- Challenges Usman to show clause in the agreement that authorised decommissioning of Terminal B at Rivers Port
- Says action inflicted over $10 million in losses on the company
By Kunle Sanni
Industrial giant BUA Group has responded to a rebuttal from Hadiza Bala-Usman, the former Managing Director of the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA), challenging her to publicly identify the specific clause that gave her the authority to decommission Terminal B at Rivers Port during her tenure.
In a statement signed by BUA Group and released on Saturday, the company accused Ms Usman of distorting facts and unlawfully terminating its concession agreement despite a valid lease and ongoing arbitration proceedings.
BUA further alleged that her actions disregarded due process and violated a Federal High Court order—an action the company said inflicted over $10 million in losses.
Background to the Dispute
In the past few days, a series of accusations have been exchanged between BUA Group and Ms Usman, who now serves as the Special Adviser on Policy Coordination to President Bola Tinubu.
These accusations particularly focus on events during Ms Usman’s tenure as Managing Director of the NPA from 2016 to 2021.
On Thursday, BUA published an article titled “Two Years of President Tinubu: A Business Perspective” to commemorate President Tinubu’s two years in office. In the article, BUA claimed that its operations at the Port Harcourt terminal were unjustly shut down due to personal bias under her leadership at the NPA.
In a separate statement, BUA Group further explained that the company had entered into a long lease agreement with the NPA in 2006 to rehabilitate and operate Terminal B at the Rivers Port.
According to the company, negotiations to address infrastructure gaps were underway before Ms Usman assumed office.
However, the company said that rather than continue these discussions, she allegedly used a letter from BUA—invoking Article 8.4 of the agreement to report environmental issues—as the basis to shut down its operations.
Earlier on Friday, Ms Usman, in her reaction, explained that the conglomerate, under BUA Ports and Terminal Limited, received a 20-year concession for Rivers Port Terminal B in 2006, with a requirement to begin reconstruction of Berths 5 to 8 within 90 days.
She said a decade later, BUA had not commenced the work, leading to a notice of default in February 2016 and additional notices in August 2016, before a termination notice in November due to BUA’s alleged non-compliance.
She added that BUA later obtained a court order in January 2018 preventing the NPA from enforcing the termination, which the agency complied with. She noted that all actions were based on BUA’s contractual breaches, not personal motives.
Usman’s Actions Were Based on Personal Motives — BUA
In its latest statement published in The Boss newspaper on Sunday, BUA Group insisted that Ms Usman’s actions were based on personal motives.
It explained that after seeking legal redress and securing a court injunction against the termination, along with a referral to arbitration in line with Section 17.3 of the concession agreement, Ms Usman “unilaterally decommissioned” the terminal—contravening both the agreement and the court order.
BUA further stated that after providing the required guarantees to the NPA, operations briefly resumed. However, three weeks later, Ms Usman ordered another shutdown, suggesting her actions were driven by personal animosity rather than due process.
“If she believes otherwise, we challenge her to cite the specific clause that authorized such decommissioning,” the statement read.
BUA said the matter eventually reached former President Muhammadu Buhari, who ordered a review by the then Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami. The review of all documentation concluded that Ms Usman’s actions were unlawful, and the company’s concession rights were restored.