Olayiwola Matthew
An Italian court has sentenced two Milan prosecutors, Fabio De Pasquale and Sergio Spadaro to eight months in prison for failing to file documents that would have supported energy group Eni’s position in the trial of Shell and Eni over the OPL 245 affair.
The Brescia court, chaired by Roberto Spanò ruled that Milan prosecutors had a legal obligation to file documents that could have helped the defence team in that trial.
According to a report by Ansa, an Italian news website, the sentence was handed down by a Brescia court on Tuesday.
The sentence, which is suspended — meaning they would only go to jail if there is a repeat offence.
This is another episode in the OPL 245 saga which the Italian prosecutors lost in the Court of Milan after failing to provide evidence of fraud in the sale of the oil block to Shell and Eni by Malabu Oil and Gas Limited, a Nigerian company, in 2011.
All the cases alleging fraud in the OPL 245 transaction failed in Italy, the UK and in Nigeria.
These documents include those that could have helped the case of the defence.
The judges ruled that the prosecutors gad infringed the rights of the defendants by failing to provide them.
Their lawyers had asked the magistrates to acquit them on the ground that they were not under obligation to present the documents to the Milan court.
De Pasquale was demoted in May 2024 by the country’s Superior Council of the Judiciary (CSM) for “lack of impartiality and fairness” in the way he handled the prosecution.
He had also hidden evidence that showed that the property purportedly linked to the former Attorney General of the Federation, Mohammed Bello Adoke, the Nigerian attorney-general when the OPL 245 resolution agreement was signed, as bribe from the OPL 245 in fact belonged to the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).
Adoke was discharged by an FCT high court in March 2024 over allegations of bribery and corruption in the transaction filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
Also discharged and acquitted by the court are: Aliyu Abubakar, a businessman; Rasky Gbinigie, Malabu Oil & Gas Ltd’s company secretary; Malabu Oil & Gas Ltd; Nigeria Agip Exploration (NAE); Shell Ultra Deep Nigeria (SNUD) Ltd; and Shell Nigeria Exploration Production Company (SNEPCO) Ltd.
The high court chided the EFCC for wasting four years over the case without a shred of evidence of crime.
In 2020, the Nigerian government filed a case against Shell/SNUD and Eni asking for compensation in the sum of $1.3 billion over an Oil Prospecting License 245, also known as OPL 245.
The case which had dragged on for over a decade came to a halt when the Ministry of Justice withdrew its petition in an Italian Court in March 2024.
Meanwhile, an international Court in Italy had already declared Shell and its affiliate partners not guilty on all counts.
Nigeria also decided to “irrevocably” suspend any future legal claims in Italy against Eni, its affiliates, as well as present and former officers concerning rights related to the field.
In 1998, Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd was awarded OPL 245 by the federal military government. However, in 2001, former President Olusegun Obasanjo revoked Malabu’s license and reassigned the oil block to Shell without a public bidding process.
After a protracted legal dispute, Malabu regained ownership of the block in 2006 through an out-of-court settlement with the federal government. In response to these actions, Shell initiated arbitration against Nigeria. Yet, when President Goodluck Jonathan came into office in 2010, he upheld the consent judgment, seemingly resolving the conflict.
This led to Shell and Eni reaching an agreement to purchase the oil block from Malabu for $1.1 billion. Additionally, the oil companies paid $210 million as a signature bonus to the Nigerian federal government.
However, the deal soon faced scrutiny from an international campaign, which alleged that the OPL 245 transaction was tainted by corruption, with accusations that the agreement involved bribes to Nigerian government officials.
In November 2015, De Pasquale visited Nigeria and had meetings with senior government officials, including Vice-President Yemi Osinbajo, over the OPL 245 affair.
Adoke alleged in his book, ‘Burden of Service’, that the EFCC was asked to go after him by putting him on trial and getting a conviction to serve as proof of corruption in the deal.
This was expected to strengthen De Pasquale’s case in Milan.
Adoke was not in trial in Italy, but the EFCC filed several cases against him in Nigeria and his name was constantly mentioned in the Milan court, although the court did not make any adverse pronouncement against him in its verdict.
One of the cases filed against Adoke was that he collected a $2 million bribe from the $1.1 billion paid to Malabu and bought a property in Abuja, an allegation he denied and for which he has been cleared.
In May 2018, when the Milan trial was on, Adoke alleged that the Italian prosecutors had hidden vital evidence from the court which would have exonerated him of alleged bribery in the transaction.
In June 2021, he also wrote a petition to the Italian minster of justice to complain about the prosecutors.
Adoke alleged that they deliberately concealed his failed N300 million mortgage transaction with Unity Bank from the Milan court just to create the impression that it was a bribe.
He also alleged that an email purportedly sent by him from the account of a property company mentioned in the OPL 245 payments was forged.
Adoke further alleged that a phone conversation was stage-managed to implicate him.
In it, somebody posing as Adoke was heard saying he knew the OPL 245 deal was “a presidential scam”.
Following a petition by Adoke, the Nigerian police quizzed and indicted Olanrewaju Suraju, chairman of HEDA, over allegations of forgery.
HEDA is the Nigerian partner of the international campaigners who helped the Italian prosecutors in the OPL 245 trial.
The Corner House, Re:Common and Global Witness worked with HEDA to generate global media publicity around the trial.
Suraju was charged to court by the federal government over the forgery allegations.
The government later decided to terminate the case, reportedly because it was relying on the same disputed evidence in its civil claims against JP Morgan over the OPL 245 deal.
Suraju was then discharged but not acquitted by the Nigerian court.
Nigeria still lost the JP Morgan case as the commercial court in London ruled that there was no evidence of fraud in the OPL 245 deal.