The President/Chief Executive Officer of the Dangote Group, Aliko Dangote, has called for accountability over allegations that the Chief Executive of the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA), Engr. Farouk Ahmed spent $5 million on the secondary school education of four of his children in Switzerland.
Dangote made the remarks during a media briefing on challenges in Nigeria’s downstream oil and gas sector on Sunday, December 14, 2025, at Dangote Refinery at Ibeju-Lekki, Lagos.
He linked the issue to broader concerns about governance, regulatory credibility, and investment in the sector.
Dangote questioned how a public official could afford such extravagant spending and contrasted it with the financial struggles of ordinary Nigerians.
‘’And I don’t know why we should continue to allow some corrupt government officials to try and destroy a whole sector of the economy. And I think it is something that when you look at it, I’ve actually had people making complaints about a regulator who has actually put his children in secondary school. And that secondary school education, which is six years, costs Nigeria $5 million for four of them.
‘’I mean, you cannot imagine somebody paying $5 million for educating five children. Even my own children don’t go to those schools. My children went to a Nigerian secondary school.
‘But today, as we speak, the authority chief executive, Mallam Farouk, Mallam Farouk has four of his children who he educated in Switzerland at the cost of $5 million for their secondary school education alone, not universally. And I know that one of them just finished Harvard.’’
Dangote argued that Engr. Farouk Ahmed’s income cannot reasonably cover $5 million in school fees for his children. He stressed that even taxpayers with significant income would have to account for such expenditures.
“Because when you look at his income, his income does not match paying this kind of fees. I think even if it’s me paying $5 million for six years for my own children, the taxman has to look at my taxes, how much I pay.”
Dangote highlighted the contrast between Ahmed’s spending and the realities faced by many Nigerians in Sokoto, his state of origin. Many struggle to pay just N100,000 for secondary school fees, leaving numerous children out of school. He noted that such disparities increase public resentment and weaken trust in government.
Dangote called for an investigation from the highest authorities, referred to the Code of Conduct Bureau, noting that public officials are required to declare their assets.
“It is that he has to be charged to either the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB). Because they have his returns. He must have filed and registered what he had. And so he needs to be checked.”
He reiterated his position that the scale of the alleged school fees is not consistent with a lifetime public service career. He said he is prepared to publicly release details of the school fees if the allegations are denied.
“As a matter of fact, when he denies it, I will publish with my name.”
“I will sue the school to publish how much of the fees he has paid for all the time that they were there. Including now,” he said
Dangote accused Ahmed of a fundamental conflict of interest, saying that a regulator should never act as a trader in the same sector. He argued that during the previous administration, allowing a trader to serve as a regulator created systemic problems in Nigeria’s downstream oil and gas industry, including distorted fuel pricing, weakened domestic refineries, and discouragement of investment.
Dangote accused Ahmed of a fundamental conflict of interest, saying that a regulator should never act as a trader in the same sector. He argued that during the previous administration, allowing a trader to serve as a regulator created systemic problems in Nigeria’s downstream oil and gas industry, including distorted fuel pricing, weakened domestic refineries, and discouragement of investment.
Dangote said this mismatch has contributed to the exit of foreign companies from the sector and ongoing operational challenges, warning that the country is paying a heavy price for regulatory decisions driven by personal or commercial interests rather than public responsibility.
Nigeria’s oil and gas industry has been under intense scrutiny over alleged missing or unaccounted revenue. In October, the House of Representatives launched a comprehensive probe into the alleged non‑repatriation of Nigeria’s crude oil and non‑oil export proceeds valued at over $850 billion between 1996 and 2014, with lawmakers describing the shortfall as a significant revenue leakage undermining economic stability.
The investigation is to determine why operators in the oil and gas sector may have failed to repatriate between 40% and 45% of export earnings as required by law and to reconcile conflicting export earnings data among key government agencies.
Earlier this year, the Socio‑Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) filed a lawsuit demanding that the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) explain a reported N500 billion shortfall in oil revenue remittances to the Federation Account, urging that anti‑corruption agencies be invited to investigate and prosecute where necessary. These efforts reflect a broader push for transparency, stronger oversight, and accountability in the sector.
These efforts reflect a broader push for transparency, stronger oversight, and accountability in the sector.
Under Nigerian law, CCB requires every public officer to declare all their assets, liabilities, and property when they take office, then again at intervals during their tenure and when they leave office.
This declaration is intended to ensure transparency and prevent illicit enrichment and abuse of office. Any false statement in an asset declaration or failure to comply with the requirement is considered a breach of the Code and can trigger verification, investigation, and enforcement action.
Sanctions for asset non‑disclosure or false declaration can include vacation of office, disqualification from holding public office for up to ten years, forfeiture of improperly acquired assets, and prosecution.