The ongoing trial between AMCON and ARIK AIR has presented the fourth prosecution witness.
In court was the former Managing Director of the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria, Ahmed Kuru, and others, who briefed the Lagos Special Offences Court that AMCON were
not patient enough to wait for the 90-day expiration repayment period granted to Arik Air before going on to transfer a portion of the airline’s assets to SuperBravo Limited.
Giving evidence before Justice Mojisola Dada to his own side of the story as a witness and Assistant Director of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission was Bawa Kaltungo.
It will be recalled that there was an alleged fraud to the tone of N76bn and $31.5m linked to the defunct Arik Air of which Kuru is standing in trial alongside other culprits namely ; Kamilu Alaba Omokide, Captain Roy Ilegbodu, Union Bank Plc and Super Bravo Limited.
This alledged conspiracy, stealing, abuse of office and making false statements in relation to the alleged fraudulent conversion of Arik Air’s assets was flagged by the EFCC.
The prosecution counsel, Dr Wahab Shittu (SAN),who led in examination -in – chief said Kaltungo who read from a legal position and analysis, told the court that although corporate restructuring is permissible, it must strictly comply with due process and established legal safeguards.
“It allows our corporation to form subsidiaries, to perform expansion and revitalisation, and to transfer shared assets to subsidiary companies,” he said.
He went on to inform , however, that “such transfer must not only comply with the law but must also comply with due process, safeguard the rights of all parties involved, and align with principles of good faith and human rights.”
The witness went in to enlighten the court that there was nothing in the report to suggest that the advice given by the Legal and Regulatory Compliance unit had been disregarded.
“There is nothing in this report in this case to show that the advice given by the LRC was disregarded. Even if such advice is contained, it is that advice which the receivership would refer to, and not what another official document might state,” he said, adding that “there is a need to confine this evidence within the respective legal limits.”
In his view on the transfer of Arik’s assets to SuperBravo, Kaltungo said he worked based on the legal advice from the LRC which emphasised that any such transfer should be effected through a deed of transfer between the relevant subsidiaries.
In his words “From my point of view, the legal advice emphasised that any transfer should involve a deed of transfer between the subsidiaries, for example, SuperBravo and ARIK, ensuring proper documentation and transparency,” he said.
Stating that AMCON’s direct transfer of the assets to SuperBravo departed from that recommendation.
To butress his evidence , Kaltungo referred to a letter dated October 22, 2020, in which AMCON demanded that Arik Air makes payment for outstanding debt within 90 days going on to stress that the period between October 22, 2020, and December 31, 2020, is definitely less than 90 days.
“Although the deed was not dated, simple arithmetic shows that from 22nd October 2020 to 31st December 2020 is less than 90 days,” he said.
The witness said ideally the 90-day grace period would have expired on January 20, 2021 noting, however, that there exists a signed deed of transfer conveying three aircraft to SuperBravo by AMCON in 2020, although the deed itself was undated.
“This suggests that the deed of transfer should have occurred after the 90-day period, which expired on 20th January 2021, and not in 2020 as indicated earlier,” he told the court.
Dissecting the issue further he pointed out that effecting the transfer before the expiration of the grace period was a calculated attempt to deprive Arik Air its right to the assets considering the fact that it was tied to the deed.
“The transfer in these circumstances was capable of causing ARIK AIR lose its right to the assets tied to the deed, in the event that they were able to pay the debt before the end of the grace period,”
Adding that such action “may be interpreted as acting in bad faith on the part of AMCON and the receiver-manager,” and that the premature transfer “may also amount to a breach of exemption rights, as outlined in the President’s Conveyance Act 1571, a document of general application and approval.” Kaltungo said
The witness told the court that Kuru’s management team should know that AMCON lacked the capacity and expertise to run an airline.
“Despite this, he placed Arik Air Ltd under receivership against the express advice of his predecessor, Mr Mustafa Chike-Obi, who had previously resolved not to declare receivership over Arik Air,” he said, citing AMCON’s lack of expertise in airline management.
The witness in a bid to prove his point tendered minutes of a meeting between the Central Bank of Nigeria detailing the controversial takeover of Arik Air.
This evidence a Certified True Copy of the CBN meeting minutes and a petition with 39 annexures was admitted by Justice Mojisola Dada, who adjourned the matter until April 28 and 29, 2026, for continuation of trial.
IMPATIENT AMCON TRANSFERRED ARIK AIR ASSETS BEFORE DUE DATE
Kumbi Lawson