Nigeria’s Questionable Arms Deal

Simon Ateba South African authorities impound a jet belonging to Ayo Oritsejafor with $9.3 million in it to buy arms for an unnamed security agency. But Nigerian government’s explanation raises further posers The transaction was meant to be secret, at least to most Nigerians. But the events that unfolded blew it open and have triggered a full-blown scandal that the administration of President Goodluck Jonathan is desperately trying to contain. On 5 September, a Bombardier Challenger 600 aircraft with registration number N808HG belonging to Ayo Oritsejafor, a close friend of President Jonathan and president of the Christian Association of Nigeria, CAN, left the Presidential wing of the Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport in Abuja stashed with $9.3 million. The money, allegedly meant to purchase arms for an unnamed security agency, was not declared to the Nigeria Customs Service, NCS, thus flouting the money laundering law. However, on arrival in South Africa, the cash was discovered and seized. The private jet was impounded and the occupants, two Nigerians and an Israeli, were detained. The matter remained under wraps until 15 September when reports about the money and arrests were made public by City Press, a South Africa-based newspaper. [caption id="attachment_10605" align="aligncenter" width="300"] •Oritsejafor: Confirmed his ownership of jet used for arms purchase[/caption] The next day, on 16 September, the various actors began to provide explanations that left more questions than answers. First, Oritsejafor admitted ownership of the aircraft but denied any knowledge of the arms deal, saying that his jet was managed by another company, Eagle Air Company, which leased it to Green Coast Produce Limited, a third company, for the transaction. Both companies confirmed Oritsejafor’s claims but denied involvement in the deal, claiming that it was not their responsibility to screen clients or their cargoes. It was the responsibility of aviation authorities and, in this case, the Nigeria Customs Services, which does not operate in the Presidential wing of the airport. “Our attention has been drawn to press reports in respect of an aircraft (Bombardier Challenger 600, Registration No N808HG) in which our company holds a residual interest. We wish to confirm that the said aircraft has since the 2nd of August 2014 been leased to and is operated by Green Coast Produce Limited,” said Emmanuel Ohaeri, general manager, Eagle Air Company. He asked that all media enquiries in respect of the day-to-day operations of the aircraft be directed to the management of Green Coast Produce Ltd. Hours later, the management of Green Coast Produce Company Ltd released a statement, absolving itself of any blame. The company said the aircraft had been hired by John Ishyaku and could not be liable for any alleged infractions. “On the 5th of September 2014 the aircraft was hired from us by a John Ishyaku. The charter to John Ishyaku was upon the following documented terms: (a) Depart Abuja-Johannesburg on the 5th of September 2014 (b) Return to The company’s director, Shima Adun said in the statement that on the 6th of September 2014 (c) To wait and return with the passengers,” the company’s director, Shima Adun, said in the statement. The statement added: “All cargoes were accompanied by passengers who could readily defend the contents. We are not and cannot be privy to any alleged extraneous cargo transported on the aircraft other than that declared in the agreed terms of hire. We are not liable and cannot be construed as a party to any alleged infractions, either in Nigeria or South Africa as he case may be, after the hire of the aircraft.” Under pressure and as more questions were asked, the Nigerian government owned up, and opened talks with South Africa. The government released documents on the transaction and claimed the deal was legitimate, according to a statement by PR Nigeria, an agency that often releases media contents for the military, police and other security agencies in Nigeria. PR Nigeria, Premium Times reported, quoted a senior government official as saying that the South African Government only faulted “non-declaration” of the cash by the delegation from Nigeria. “The Federal Government has submitted relevant data and documents on the transaction to South Africa and insisted that the transaction was legitimate. It also clarified that the funds were not laundered or smuggled for any covert manoeuvres. No launderer will be audacious to fly into a country in a chartered jet with such a huge cash. The technical details on security matters, which necessitated the desk, had been availed South Africa for screening. Based on initial scrutiny of the documents, the Challenger Jet has been released pending the conclusion of a full-scale investigation by South Africa,” Premium Times quoted PRNigeria as saying in a statement. The online pmedium quoted another source as saying that the South African authorities impounded the cash because of “procedural error” at the airport: the team did not declare the $9.3 million contrary to the aviation and customs laws in South Africa. So, there was an oversight on the part of the delegation that went to complete the transaction. “Nigeria is trying to complete the formality and we are confident that the cash will be released for the purpose it was meant for. “Movement of cash for strategic purchase of security equipment by intelligence service is not new; it is a global trend. The FBI, KGB, MOSSAD and others do it,” the source was quoted as saying. [caption id="attachment_10606" align="aligncenter" width="300"] •Oritsejafor’s jet[/caption] But these explanations raised more questions than answers, the opposition All Progressives Congress, APC, said in a statement on 18 September. The party called on President Jonathan to come clean on the deal and provide reasonable answers to questions being raised by Nigerians. In a statement by its National Publicity Secretary, Lai Mohammed, APC called on the National Assembly to open an investigation into the matter. Even before an investigation was carried out, the party said it believed Jonathan was at the centre of the whole issue. APC then raised 15 questions it said Jonathan should answer. “It is absolutely urgent for President Jonathan to clear the air on this alleged off-the-shelf equipment or arms purchase, which runs against all known protocol for such purchases anywhere in the world. Military equipment and weapons are not bean cakes to be purchased by the road side. There are globally-acceptable protocols for such purchases by governments, otherwise what differentiates a government from an insurgent group that is shopping for arms?” queried Mohammed. APC wondered if the Jonathan Administration was not aware that the UN General Assembly on 2 April, 2013 adopted a landmark Arms Trade Treaty, ATT, to regulate the international trade in conventional weapons. “Though the ATT has not come into effect, the fact that Nigeria is among the few countries to have signed and ratified the treaty shows that the country is concerned by unregulated arms trade,” APC said. The party said the “procedural error” excuse was not tenable because the Nigerian authorities cannot pretend not to be aware that anyone bringing into South Africa more than R25,000 or U$10,000 or the equivalent thereof in foreign currency must declare such. APC said all details about the transaction must be made public. But on Thursday, 18 September, when this report was written, Nigerians were still expecting answers to those questions.