The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project has filed a lawsuit against the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited over what it described as the company’s failure to account for approximately ₦5.9 billion allegedly spent on the incorporation, transition and rebranding of the NNPC into NNPCL.
- +SERAP sues NNPCL over ₦5.9bn rebranding cost
SERAP said the NNPC reportedly paid ₦2.9 billion for incorporation expenses from petroleum product proceeds, while the National Petroleum Investment Management Services also charged ₦2.9 billion to crude oil revenue for the same purpose, bringing the total to ₦5.9 billion.
SERAP said the NNPC reportedly paid ₦2.9 billion for incorporation expenses from petroleum product proceeds, while the National Petroleum Investment Management Services also charged ₦2.9 billion to crude oil revenue for the same purpose, bringing the total to ₦5.9 billion.
The organisation is seeking “an order of mandamus to direct and compel the NNPCL to account for about ₦5.9 billion allegedly spent on the rebranding of the NNPC to the NNPCL.”
It is also asking the court to “direct and compel the NNPCL to provide a comprehensive reconciliation statement detailing the specific financial transactions relating to the ₦5.9 billion expenditure, including the identities of the contractors involved, and how the funds were utilised for the rebranding of NNPC to NNPCL.”
SERAP further asked the court to “direct and compel the NNPCL to disclose the names and official positions of the government officials who authorized and approved the release and expenditure of the ₦5.9 billion reportedly spent on the rebranding of NNPC to NNPCL, and to clarify whether the expenditure complied with applicable procurement laws and due-process requirements.”
The order of mandamus is contained in suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/1248/2026 filed at the Federal High Court in Abuja, according to a statement issued on Sunday by the NGO’s Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare.
Filed on behalf of SERAP by its lawyers, Oluwakemi Agunbiade, Kehinde Oyewumi and Andrew Nwankwo, the suit also noted that the Senate Committee on Public Accounts reportedly raised concerns over the expenditure described as incorporation and transition costs during the transformation process.
“The Committee described the spending of the ₦5.9 billion as excessive, unjustifiable, and deserving of further explanation, investigation, and legislative scrutiny in the public interest,” SERAP noted.
SERAP argued that there is a legitimate public interest in the disclosure of the details sought.
“The NNPCL has a legal responsibility to explain whether the ₦5.9 billion expenditure represents value for money, constitutes lawful spending of public funds, and complies with applicable due process requirements.
“There ought to be full transparency and accountability regarding the reported ₦5.9 billion spent on rebranding NNPC to NNPCL. Nigerians have the right to know who approved the expenditure, who received the funds, the nature of the services rendered, and whether due process and procurement requirements were strictly followed,
“The disclosure of the identities of the officials involved and the processes followed in approving the expenditure would enable the public to assess whether the expenditure was properly authorized, represented value for money, and was undertaken in accordance with due process and procurement requirements,” it said.
It added that, given the size of the expenditure, there is “an urgent need for a prompt, thorough, and transparent disclosure of the details surrounding the spending of the funds.”
It further stated that “the failure to account for the spending of the ₦5.9 billion on rebranding from NNPC to NNPCL reflects a failure of NNPCL accountability more generally and is directly linked to the institution’s continuing failure to uphold transparency and accountability principles.”
SERAP added that the transformation of the national oil company from NNPC to NNPCL followed the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) 2021, which required it to become a commercially oriented limited liability company fully owned by the federal government.
It also cited constitutional and international provisions, including Section 13 and Section 15(5) of the Constitution, as well as Articles 5 and 9 of the UN Convention against Corruption and Article 21 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, to support its arguments.
No date has been fixed for the hearing of the suit.
