, Ibikunle Amosun and Otunba Gbenga Daniel, asserted that it was clear that this Chinese company was nothing but a scammer trying to extort money from the Nigerian government.
They insisted that there was no legitimate basis for the company to claim compensation, and that they would stand together to support the Federal Government in recovering the national assets.
They had said, "We stand in solidarity with the Federal Government in this fight against the unjust seizure of our presidential jets. We will do everything in our power to ensure that this Chinese company is exposed for their fraudulent actions."
The former governors also called on the Nigerian government to take all necessary legal actions to overturn the French court’s decision and reclaim the seized national assets.
They emphasized the importance of protecting Nigeria’s national interests and standing up against foreign companies attempting to exploit the country.
Since the curious judgment was delivered in August 2024, it has continued to generate public discourse in Nigeria.
Many Nigerians have expressed disparate views about the judgment and some wondered why a contract between a private Chinese firm and a sub-national entity, in this case, Ogun State government, should be used to punish the entire country.
The impunity with which the jets were seized has raised serious concerns about the court's ruling with regard to morality, legality, immunity and sovereignty of the country.
It is incontrovertible that sovereign immunity indeed protects states (sub-nationals) from being sued in foreign courts. However, there are situations where national courts, like those in France, may prioritize domestic law over sovereign immunity, especially in cases involving commercial transactions or specific legal frameworks that allow for exceptions to immunity.
In the case of the French court potentially ignoring sovereign immunity, several factors could be at play. Commercial activity exception: It is believed that if the Chinese firm, Zhongshan, engaged in commercial activities in France, the court might determine that sovereign immunity does not apply in this context.
Many jurisdictions recognise that states can be subject to litigation when they act as private entities in commercial matters.
Public Policy Considerations: The French legal system may have public policy reasons to prioritize its own laws, especially if enforcing a contract would align with the principles of justice or fairness as understood in France.
Lack of direct international law subjectivity: As noted, the contracting parties are not direct subjects of international law. This could further justify a focus on national laws, as the agreement may not have the same international legal status.
Judicial discretion: Courts often have discretion in applying laws, and judges may interpret cases with a focus on local laws and the specific circumstances surrounding a case.
Ultimately, while sovereign immunity is a fundamental principle, its application can vary based on the nature of the dispute, the context of the agreement, and the jurisdiction's laws.
All those legal jargons espoused, many Nigerians still believe that there was more to it than meets the eye.
If there is any Nigerian, who is highly upset at the entire drama, it is Peter Obi, the standard bearer of the Labour Party in the 2023 presidential election in Nigeria.
Obi's reaction to the judgment and the lackadaisical attitude of the Nigerian government concerning the seizures of the three presidential jets should be an eye-opener to the citizens of Nigeria.
The former Anambra State Governor highlighted the worrying trend of failed leadership, insensitivity to the plight of the people, lack of transparency, and disrespect for the rule of law in Nigeria.
To him, the seizure of the jets was not just a matter of contractual breaches, but also a reflection of the overall governance crisis in the country.
He said the federal government's decision to purchase an expensive jet at a time of economic hardship for many Nigerians was particularly concerning.
He, therefore, called for transparency and accountability in government dealings, saying such is crucial if the country must move out the current economic doldrums.
He posited that the lack of information surrounding the purchase and sale of the jets was unacceptable, given that they are public assets funded by taxpayers' money.
For him, it is imperative for the government to provide detailed explanations and take appropriate actions to address the situation. He believed that the incident also shed light on the need for discipline and adherence to the rule of law at all levels of governance.
Obi rationalised that the disregard for court rulings and agreements further undermined the country's credibility and reputation on the international stage, stressing that his asseveration serves as a reminder that issues of such magnitude should not be treated with levity as it mocks the sovereignty of the country as well as the impact on Nigeria's reputation as a destination for foreign investment.
The failure to pay the arbitration award and the involvement of Zhongshan in alleged corruption cases have highlighted the need for transparency and accountability in business dealings.
On its part, the Ogun State government has stated that it is working to resolve the issue and make the necessary payments to Zhongshan.
However, the situation serves as a cautionary tale for other states and countries engaging in business partnerships with foreign entities, emphasising the importance of conducting due diligence and ensuring that agreements are fair and legally sound.
Overall, the dispute between Ogun State government and Zhongshan serves as a stark reminder of the potential risks and challenges that can arise in international business ventures, underscoring the need for strong governance and ethical business practices.
As the situation appears now, the Nigerian government cannot fold its arms and allow three presidential jets to be taken away just like that. The government must employ both diplomatic and legal options to ensure that they are released quickly.
It is also recommended that next time, before any state government enters into such business contracts with foreign firms, the federal government must be in the know so that there won't be a repeat of this kind of embarrassment the citizens and the government alike are facing.
To be forewarned is to be forearmed.
