The All Progressives Congress (APC) Presidential Campaign Council has renewed its criticism of African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar, following the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) arbitration ruling on the long-running dispute surrounding Nigeria’s Mambilla Hydroelectric Power Project in Taraba State.
In a statement issued in Abuja on September 18, 2026, APC Campaign Council spokesman Dele Alake argued that the controversy surrounding the project demonstrates why, in the council’s view, Atiku should not seek Nigeria’s presidency.
The Mambilla dispute dates back to 2003, when Sunrise Power and Transmission Company Limited, promoted by businessman Leno Adesanya, became involved in a proposed Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) arrangement for the hydropower project. The project was initially described in different government and arbitration documents as having a capacity ranging from 3,050MW to 3,960MW.
At the centre of the latest controversy is a $500,000 transfer made on January 30, 2003, to Jennifer Douglas, Atiku’s then-wife, through China Castle Investments Limited, an offshore company associated with Adesanya. The transfer occurred less than four months before Sunrise was purportedly awarded the Mambilla BOT contract.
According to TheCable’s review of the ICC tribunal’s final award, Adesanya told the tribunal that the payment represented dollars purchased for Atiku with naira through a foreign-exchange transaction. However, the tribunal found that the explanation was not adequately supported by documentary evidence. It noted the absence of records showing the underlying naira payment, exchange rate, instructions from Atiku or his representatives, or documentation establishing the commercial purpose of the transaction.
The tribunal also considered the timing of the payment and its relationship to the Mambilla negotiations. Neither Atiku nor Douglas testified before the tribunal, and no witness statement from either was submitted to corroborate Adesanya’s explanation.
Importantly, the documented arbitration findings should be distinguished from the APC’s political characterization of the transaction. The tribunal examined the payment in the context of Nigeria’s corruption allegations and Sunrise’s contractual claims, but available reporting does not establish that the tribunal itself found Atiku personally received a $500,000 bribe.
The controversy also connects with an earlier U.S. Senate investigation. The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations reported in 2010 that Jennifer Douglas helped bring more than $40 million in suspect funds into the United States between 2000 and 2008 through offshore wire transfers. The report also examined alleged payments linked to Siemens and said Douglas had told banks that funds came from her husband while professing limited familiarity with the offshore companies involved.
The APC statement further argues that the disputed Mambilla arrangement exposed Nigeria to substantial financial liabilities. Sunrise had pursued billions of dollars in claims arising from the project and a subsequent settlement dispute. In the latest ICC proceedings, Nigeria successfully defended itself against Sunrise’s claims. The tribunal rejected the company’s claims and ordered Sunrise and Adesanya to reimburse Nigeria for 75 percent of its legal fees and expenses, amounting to approximately $9.32 million after accounting for $2.5 million held in escrow.
The Nigerian government described the September 17, 2026 ICC award as a major victory, saying it removed what President Bola Tinubu called the “single biggest legal hurdle” that had stalled the Mambilla project for years. The government also credited former Presidents Olusegun Obasanjo and Muhammadu Buhari, as well as other witnesses, with helping defend Nigeria’s position during the arbitration.
Obasanjo had previously questioned the legal authority behind the 2003 Sunrise contract. In testimony and subsequent public comments, he maintained that the Federal Executive Council did not authorize the agreement and questioned how a minister could commit the Federal Government to a multibillion-dollar project without presidential approval.
Against this backdrop, the APC Campaign Council has called on Atiku to withdraw from the presidential contest, describing the Mambilla controversy as evidence of what it considers a wider pattern of conduct incompatible with presidential leadership.
The council also appealed directly to residents of Taraba State, arguing that the prolonged legal dispute contributed to delays surrounding a project that could have generated significant electricity, investment and economic opportunities for the state and Nigeria.
The Mambilla saga, therefore, remains both a major infrastructure controversy and a politically significant issue ahead of the 2027 presidential election, with the competing claims surrounding the 2003 contract, the $500,000 payment and the conduct of the various parties likely to remain subjects of intense public scrutiny.
0 Comments