Tribunal Never Said $500,000 Bribe, Atiku’s Camp Insists

The Mambilla power project has moved from a long-running arbitration dispute into a fresh political battle over what the international tribunal actually found.

The International Chamber of Commerce tribunal in Paris rejected claims worth about $3.38 billion brought against Nigeria by Sunrise Power and Transmission Company over disputes linked to the Mambilla Hydroelectric Power Project.

The award has since become part of the political debate surrounding former Vice President Atiku Abubakar.

The APC Presidential Campaign Council argued that the tribunal’s findings raised questions about Atiku’s role in the project and called on him to withdraw from the 2027 presidential race.

Atiku’s camp has rejected that interpretation.
Paul Ibe, his spokesperson, argued that the tribunal did not convict Atiku of corruption and challenged the APC to identify where in the final award the tribunal made such a finding.

That position is consistent with an earlier statement from Atiku’s Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, who specifically disputed the claim that the tribunal found Atiku received a $500,000 bribe or corruptly influenced the Mambilla contract.

The distinction matters because an arbitration award and a criminal conviction are not the same legal process.

The tribunal’s ruling concerned claims arising from the Mambilla project and rejected Sunrise’s claims against Nigeria. It also found serious problems with agreements involving former Attorney-General Abubakar Malami and Sunrise promoter Leno Adesanya, including findings concerning corruption and lack of required presidential approval.

But the political argument now centres on how those findings should be interpreted in relation to Atiku.

One side has presented the arbitration record as raising questions about his political suitability. His representatives say that interpretation goes beyond the tribunal’s actual findings.

ADVERTISEMENT

The underlying arbitration itself is separate from the political dispute. Nigeria has won the long-running case, avoiding the financial exposure associated with the claims, while the tribunal’s detailed findings have opened a new chapter in the political arguments surrounding the project.

ValidViewNetwork reports that the Mambilla dispute now has two distinct dimensions: the legal outcome of Nigeria’s arbitration battle and the competing political interpretations of what the tribunal’s findings mean for individuals mentioned in the proceedings.