Nigeria’s Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, has strongly defended the federal government’s resolution of the long-running dispute over the OPL 245 oil block, describing criticism from allies of former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar as “misleading” and driven by “self-serving interests.”
In a detailed statement issued on Wednesday, the Attorney-General said recent comments attributed to the Atiku Abubakar Media Office misrepresented what he described as a major achievement by the administration of Bola Ahmed Tinubu in resolving a dispute that has spanned nearly three decades.
Fagbemi traced the origins of the controversy surrounding the lucrative oil block, noting that OPL 245 was first awarded to Malabu Oil & Gas Ltd in 1998, revoked in 2001, and later reallocated to Shell Nigeria Ultra-Deep Limited in 2002—decisions that triggered prolonged litigation and political scrutiny. He explained that the disputes were eventually addressed through a 2011 Resolution Agreement involving the Federal Government, Malabu, Shell’s successor Shell Nigeria Exploration and Production Company Limited, and Nigerian Agip Exploration.
According to him, under the agreement, Malabu relinquished its claims in exchange for compensation, while the oil block was reallocated to SNEPCo and NAE as joint license holders, with a commitment by the government to convert the asset into an Oil Mining Lease.
The Attorney-General emphasised that the transaction and its aftermath were subjected to extensive judicial scrutiny in multiple jurisdictions, including the United States, the United Kingdom, and Italy, noting that “these proceedings did not establish any wrongdoing against Eni, SNEPCo, or the transaction as a whole.”
He further disclosed that Nigeria faced a potential financial exposure exceeding $2 billion after arbitration proceedings were initiated at the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) by Eni-related entities, which argued that delays in converting the oil block breached Nigeria’s obligations under the Nigeria–Netherlands Bilateral Investment Treaty.
Fagbemi clarified that the arbitration, which began in 2020, focused strictly on treaty obligations and licensing issues, not on ownership disputes involving Malabu or other claimants. He pointed out that individuals now asserting interests in the block neither participated in nor had legal grounds to intervene in the proceedings.
Highlighting the economic importance of the asset, the Attorney-General described OPL 245 as one of Nigeria’s most commercially viable offshore oil blocks, located about 150 kilometres from the coastline, with the potential to significantly boost national production. He noted that the project is projected to add approximately 150,000 barrels per day to Nigeria’s output and is expected to incorporate large-scale offshore production infrastructure alongside gas export components linked to Nigeria LNG.
“The significance of this development cannot be overstated,” Fagbemi said, adding that the resolution “transforms it into a viable and bankable development opportunity capable of delivering substantial economic and social benefits.”
He also referenced a recent ruling by the Court of Appeal in Nigerian Agip Exploration Limited v. Malabu Oil & Gas Ltd (2025), which dismissed Malabu’s challenge to the allocation of the oil block, describing the action as statute-barred and an abuse of court process.
Responding directly to critics, the Attorney-General stated that “the persistence of these criticisms, despite clear legal, commercial, and national interest considerations, strongly suggests that they are driven not by patriotism or objective reasoning, but by undisclosed and self-serving interests.”
He warned that continued opposition risks undermining efforts to unlock the economic potential of the asset, urging Nigerians to reject narratives aimed at derailing progress. “The national interest must not be sacrificed on the altar of a hidden agenda,” he said.
