News
Domestic airlines ask court to terminate FG-Ethiopian deal
Among other prayers, the indigenous airlines want the court to stop the national carrier deal and withdraw the Air Transport Licence already issued to Nigeria Air by the Federal Government/Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority.
They also claimed that the firm which served as Transaction Adviser for the transaction, was incorporated in March last year and alleged that the company was linked to the aviation minister.
The local airlines further alleged that ATL issued to Nigerian Air did not pass through the normal security clearance.
According to them, the Federal Government’s partnership with Ethiopian Airlines on the project will send domestic airlines out of business by opening up the domestic air travel market to Ethiopian Airlines.
In September this year, the Federal Government named Ethiopian Airlines Consortium as preferred bidder for Nigeria Air. The Minister of Aviation, Hadi Sirika, announced this in Abuja.
But it was learnt on Sunday that the Registered Trustees of the Airline Operators of Nigeria, including Azman Air, Air Peace, Max Air, Topbrass Aviation and United Nigeria Airlines, filed a suit against the move on Friday.
The defendants in the suit include Sirika, Nigeria Air Limited, Ethiopian Airlines, and the Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami. The suit was filed in the Federal High Court of Nigeria in the Lagos Judicial Division.
Four defendants
The first, second, third and fourth defendants in the suit were Nigeria Air Limited, Ethiopian Airlines, Senator Hadi Sirika, and Attorney-General of the Federation.
The court summoned Sirika and other defendants named in the suit to cause an appearance to be entered for them to the summons within 30 days after service of the summons on them.
The court said the summons was for the determination of several questions. It outlined the questions to include, “1. Whether on proper construction of the Companies and Allied Matters Act 2020, SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) Nigeria Consolidated Rules & Regulations 2013 (as amended in 2022), Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission Act, International Civil Aviation Organisation Convention, Civil Aviation Act, Public Procurement Act, Concession Regulatory Commission (Est.) Act, 2005, Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act, Procurement Processes for Public Private Partnership in the Federal Government under the National Policy on Public Private Partnership (N4P) and Nigeria Civil Aviation Regulations, 2015 and other regulatory statutes on aviation, companies and investment laws in Nigeria; the action, conduct and or decisions in the sale of the shares and operations of the 1st defendant is not invalid, null & void.
“2. Whether on construction of International Civil Aviation Organisation Convention, among others, the entire administrative actions and decisions of the third and fourth defendants in the sale of the shares of the 1st defendant to the 2nd defendant and its consortium is not invalid, void and of no effect having regard to the process embarked upon and the extant local and international laws and regulations on aviation including the terms and condition stated in the request for proposal.
“3. Whether, on a construction of Section 78 (1) & (2) of the Companies and Allied Matters Act 2020, Rule 406(2) of SEC Nigeria Consolidated Rules & Regulations 2013 (as amended in 2022), section 20 of the Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission Act, Article 7 of the International Civil Aviation Organization Convention, section 33 of the Civil Aviation Act Cap C13 LFN 2004 (as amended in 2006); the 2nd Defendant and its consortium were competent and qualified to bid for shares in the 1st Defendant and commence business accordingly.
“4. Whether, on a construction of Sections 4 & 5, among others, of the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (Est.) Act, 2005; Sections 24 & 27, among others, of the Public Procurement Act; and Clauses 2, 3 and 4 of the Procurement Processes for Public Private Partnership in the Federal Government under the National Policy on Public Private Partnership, sections 76-81 of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act; the selection of the 2nd Defendant and its consortium as the sole bidder in the bidding exercise for the Nigeria Air Project conducted by the 1st, 3rd& 4th Defendants is proper, lawful and valid?
“5. Whether the entire process for the sale and transfer of shares of the in the 1st Defendant to the 2nd defendant and its consortium by the 3rd and 4th Defendants is in line with the provisions of the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (Est.) Act, 2005, Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act, International Civil Aviation Organisation Convention, the National Policy on Public Private Partnership, sections 76-81 of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act and does not affect the entire process including the selection, approval or grant to the 2nd Defendant and its consortium by the 3rd and 4th Defendants is not invalid and thereby entitling the entire process to fresh bidding exercise?”
The domestic airlines demanded, in the court document, an order directing the immediate revocation and cancellation of the Air Transport License issued by the Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority to the 1st Defendant.
They also demanded an order of N2bn only as damages “for the injury suffered by the Plaintiffs and still suffering as a result of the wrongful exclusion of the Plaintiffs, wrongful action; unlawful bidding and selection processes and their wrongful projection of the plaintiffs as not having properly, rightly and timely bid for the Nigeria Air project.”
The Federal Government’s choice of Ethiopian Air¬lines as the core investor and technical partner in the Nigeria Air project, had been described as a win for the East African carrier and a huge loss for Nigeria.
Some critics argued that instead of giving Ethiopian Airlines a 49 per cent stake in Nigeria Air, there could have been better partnership arrangements that would benefit Nigeria more.
The Assistant General Secre¬tary, Aviation Round Table, Olumide Ohunayo, said though Ethiopian Airlines had been a successful airline in Af¬rica, its partner carriers on the continent had all failed.
Ohunayo named the failed partner carriers to include Congo Air¬ways, Tchadia Airlines, Zam¬bia Airways and others, adding that it was on Asky Airline that was surviving as it (Asky) just upped its fleet of aircraft to about 12.
The Chief Execu¬tive Officer, Centurion Security Limited, Capt. John Ojikutu (retd.), had said in an interview with The PUNCH that similar partnerships in the past by the defunct national carrier, Nigeria Airways, with KLM and South African Airways in the early 1990s did not benefit Nigeria.
He said this new move with Ethiopian Airlines would not be different from the others.
Aviation minister
As analysts and operators raise diverse concerns about the national carrier project, the government through its aviation minister, Sirika, gave reasons why it picked Ethiopian Airlines as the preferred bidder for Nigeria Air.
Sirika told journalists in Abuja on Thursday that Ethiopian Airlines was the only airline that responded to the government’s requests for expression of interest and fulfilled all the stipulated conditions laid down by Nigeria.
He said other airlines in the world ignored Nigeria’s call to join hands with the country to float a national carrier despite the fact that he personally went to the airlines and met with them at several air shows and international aviation events to convince them.
Sirika, however, said the airline proved that it was not only efficient and prosperous by registering over $1bn profit after tax even in the wake of COVID-19, but had continued to flourish despite the challenges in the aviation sector globally.
He said, “We did not cede Nigeria Air to Ethiopian Airlines. It is the only airline in the world that made $1bn profit even during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is the most prosperous, efficient and leading airline in the African continent and it was the only airline that responded to our request for partnership to run the airline after many months of advertisement of expression of interest.
“Even after some interested persons asked Nigeria to extend the time of EoI and we did, none of them showed interest. Officials of the Ministry of Aviation led by me personally visited some of the leading airlines across the world and pleaded with them to take up the partnership with Nigeria to set up the airline.
“None of them signified interest except Ethiopian Airlines, which has been allotted 49 per cent shares, while Nigerian institutional investors take up 45 per cent and the Federal Government will take up only five per cent.
“The choice of Ethiopian Airlines is good for Nigeria and it is in line with the African Union Agenda. Our desire is for Africa to come together and lead the African aviation market through our new partnership with Ethiopian Airlines. The partnership will also reduce cost of operations and airfares for Nigerian and African air travellers as opposed to the current situation.
“Contrary to what people think, let it be known that Ethiopian Airlines emerged as the preferred partner of Nigeria Air through a transparent and credible process that cannot be faulted because we want the project to succeed so that Nigeria can have an airline that does not suffer the fate of the former Nigeria Airways.”
When the Enugu State House of Assembly adopted the report of its Special Committee on Land Matters and Disputes in 2024, many observers described it as a watershed moment in the long-running controversy surrounding the Centenary City land in Amechi and Obeagu communities.
The report attracted national attention because it tackled a dispute that had generated numerous court cases, allegations of intimidation, destruction of property, community unrest, and claims involving some of the most influential figures in the state.
For many residents of Amechi and Obeagu, the Assembly’s intervention provided the first official platform where their grievances appeared to receive impartial consideration. The committee’s findings were widely commended for their detailed examination of the circumstances surrounding the acquisition and development of over 1,097 hectares of ancestral land.
At the heart of the controversy was the allegation that Private Estates International West Africa Limited (PEIWA), operating under a development agreement with the Enugu State Government, relied on questionable documents to assert rights over vast portions of land originally linked to a proposed university project initiated during the administration of former Anambra State Governor, Dr. Jim Nwobodo.
After reviewing submissions from the parties, the Assembly committee identified several inconsistencies in documents connected with the acquisition process. Among its findings were concerns regarding the authenticity of a survey plan purportedly prepared for the “Permanent Site of Enugu State University of Science and Technology” in 1985, despite the fact that Enugu State had not yet been created at that time.
Controversial Enugu Centenary Land: A Daniel Has Come To Judgement
The committee also questioned the authenticity of signatures and official endorsements appearing on key documents, including survey records, gazette notices, and correspondences allegedly executed on behalf of traditional authorities in Amechi and Obeagu communities.
Based on these findings, the committee concluded that the host communities had established that they were not properly carried along in the acquisition process and recommended dialogue, compensation, government intervention, and a comprehensive audit of lands developed under the Centenary City project.
At the time, many hailed the report as evidence that the legislature was willing to confront powerful interests in defence of justice and accountability.
Two years later, events appear to have given fresh significance to those findings.
Today, Kingsley Eze, Chamberlin Mbachu and Private Estates International (W.A.) Limited are facing criminal charges before the Federal High Court, Enugu, in connection with the alleged forgery of a survey plan linked to the disputed acquisition of ancestral lands in Amechi and Obeagu communities.
According to the charge sheet in Charge No. FHC/EN/CR/84/2025, the defendants are accused of conspiring to forge a survey plan titled “Permanent Site of Enugu State University of Science and Technology” purportedly dated 1985.
The prosecution alleges that the defendants knowingly made or uttered the survey plan as a genuine document despite its alleged falsity. The offences are said to be punishable under relevant provisions of the Miscellaneous Offences Act.
The criminal charges have drawn renewed attention to the conclusions reached by the Enugu State House of Assembly in 2024, particularly its observations regarding inconsistencies surrounding the same survey plan and related acquisition documents.
The developments have also prompted further advocacy from civil society organisations. The Rule of Law and Accountability Advocacy Centre (RULAAC) has called on the Inspector-General of Police to direct the Police Monitoring Unit to take over investigations and prosecutions connected with the dispute, investigate allegations of misconduct against certain police officers, and review criminal proceedings allegedly used for harassment and intimidation.
In a separate petition dated May 28, 2026, RULAAC also urged the Inspector-General of Police to intervene in two criminal cases pending before the Federal High Court, Enugu, citing repeated failures by law enforcement authorities to produce defendants for arraignment.
The cases include Charge No. FHC/EN/CR/84/2025, IGP v. Kingsley Eze & 2 Others, and Charge No. FHC/EN/CR/222/2024, IGP v. Alex Ifeadi & 2 Others.
As the criminal proceedings continue, many observers believe the matter has entered a decisive phase. The allegations that were once the subject of community petitions, legislative inquiries and public debate are now before a court of law for determination.
Whether the Assembly’s 2024 report marked the beginning of accountability or merely one chapter in a much longer struggle remains to be seen. What is clear, however, is that the issues raised by the Amechi and Obeagu communities have not faded away. Instead, they have evolved into a legal test that could shape public confidence in land administration, governance and the rule of law in Enugu State for years to come.
If the legislative findings, criminal investigations and court proceedings ultimately converge on the truth, then many residents may indeed conclude that, at long last, a Daniel has come to judgment.
Son of the late head of state and former Minister of Defence, Chief Thomas Aguiyi-Ironsi, in a letter of remembrance and solidarity written on behalf of the Aguiyi-Ironsi family to the Fajuyi family, marking the 60th anniversary of his death, said July 29, 2026, will be a solemn occasion to honour a soldier they described as “a war hero who offered himself as a sacrificial lamb for the unity and integrity of the nation.”
The family recalled that Lt Col Fajuyi, then Military Governor of the Western Region, made the ultimate sacrifice in 1966 when mutinous soldiers abducted him alongside Maj Gen Aguiyi-Ironsi in Ibadan during the military counter-coup.
They stated that Fajuyi, in a defining moment of conscience, chose honour over personal safety and refused to abandon his guest and superior, a decision the family said reflected the highest ideals of loyalty, integrity, and military brotherhood.
According to the statement, his action transformed him into a national martyr whose legacy continued to inspire unity, courage, and selfless service.
The Aguiyi-Ironsi family also expressed sympathy with the Fajuyi family, acknowledging the enduring pain of their loss, while praying for continued strength, comfort, and peace.
The statement further stated, “He did not run. He did not hide. He chose to stand. In that sacrificial decision lay the essence of his greatness.”
The family called on government institutions, military authorities, and custodians of national memory to ensure sustained recognition and support for the Fajuyi family, stressing that his sacrifice remained a national responsibility to remember and honour.
It urged Nigerians to draw inspiration from his life and death, noting that his legacy continues to challenge the nation to uphold unity, courage, honour, and selfless service.
Fajuyi was killed on July 29, 1966, during the military counter-coup in Ibadan alongside Aguiyi-Ironsi.
By Okey Maduforo Awka
The emergence of Chief Ikeagwuonu Ugochinyere as the Minority Leader of the Federal House of Representatives has been described as a vindication of the fact that the Action People’s Party (APP ) represents the collective interests of the Nigerian masses.
Recall that recently, Ugochinyere was elected as the Minority Leader of the party in a keenly contested election of the Federal House of Representatives.
According to a statement by the Chairman Anambra state chapter of the APP Chief Chijioke Okeke, Ugochinyere had been consistent in offering himself as the voice of the people and that of the voiceless.
“It did not come to us as a surprise that our great leader High Chief Ugochinyere became the Minority leader of the Federal House of Representatives because he has always been consistent and focus towards providing himself as the only vent for the masses at the Green Chambers”
“We know his pedegre as a politician as well as a leader and he has remained focus in ensuring that the voiceless are heard and this is also a vindication of our party’s unflinching desire to provide a veritable platform in a democratic process”
Okeke further stated that the fifth columnists who had attempted to deregister the party have been put to shame adding that the party shall continue to champion the interests of the Nigerian people.
“They made failed attempt at deregistering our great party but they lost sight of the fact that the APP is firmely rooted on ground and has all that it takes to drive the wishes and aspirations of the Nigerian populace and with this recent development our traducers have been put to shame and our party is on the path of further greatness “. Okeke noted .
By Okey Maduforo Awka
Six members of the Indigenous People Of Biafra IPOB have been declared wanted by the Nigerian Police .
The six persons led by Mr Chukwuebuka Ohaechesi, include Emma Okonkwo, Jude Uwa, Gentle Okoro, Uchenna Dike, and Emmanuel Nwankwo who are said to be at large.
The were said to have fled to neighboring states in the South East hence signaling the other four Police Commands in the geopolitical zone to assist in the manhunt for them
The Police accused them of executing protests against the detaintion of the leader of IPOB Mazi Nnamdi Kanu who is currently serving jail terms in Sokoto Correction Center.
According to a statement issued by the Abia Police Public Relations Officer of the Command, ASP Eguavon Omokaro, the individuals are suspected members of IPOB who have allegedly participated in protests at various times and locations within the state.
The statement alleged that the protests were organised in connection with the continued detention of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu and demands for justice through the judicial process.
The Police Command further stated that these protests have allegedly resulted in breaches of peace and disruptions to law and order in Abia State. Consequently, the Police Intelligence Department reportedly concluded that the named individuals were among the principal organisers and coordinators of the demonstrations.
The statement further alleged that; ;
“It should be noted that on every 30th day of May, these men and their cohorts convene for the so-called remembrance of Biafra, holding clandestine meetings at various locations in the name of the emancipation of the Biafran Republic and the release of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.”
According to the police, the six individuals were invited on several occasions for questioning in relation to the allegations against them.
The statement indicated that the first invitation was issued on 18 December 2025, followed by a second invitation on 7 February 2026, and a third invitation on 3 March 2026.
The police alleged that the individuals failed to honour all three invitations.
The statement further asserted:
“These individuals were invited by the police on several occasions. Firstly, on 18 December 2025, they failed to honour the invitation. Again, they were invited on 7th February 2026 and failed to appear. Finally, they were invited on 3 March 2026, and they also failed to present themselves before the police.” It stated.
As a result, the Abia State Police Command announced that all six individuals had been formally declared wanted.
The police appealed to members of the public to provide any reliable information that could lead to their arrest and prosecution, stating that informants would be suitably rewarded.
The declaration of the six individuals as wanted persons is linked to allegations of their participation in pro-Biafra activities, demonstrations concerning the detention of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, and their alleged association with IPOB, an organisation that has been the subject of extensive scrutiny and security operations by Nigerian authorities.
-
Crime5 days agoOyo abduction: Teachers begin strike as Tinubu sends 1,000 forest guards to rescue victims
-
Education5 days agoEnugu East Chairman Celebrates Children’s Day with St. Ann’s College, Reaffirms Commitment to Education
-
News5 days agoDSS Detains Novelist Okey Ndibe at Lagos Airport, Awaits Clearance from Abuja
-
Crime5 days agoUS Announces $3.5m Religious Freedom Initiative, Questions Nigeria’s Response to Attacks
-
Crime5 days ago2 Police Officers Shot Dead as Gunmen Attack Anambra Chief of Staff’s Convoy
-
Politics3 days agoSpeaker suspended over anti-party activities
-
Crime4 days agoAbducted Army General: Gunmen Make Demands, Contact Family
-
News3 days agoPower Doesn’t Last Forever, It Has Expiry Date — VeryDarkMan Warns Wike