By Oladosu Adebola Oluwaseun
The House of Representatives has commenced deliberations on a petition arising from a dispute between Abuja Power Company Limited (APCL) and the Federal Ministry of Water Resources and Sanitation over the proposed Gurara II Hydropower Project in Niger State.
Speaking during a hearing in Abuja, the chairman of the committee said the matter—pitting APCL against the Federal Government, represented by the Minister of Water Resources and Sanitation—falls squarely within the committee’s oversight mandate.
He disclosed that the committee received a formal petition from APCL through its legal representatives concerning the Gurara II project.Burara II, also known as the Gurara II Hydropower Project, is a proposed multipurpose dam located in Niger State. Lawmakers explained that the Burara dam axis is a Federal Government irrigation dam area situated off the Buarli Jere Junction road, leading towards Kaluniga and Kampacheng.
At the hearing, the Minister of Water Resources and Sanitation, Prof. Joseph Terlumun Utsev, confirmed that he was representing the Federal Government. APCL was represented by its legal team and a company director, Prof. George Momen, who appeared on behalf of the firm after its managing director was unable to attend.Presenting the petition, APCL’s lead counsel, Oluwemi Okunbi, SAN, told the committee that the dispute centres on the Gurara II project, which he said was initiated by his client as far back as 2004.
He alleged that APCL secured a Certificate of Occupancy (C of O) from the Niger State Government to develop the project, but that the title was later revoked following alleged interventions by federal officials aimed at transferring the project to another company.
According to Okunbi, APCL was compelled to approach the courts on two separate occasions to restore the revoked title, a process he said caused significant delays to the project. He explained that the Gurara project was conceived as a multipurpose development encompassing irrigation, power generation and hospitality, with anticipated benefits for host communities and the wider economy.He added that APCL repeatedly sought an amicable resolution with the Ministry of Water Resources and other relevant authorities, including the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation, stressing that the matter was of national importance and should not be prolonged through litigation.
In its petition, APCL outlined three key prayers. First, it urged the committee to note that the concession or public-private partnership (PPP) arrangement allegedly awarded to a Chinese firm, CGC Nigeria Limited, violated the Public Procurement Act, the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (ICRC) Act and regulations governing unsolicited proposals.
Secondly, APCL asked that CGC Nigeria Limited be restrained from taking further steps on the project unless equivalent terms were first offered to APCL as the original project initiator.In the alternative, the company requested that if the ministry opted not to proceed with APCL’s unsolicited proposal, APCL should be adequately compensated in line with extant laws, and that the project be advertised and procured through a competitive bidding process.Prof. Momen, speaking briefly, confirmed that the prayers reflected APCL’s position.
Responding, the Minister of Water Resources and Sanitation told the committee that Gurara II is a proposed 360-megawatt multipurpose dam project conceived after the completion of Gurara I. He said the project was designed to support power generation, irrigation of approximately 8,000 hectares of land, fisheries, flood control and tourism.
He explained that in 2010, the ministry engaged three consortiums to conduct technical assessments of the project, with the expectation that it would be funded by the Federal Government. However, due to funding constraints, the ministry later adopted a selective procurement process and awarded the project to CGC Nigeria Limited based on technical and financial evaluations.The minister said APCL only emerged after the project had been procured, claiming prior land allocation and incurred expenses. He added that upon assuming office, he invited both APCL and the Chinese firm for discussions and advised them to reach an agreement on compensation.
However, he noted that the situation became complicated when APCL proceeded to court, stressing that the ministry could not engage in settlement talks while the matter remained under litigation.“So long as this issue is in court, our hands are tied. If it is withdrawn from court, then we can sit as a family and resolve it amicably,” the minister said.Several lawmakers raised concerns over due diligence, project ownership, the role of the Niger State Government, and whether APCL acted as a volunteer or with lawful authority when it commenced work on the site.
Others cautioned that the committee must avoid delving into matters still before the courts, warning that doing so could prejudice ongoing judicial proceedings. The committee is expected to review all submissions, including court documents and correspondence, before determining the next steps in resolving the long-running dispute over the Gurara II Hydropower Project.
