The Federal Government has retaliated against Atiku Abubakar, a prominent member of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and former vice president of Nigeria, as well as other opponents of the recent OPL 245 dispute resolution, characterizing them as people pursuing “selfish” rather than patriotic goals.
Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, issued a sharply worded statement in which the government addressed recent “misrepresentations” about the oil block that were attributed to the Atiku Abubakar Media Office.
Decades of Standoff
The AGF pointed out that the OPL 245 dispute dates back to its initial award to Malabu Oil & Gas Ltd. in 1998, making it nearly thirty years old. The block remained underdeveloped after years of revocations, reallocations to Shell (SNEPCo) and Eni (Agip), and international legal disputes in the US, UK, and Italy.
Fagbemi stressed that in order to advance the project, President Bola Tinubu’s current administration has finally mediated a historic settlement.
Avoiding a Liability of $2 Billion
The Minister disclosed that Nigeria might be held liable for damages at the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) totaling more than $2 billion. Eni and Agip started the arbitration, claiming that Nigeria violated international investment treaties by delaying the conversion of the OPL into an Oil Mining Lease (OML).
The AGF made it clear that “ownership of Malabu was not concerned with the arbitration.” “It was solely concerned with whether Nigeria had improperly postponed OPL 245’s conversion to an OML.”
Financial Effects
Massive value for the Nigerian economy is anticipated to be unlocked by the resolution, including:
a daily increase in oil production of 150,000 barrels.
An extensive floating production system for Nigerian LNG that includes gas export components.
increased income for the government and improved energy security.
Legal Conclusion
Fagbemi cited a 2025 Court of Appeal decision (Nigerian Agip Exploration Limited v. Malabu Oil & Gas Ltd.) that rejected objections to the block’s distribution and referred to such legal tactics as “abuse of court process.”
The Conclusion
The AGF came to the conclusion that critics’ insistence implies they are motivated by “undisclosed and self-serving interests,” despite obvious legal and commercial advantages.
“Those promoting such narratives aim to deprive over 200 million Nigerians of the financial advantages of a vital national resource,” the statement stated. “Secret agendas must not be sacrificed on the altar of national interest.”
