A former Managing Director of the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA), Hadiza Bala Usman, has again reacted to an accusation by the BUA Group that she disobeyed court orders and violated the terms of the agreement with the company.

In a statement yesterday signed by Niran Adedokun, the Media and Communications Adviser to Bala Usman, who is also the Special Adviser to the President on Policy Coordination, she described BUA’s narrative as half-truths and outright falsehoods.

She stated that instead of apologising to the public and to her for the first false statement he made, the BUA group has doubled down, ‘brandishing a new set of lies and misleading information regarding its breach of contractual obligation to the NPA.”

BUA Group had dismissed as false, the claims of breaching the concession agreement and distorting facts made against the Nigerian conglomerate and its chairman, Abdul Samad Rabiu by Bala Usman.

“We have taken note of recent public statements made by Ms. Hadiza Bala Usman, the former Managing Director of the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA), who was sacked from office. In her comments, she accused BUA Group and our Chairman, Abdul Samad Rabiu, of breaching a concession agreement and distorting facts.

“Ordinarily, we would not engage, but the distortions in her response necessitate this factual clarification, especially as they relate to her actions during her tenure as MD of the NPA,” the BUA statement added.

However, Bala Usman said: “It is also curious that the company’s claim to lack security did not prevent it and all other concessionaires from making full commercial use of the facility at any time. The claim that the Authority disobeyed the order of the Federal High Court sitting in Lagos, which granted an injunction to BUA, is also untrue!

“The NPA obeyed the court order and allowed BUA access and continued use of the facility from January 2018, when BUA secured the injunction, until June 2019, when it was decommissioned due to safety concerns raised by the company itself.

“In the 18 months between January 2018, when the company secured the court injunction and June 2019, BUA berthed 117 vessels comprising liquid and dry bulk cargoes. This data refutes the claim that the NPA flouted court orders,” he stated.

According to Bala Usman, the total number of vessels BUA berthed also indicates that it made full commercial use of the terminal despite the poor quay walls and low draft.

However, on May 16, 2019, the statement noted that BUA Ports and Terminals Limited wrote to the NPA informing it that the jetty was in a state of total dilapidation and urgent need of repair or reconstruction and its engineers had advised that the jetty was liable to collapse at any moment.

Upon receiving the letter, the former Managing Director said she sought the advice of the engineering department of the NPA, which advised her office that the situation described in BUA’s letter raised serious safety concerns.

It went further to recommend that the Authority should decommission the jetty pending the submission and approval of the reconstruction details.

“We took this action to prevent accidents, especially since any incident would affect the adjoining quays and facilities of other concessionaires. The NPA has a duty to ensure the safety of lives and properties on its facilities, and this was what it did with the decommissioning of the jetty based on the professional advice of the engineering department.

“Contrary to BUA’s claim that the former MD, against the advice of her agency, unilaterally decommissioned the berths… at no point did the management take any decision without the advice of the relevant department. For the records, even the termination notice issued to the company emanated from recommendations of the legal department of the NPA,” she stressed.

Bala Usman reiterated that BUA’s access to former President Muhammadu Buhari and his subsequent intervention was based on the manipulation of facts and misinformation.

“How do you factually justify the continued refusal to comply with a contractual obligation which was due to commence in 90 days for 10 years? It is also false that the NPA did not attend the mediation meetings called by the Office of the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice. Staffers of the legal department of the Authority represented the Authority at the meeting.

“It is interesting to note that BUA states with pride that it commenced a contractual obligation it was required to fulfill in 2006, in 2022, which is 16 years after the obligation was due! For the records, the NPA diligently pursued the arbitration process (which it initiated despite the delay by BUA) with BUA at every material time. It is, therefore, unfortunate that the company would accuse this same management of disregarding the process.

“The foregoing facts impugn BUA’s serial attempts to mislead the public and present itself as a victim in the media, while in reality, it operates with the air of a conglomerate that considers itself above the laws of the land,” the statement added.

It stated that Bala Usman’s tenure as MD of the NPA was driven solely by a commitment to Nigeria’s best interests, explaining that guided by this principle, she insisted on the strict enforcement of all contractual agreements—standards to which she and her management team held the NPA itself accountable.

“The actions of an organisation that blatantly refused to honour its obligations while exploiting access to higher Authority reflect the impunity with which many big companies operate in Nigeria.

“Such conduct not only undermines the rule of law but also reeks of vindictiveness—an attempt to smear the reputation of individuals who serve the nation with integrity and diligence,” Bala Usman maintained. (THISDAY)