NNPCL, Kyari Deny Bias in Niger Delta Contract

The Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) and its former Group Chief Executive Officer, Mele Kyari, have pushed back against claims that they improperly awarded a pipeline surveillance contract in the Niger Delta to Tantita Security Services Limited.

The allegations were brought before the Federal High Court in Abuja by the Incorporated Trustees of the AGIP Indigenous Contractors Association, along with several indigenous firms. The plaintiffs argue that the contract was granted without a transparent bidding process, in breach of the Nigerian Oil and Gas Industry Content Development Act of 2010.

Allegations of Exclusion and Bias

According to the complainants, the NNPCL and Kyari awarded the surveillance contract in 2020 to companies of their choosing, bypassing several interested indigenous contractors who had officially expressed interest. The plaintiffs include firms such as Eliax Bleet Nig Ltd, Tamak Plan Oil & Gas Ltd, De-friyo Marine Services Ltd, Joclemsco Nig Ltd, and others, as well as individual directors from the oil-producing communities.

They accused the defendants of ignoring their bids and instead awarding the lucrative contracts to associates and preferred companies. Their legal counsel, R. U. Afangide, argued that the process violated provisions of the Content Development Act, and urged the court to ensure the plaintiffs are fairly considered in future contract awards.

NNPCL’s Defense

In response, NNPCL and Kyari filed a counter-affidavit through Suleiman Kuku Usman, the company’s lead counsel on community claims. They denied all allegations, stating that no laws were broken and that the plaintiffs’ claims were based on unfounded assumptions.

The company emphasized that receiving expressions of interest does not guarantee selection for contracts. It also cited provisions from the Petroleum Industry Act, noting that NNPCL, as a commercial entity incorporated under the Companies and Allied Matters Act, is exempt from the Public Procurement Act and is not obligated to follow public sector procurement rules.

NNPCL stressed that all contracts were awarded to fully indigenous firms with the technical capability to deliver results. The affidavit also asserted that the selection process was consistent with both the Content Act and directives from the Federal Executive Council.

The company described the accusations of favoritism as baseless, adding that the success of the surveillance operations—evident in the disruption of crude oil theft and dismantling of illegal refineries—underscores the competence of the selected contractors, including Tantita.

Court Developments

At the last court session on June 11, 2025, the plaintiffs’ lawyer informed the presiding judge, Justice G. Umar, that some of the defendants had not been properly notified and were absent from the hearing.

The court granted a request for an adjournment, with no objection from the defense team, which included legal representatives for NNPCL, Mele Kyari, and the Attorney General of the Federation.

The matter was postponed to July 7, 2025, with instructions that hearing notices be served on all absent parties before the next sitting.