Malami rejects bribery findings in $2.7b Mambila arbitration

By Vivian Okejeme

The former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, has rejected allegations that he entered into a corrupt arrangement with Sunrise Power promoter, Leno Adesanya in the Mambilla Hydroelectric Power Project arbitration.

Malami’s position was contained in a statement issued by his Special Assistant on Media, Mohammed Doka, on Tuesday, following the International Chamber of Commerce(ICC) arbitration tribunal’s rejection of claims brought by Sunrise Power and Transmission Company Limited against Nigeria.

Meanwhile, Malami welcomed Nigeria’s victory in ICC 616-page final award delivered in Paris on September 16, 2026, which rejected Sunrise’s claims connected with the Mambilla project and ordered the company and Adesanya to reimburse Nigeria for a substantial portion of its legal costs.

However, reports of the award said the tribunal made adverse findings concerning Malami’s handling of a settlement agreement with Sunrise, including an alleged corrupt arrangement involving him and Adesanya.

Reacting, Malami said the proceedings were commercial arbitration and not a criminal trial, stressing that the award should not be presented as a criminal conviction.

“The proceedings were commercial arbitration proceedings between parties to a dispute. They were not a criminal prosecution of Abubakar Malami, SAN, and the award does not constitute a criminal conviction of him,” the statement said.

He, however, acknowledged the seriousness of the findings reported from the award, saying they should be examined against the complete documentary and evidentiary record.

Those matters should not be ignored, trivialised or answered by speculation,” the statement added.

Malami also sought to provide historical context to the controversy, arguing that the dispute surrounding Sunrise and the Mambilla project began years before he became Attorney-General.

According to him, Sunrise became involved in the proposed project in 2003, while successive administrations and Attorneys-General dealt with contractual disputes involving the company.

He said former AGF Michael Aondoakaa had reviewed the dispute before his tenure and recommended an amicable resolution, while the Federal Government entered into a General Project Execution Agreement involving Sunrise and Sinohydro in November 2012.

“The relevance of this history is straightforward: Malami did not create the Sunrise dispute, introduce Sunrise to the Mambilla project, or originate the Federal Government’s attempts to settle the controversy.

“He inherited a longstanding dispute that had traversed previous administrations, Attorneys-General, ministries and contractual arrangements,” the statement said.

The former AGF said his involvement followed governmental and presidential processes, including a directive communicated by the then Chief of Staff to President Muhammadu Buhari in April 2016 concerning the resolution of disputes surrounding the Mambilla project.

He said the Ministry of Justice’s role was primarily to advise the Federal Government on its legal exposure and possible ways of resolving the dispute.

Malami further explained that by 2019, the unresolved Sunrise dispute was considered an impediment to financing discussions concerning the Mambilla project, including discussions involving China Exim Bank.

He said Sunrise initially demanded $500m as a full and final settlement during negotiations in London in November 2019, while Federal Government representatives countered with $100m before a $200m figure emerged.

“The governmental calculation was whether an asserted multibillion-dollar exposure, continuing litigation, financing difficulties and delays to the Mambilla project could be brought to an end through a substantially smaller negotiated settlement,” he said.

Malami also stressed that former President Buhari ultimately did not approve the proposed $200m settlement.

He said Buhari indicated on April 20, 2020, that the Federal Government did not have $200m to pay Sunrise, a position he said was communicated to the company on April 22, 2020.

He added that a subsequent request for presidential approval in January 2021 was also rejected, with Buhari writing, “Not approved.”

Malami argued that his subsequent conduct should also be considered, saying he instructed Federal Government lawyers to resist Sunrise’s attempt to enforce the settlement after the President declined to approve payment.

“Malami did not simply direct that Sunrise be paid regardless of the President’s position,” the statement said.

“When Sunrise asserted that Nigeria was consequently in default… Malami instructed counsel representing the Federal Government to resist Sunrise’s attempt to have the settlement terms adopted or enforced against Nigeria and to preserve the Federal Government’s legal position.”

On the tribunal’s reported finding of a corrupt arrangement between him and Adesanya, Malami categorically denied the allegation.

“Malami rejects any suggestion that his official actions were undertaken pursuant to a corrupt agreement or in exchange for personal financial benefit,” the statement said.

It added that the allegation should be tested against the complete evidentiary record, including whether Malami ever received money or another financial benefit from Sunrise, Adesanya or any connected entity.

The statement also referred to reports that Adesanya claimed to possess audio or video recordings relevant to his allegations but that the recordings were not produced before the tribunal.

“Where allegations of this gravity and are made, the existence, non-product ion, authenticity and contents of any claimed recordings are matters of obvious evidentiary importance,” Malami said.

The tribunal’s reported findings, however, said it found evidence of a corrupt arrangement involving Malami and Adesanya, while media reports also said the tribunal considered evidence including communications between the two.

Despite the controversy surrounding the former AGF’s role, Nigeria secured the outcome it sought in the arbitration.

The Federal Government said Sunrise had sought $680m plus interest in one arbitration and more than $2.7bn in another dispute connected to the Mambilla project.

The tribunal rejected Sunrise’s claims and also dismissed its demand for $400m arising from the settlement agreement and an alleged default payment. It further ordered Sunrise and Adesanya to reimburse Nigeria for legal costs.

President Bola Tinubu, in welcoming the award, described it as removing a major legal obstacle to the long-delayed Mambilla project and commended the Federal Ministry of Justice, the defence team and other witnesses who participated in the case.

Malami said he was pleased that Nigeria’s financial interests had been protected.

“Nigeria’s victory should be welcomed, and findings concerning the conduct of former public officials should be carefully examined and answered on the evidence,” he said.

He added that a more comprehensive response to the tribunal’s individual findings would be issued after his office had studied the complete award and accompanying records.