The Federal Ministry of Marine and Blue Economy has given the Director General/CEO, Nigeria Maritime Administration and Safety Agency, seven days to respond to an alleged breach of contractual agreement.
The agreement was between the agency and the Springdale Academy of Maritime Education and Training Trust (SAMET) in India with Maritime Labour and Cabotage Services.
SaharaReporters reported on August 21, that 296 Nigerian cadets risked deportation as the Indian Training Academy, SAMET accused NIMASA of contract breach and failure to pay for services.
Springdale Academy of Maritime Education and Training Trust had also sought an assurance that further business relationship between the parties would be governed by strict adherence to best international practices.
However, the Federal Ministry of Marine and Blue Economy in a letter SaharaReporters obtained on Monday, dated August 28, requested the DG NIMASA to respond immediately to the allegations raised in the petition to enable the Minister act as appropriate.
The letter with Ref: ECO0735 and signed by Director Maritime Safety & Security, Babatunde H. Bombata for the honourable Minister was titled: “Re: breach of contractual engagement as contained in the memorandum of understanding duly executed between Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) and Springdale Academy of Maritime Education and Training Trust (SAMET), India.”
The letter partly read: “I am directed to forward herewith a copy of the attached self- explanatory correspondence addressed to your Agency, copied the Office of the Attorney General and Minister of Justice and to the Honourable Minister of Marine and Blue Economy respectively, dated 19th July, 2024 on the above subject from the Law Firm of Kunle Adegoke & Co., a Solicitor to Springdale Academy of Maritime Education and Training Trust (SAMET) for your necessary inputs/comments.
“I am to request you to kindly respond to the allegations raised in the aforesaid letter with utmost urgency, seven (7) days from the date of receipt of this letter to enable the Ministry/Minister act as appropriate.
“Please accept the assurances of the Honourable Minister’s warm regards and high esteem,” it reads.
SaharaReporters reported that SAMET in the petition dated July 19, 2024 through its Nigerian legal firm, Kunle Adegoke & Co and signed by Kunle Adegoke, SAN, demanded an immediate payment of all sums due and payable as per the invoices already submitted to the Agency in line with the obligations contained in the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the parties.
Titled “Breach Of Contractual Engagement As Contained In The Memorandum Of Understanding Duly Executed Between Nigerian Maritime Administration And Safety Agency (NIMASA) And Springdale Academy Of Maritime Education & Training Trust (SAMET), India,” the Indian company appealed to NIMASA DG to thoroughly investigate its complaint against the Executive Director, ML & CS; Mr Jibril Abba, with unbiased mind.
In the petition which was copied to the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Minister of Marine and Blue Economy and Director, Legal Unit of NIMASA, the company accused the Executive Director of Maritime Labour and Cabotage Services, Mr Abba of renegotiating the terms of the MoU in an “unconventional manner,” contrary to the provisions of the said MoU and with an alleged “intention to achieve personal gratification”.
On the contractual relationship with his client, Adegoke stated that NIMASA vide a duly executed Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed in 2021, engaged “our client to provide the services of training your agency’s cadets in India under the terms provided in the said MoU wherein your Agency covenanted to “co-operate with our client in all matters relating to the services and provide information as our client may require from time to time; provide the NIMASA deliverables; pay for the Services under an invoice which has been vetted and agreed by both parties.”
Adegoke informed the NIMASA DG that since the commencement of the MoU, his client had fulfilled its contractual obligations as contemplated by the agreement.
He said unfortunately “the same cannot be said of his Agency which has persistently treated its obligations under the MoU with utter levity and disregard”.
He added that “by Clause 4 (a) (iii) of the MOU, your Agency has an obligation to pay for the services rendered by our client under an invoice which has been vetted and agreed by both parties while Clause 7 (1.3) of the MoU further provides that:
“The NIMASA shall pay the Invoice, within 30 days of the date of receipt of a valid invoice in advance to the Service Provider’s Bank Account, barring any delays caused by unavoidable financial regulatory processes. A valid invoice in respect of any student may be issued by the Service Provider only following enrolment of such students for the Course by the Service Provider.
“Earlier in 2023, our client was requested to submit invoice for additional 100 cadets under the existing MOU and the sum of $24,300 per cadet was submitted. The Management of your Agency met on the 3rd day of April, 2024 and approved additional 100 cadets and the list of the 100 cadets was given to our client to commence necessary arrangements.”
He claimed that their client has since commenced the process for “this Instruction including expending its financial resources and entering into further obligations with respect to third parties in fulfilment of its bargain with your Agency (NIMASA)”.
It said, “In line with the terms of the MOU, our client has issued your Agency with an invoice for over (3) three months now, but to our client’s dismay, your Agency, which is expected to uphold best practices, has deliberately failed, refused and/or neglected to pay the issued invoice.
“The amount invoiced is, by the MOU, due and payable and it is with regard to service which your Agency has enjoyed and is currently enjoying.”
Adegoke stated that the firm’s Indian client reasonably believes that reason the invoice had not been paid because ED, ML&CS would like to renegotiate the terms of the MOU in an “unconventional manner contrary to the provisions of the said MoU and with some personal gratification to achieve”.
He claimed that the agency’s Executive Director’s insistence on stringent terms is not in any way consistent with the existing obligations of the Agency under the MOU.
According to him, this is in conflict with NIMASA’s ethical, moral and legal duty to abide by the terms of the MOU in the interest of all the cadets in training and the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Adegoke alleged that on multiple incidents, the Executive Director engaged in bullying and harassing his client’s representatives.
He noted that his client seeks to avoid a situation where 296 students currently undergoing training would be at the “receiving end of the consequences of your Agency’s Executive Director’s embarrassing and despicable behaviour.”