BUA criticizes Hadiza Usman over alleged violations in port concession

BUA Group has challenged the Particular Adviser to President Bola Tinubu on Coverage Coordination, Hadiza Bala Usman, to obviously state which clause or clauses of the port concession settlement the corporate allegedly violated, following her justification for terminating the settlement with the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA).

BUA Group and Hadiza Bala Usman, former Managing Director of the NPA have been embroiled in a renewed dispute over the termination of a Rivers port concession settlement.

The disagreement reignited after an article authored by Abdul Samad Rabiu, Chairman of BUA Group, titled ‘Two Years of President Tinubu: A Enterprise Perspective’.

Within the article, Rabiu alleged that the NPA, throughout Usman’s tenure, abruptly terminated his firm’s concession with none prior discover.

In response, Usman dismissed Rabiu’s model of occasions as “barefaced lies” designed to mislead the general public and deflect consideration from his firm’s failures to fulfill contractual obligations.

Nonetheless, in a counter-statement dated Might 31, BUA Group reiterated its claims, accusing Usman of performing unilaterally, ignoring a court docket order, and bypassing the arbitration clause within the concession contract.

The corporate said that it could have neglected Usman’s remarks however felt compelled to reply because of the “distortions” contained in her assertion.

“Lengthy earlier than Ms. Usman’s appointment, BUA had begun formal engagement with the NPA to handle excellent remedial works and infrastructural deficiencies,” the assertion reads.

“These discussions have been close to conclusion when she assumed workplace. Somewhat than construct on that course of, Ms. Usman ignored BUA’s requests and obligations below the settlement. In 2016, BUA wrote to the NPA below Article 8.4 of the lease, mandating concessionaires to report environmental and security issues and to hunt approval for remedial works.

“Somewhat than act constructively, Ms. Usman used that letter as a pretext to situation a termination discover and summarily shut down the terminal, with out offering any prior warning, session, or invoking the dispute decision clause.”

BUA Group additionally alleged that below Usman’s management, the NPA did not fulfil its personal duties — together with the handover of important port sections, elimination of deserted iron ore, dredging and repairing quay partitions, and making certain satisfactory safety.

READ THE FULL STATEMENT BELOW:

Now we have taken word of latest public statements made by Ms. Hadiza Bala Usman, the previous Managing Director of the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA), who was sacked from workplace. In her feedback, she accused BUA Group and our Chairman, Abdul Samad Rabiu, of breaching a concession settlement and distorting information. These claims have been made in response to our Chairman’s interview and article, “Two Years of President Tinubu: A Enterprise Perspective” (watch at https://bit.ly/pbatbua), which celebrated Nigeria’s reform trajectory and referenced prior situations of arbitrary disruptions to enterprise operations, with out naming anybody – a state of affairs that has now been curtailed by President Tinubu’s no-nonsense strategy to bringing sanity and stability to the enterprise setting in Nigeria.

Ordinarily, we’d not interact, however the distortions in her response necessitate this factual clarification, particularly as they relate to her actions throughout her tenure as MD of the NPA.

THE CONTRACT AND WHAT SHE OMITTED

BUA entered into a sound lengthy lease settlement in 2006 with the NPA to rehabilitate and function Terminal B at Rivers Port in Port Harcourt, Rivers State. Lengthy earlier than Ms. Usman’s appointment, BUA had begun formal engagement with the NPA to handle excellent remedial works and infrastructural deficiencies. These discussions have been close to conclusion when she assumed workplace.

Somewhat than construct on that course of, Ms. Usman ignored BUA’s requests and obligations below the settlement. In 2016, BUA wrote to the NPA below Article 8.4 of the lease, mandating concessionaires to report environmental and security issues and to hunt approval for remedial works. Somewhat than act constructively, Ms. Usman used that letter as a pretext to situation a termination discover and summarily shut down the terminal, with out offering any prior warning, session, or invoking the dispute decision clause.

She forgot or did not disclose in her response that the NPA, below her management, was itself in materials breach of core obligations together with, failing at hand over crucial parts of the port, leaving derelict iron ore on the berths, failing to dredge or restore quay partitions, and neglecting to supply obligatory safety. These lapses have been vital impediments to BUA’s operations and, because of this, led to disputes between the events.

ILLEGALITY, CONTEMPT, AND DISREGARD FOR CONTRACTUAL MECHANISMS

After the illegal termination, BUA approached the Federal Excessive Court docket, which promptly granted an injunction restraining the NPA from continuing with termination. The NPA itself then referred the dispute to arbitration, as stipulated in Part 17.3 of the settlement, which clearly states:

“Any dispute, controversy or declare… shall be completely and at last settled pursuant to the dispute decision course of prescribed on this Article.”

Regardless of this, Ms. Usman, towards the recommendation of her company, unilaterally decommissioned the berths, thereby violating each the settlement and a court docket injunction. To be clear, the concession settlement granted her no such energy to decommission. If she believes in any other case, we invite her to publicly cite the particular clause that authorizes this motion.

To additional compound the illegality, BUA—after offering the ensures and indemnities requested by the NPA—was permitted to renew operations briefly. Merely three weeks later, the terminal was once more shut down, this time by Ms. Usman’s instruction. This left little question that her actions have been motivated not by due course of, however by private animosity and abuse of workplace.

BUA subsequently filed contempt proceedings and was taking a look at estimated losses in extra of $10 million. These proceedings have been solely withdrawn out of respect for nationwide curiosity and following the intervention of well-meaning Nigerians inside and out of doors the federal government.

PRESIDENT BUHARI WAS NOT MISINFORMED—HE ACTED ON FACTS AND LAW

Ms. Usman’s declare that former President Muhammadu Buhari was “misinformed” when he reversed her actions is fake, disrespectful, and disingenuous.

Following a gathering that our Chairman had the privilege of holding with President Buhari in 2018, he introduced the matter to the President, who then directed the Workplace of the Attorney General of the Federation to conduct an intensive authorized assessment and examine the state of affairs. The AGF invited all events, together with Ms. Usman, to a number of conferences. We by no means noticed her at any of them. Nonetheless, the AGF proceeded to undertake a complete assessment of the contract, the litigation, the arbitration clause, and all correspondence and actions by BUA and NPA.

The authorized recommendation (hooked up herewith) discovered that the termination was illegal, the decommissioning was with none authorized foundation, and that BUA’s rights ought to be reinstated. It was on this foundation that President Buhari ordered the reversal of her illegal actions. His intervention preserved the sanctity of the contract, saved over 4,000 jobs, and BUA’s $500 million built-in funding cluster involving flour, pasta, and sugar processing services which have been all depending on terminal entry. For this, we stay deeply grateful to former President Buhari.

As our Chairman mentioned in his interview, think about if he wasn’t privileged to have entry. Nonetheless, this tradition of impunity has been considerably curtailed below President Tinubu’s management, as many are conscious they may very well be dismissed or imprisoned in the event that they abuse their positions.

POST-HADIZA: DUE PROCESS RESTORED, INVESTMENT RESUMED

Following Ms. Usman’s elimination from workplace, the NPA, below new management, carried out the AGF’s place. In 2022, BUA was granted formal approval to renew reconstruction works. The contract was awarded to TREVI, and BUA has since invested over $65 million—solely self-funded and with no recourse to public funds or subsidies. Work is ongoing and completion is anticipated within the first quarter of 2026.

THE REAL DANGER: INVESTOR CONFIDENCE AND RULE OF LAW

We should state clearly that this matter goes past BUA. Had Ms. Usman’s actions been allowed to face, it could have despatched a disastrous sign that contracts in Nigeria are nugatory, court docket orders are non-obligatory, and public establishments or people can act unilaterally with out consequence. We mustn’t ever return to that period. Nigeria’s reform success immediately is rooted in respecting contracts, due course of, and investor confidence—rules being restored below President Tinubu’s administration, below which BUA has dedicated over $1 billion in new investments throughout vitality, meals processing, manufacturing, infrastructure and social interventions.

We want to emphasise that Ms. Usman is entitled to her opinions, no matter how distorted they could be. Nonetheless, she is just not entitled to distort the information or rewrite historical past. We don’t search a public spat and would love her to focus on fulfilling her duties in her new position below the sturdy management of President Tinubu. We subsequently merely restate the information that Ms Hadiza Bala-Usman had no authority to decommission Terminal B unilaterally. She additionally acted in defiance of a court docket injunction and contractual process and her actions brought on vital financial lack of over USD10 million, reputational danger to BUA, and investor concern for Nigeria.

Our core message stays the identical: public workplace ought to be considered as a place of belief moderately than a platform for private biases. These granted public energy want to withstand the temptation to let prejudice, ego, and vendetta affect their actions.

If Ms Hadiza Bala-Usman believes she acted lawfully, we problem her to quote the particular clause or clauses that guided her illegal actions. If not, let the information stay the place they belong — within the public file.

Signed,

BUA Group

Might 31, 2025