The Court of Appeal in Abuja has temporarily stayed the execution of a Federal High Court judgment that barred the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission from investigating Leno Adesanya, the promoter of Sunrise Power and Transmission Ltd, over alleged criminal activities connected to the $6bn Mambilla hydropower contract.
A three-member panel of the appellate court, led by Justice Joseph Oyewole, made the ruling after the Attorney General of the Federation filed an application for a stay of execution.
The appellate court ruling followed a previous decision by Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court, delivered on September 23, 2024, which had ordered the EFCC to remove Adesanya from its wanted list related to the Mambilla project.
Justice Ekwo’s ruling was in response to a lawsuit filed by Adesanya’s lawyer, M.S. Diri (SAN), against the EFCC, the Federal Ministry of Power, and the Federal Government, among other defendants.
The EFCC had declared Adesanya wanted for alleged conspiracy and corruption linked to the Mambilla hydropower project.
In response, Adesanya’s legal team sought a perpetual injunction to stop further investigations, public listings, or any criminal charges related to the project, citing ongoing arbitration proceedings at the International Chamber of Commerce Court of Arbitration in Paris.
Adesanya’s counsel argued that the Mambilla project, initiated under the administration of former President Olusegun Obasanjo, was designed to ensure sustainable power in Nigeria through the involvement of Sunrise Power and its Chinese partners.
He said despite significant meetings and agreements, including financial negotiations approved by the government, the project had yet to receive funding.
But the EFCC countered the claim, saying evidence of criminal activity linked to the project was found during investigations, and that the agency was acting in accordance with the law, asserting that the contract lacked necessary approvals
Justice Ekwo, while ruling on the case, held that due to the ongoing arbitration process, the sanctity of the proceedings must be respected, and the EFCC’s actions, particularly the publication of Adesanya’s name as a “wanted person,” lacked a valid defence.
The court then declared that the EFCC was not authorised to investigate or prosecute the contractual dispute, which was still under arbitration in Paris.
Following this ruling, the AGF, through his counsel, T.A. Gazali (SAN), appealed, urging the Court of Appeal to stay the execution of the judgment.
Gazali argued that irreparable harm would occur if the ruling were carried out before the appeal was heard.
The Court of Appeal agreed, with Justice Oyewole stating that the balance of convenience favoured staying the judgment until the appeal was resolved.
