EFCC declares wanted promoter of Sunrise Power, Leno Adesanya over corrupt offer to public officers

Nigeria’s anti-corruption agency, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has declared Leno Adesanya, the promoter of Sunrise Power and Transmission Ltd.

In a notice issued on Tuesday made available to newsmen, the EFCC said Adesanya is wanted “in an alleged case of conspiracy and corrupt offer to public officers”.

Adesanwa was mentioned in three out of the seven-count charges preferred against Olu Agunloye, former minister of power and steel.

The EFCC is prosecuting Agunloye over the $6 billion Mambilla hydropower contract.

Pageone had reported that EFCC traced some suspicious payments made by Sunrise Power and Transmission Ltd to Agunloye’s bank accounts.

In one of the counts, the EFCC alleged that on August 10, 2019, Agunloye “corruptly received the sum of N3,600,000.00” through his Guaranty Trust Bank account no.0022530926 from Sunrise Power and Transmission Company Limited (SPTCL) and Leno Adesanya for approving the Mambilla Hydroelectric Power Station project.

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo had challenged Agunloye to tell Nigerians where he derived the authority to award a $6 billion contract to Sunrise for the Mambilla hydropower project in 2003.

Sunrise Power is in arbitration with Nigeria at the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), Paris, France, alleging a breach of contract.

The company said it was awarded a $6 billion build, operate and transfer (BOT) contract in May 2003 by the Obasanjo administration but that the federal government repudiated the agreement.

Sunrise is asking for a compensation of $2.3 billion, claiming it had spent millions of dollars on financial and legal consultants before the contract was jettisoned.

Sunrise is asking for a compensation of $2.3 billion, claiming it had spent millions of dollars on financial and legal consultants before the contract was jettisoned.

In its defence at the arbitration, the Nigerian government is alleging fraud and corruption of public officials in the award of the contract.

The matter is similar to the P&ID case in which a UK court nullified an $11 billion award against the country for the same reasons.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *