.Key Questions EFCC Is Expected to Probe in $1.5 Billion Port Harcourt Refinery Revamp
A top source at the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has pushed back against claims by former Chief Finance Officer of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL), Umar Ajiya Isa, that he was never arrested during his recent questioning by the anti-graft agency.
The senior EFCC official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told KeepingThemHonest.ng that the former NNPCL executive was “clearly being economical with the truth” in his public denial. “Once a person honors an invitation and arrives at the commission’s office, they are automatically under arrest for the period of their stay,” the source said.
Umar Ajiya had issued a statement last week denying that he was arrested in connection with the ongoing investigation into alleged financial mismanagement and questionable disbursements tied to the $1.5 billion refinery turnaround projects in Port Harcourt and Warri. He claimed he went to the EFCC “voluntarily” and was not “arrested.”
But the EFCC insider dismissed that narrative as “mere semantics.” According to the source: “Did the man not write a statement while he was at the commission? If he did, then he was under arrest. We don’t arbitrarily handcuff and throw people into cells, if that is his definition of “arrest.”
The official further explained that the discretion to detain or release an invitee after initial questioning lies with the Commission, based on the advice of the investigation team. “We decide whether or not someone will be released after the initial interview. But the moment you walk into our premises in response to an invitation, you are no longer free — at least not until we, or the courts, say so,” the source clarified.
The controversy stems from Ajiya’s role as CFO when major payments were reportedly made to contractors and consultants working on the refinery rehabilitation projects. While no formal charges have been filed, EFCC investigators are examining possible infractions including over-invoicing, unauthorized disbursements, and abuse of procurement procedures.
According to the EFCC source, investigators are particularly interested in tracing the movement of funds, especially those disbursed through the $1.5 billion AfreximBank-backed financing structure, and whether any payments were diverted or funneled to fronts linked to NNPCL officials.
“The Commission is determined to get to the bottom of this matter — no matter how high it goes, ” said our source, as public pressure mounts over the failure of Nigeria’s long-promised refinery revamp projects.
Meanwhile, yesterday, a former top investigator with the commission, also on the condition of anonymity, walked this newspaper through the likely hot-button items the anti-graft body could have in its sights as the investigation into the $1.5 billion rehabilitation of the Port Harcourt Refinery, executed by Italian firm Tecnimont S.p.A. in partnership with the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL), revs into high gear.
“They are definitely going to ask hard questions about the integrity of the project—from the award of contracts and disbursement of funds to the quality of work delivered and the sudden shutdown of the refinery shortly after it was declared operational. We all know that a similar fate has also befallen the Warri Refinery, which was reopened and then abruptly shut down.
“I expect that they will invite Interpol, that is, if they have not done so already, to help trace the international movement of funds from AfreximBank, which provided the financing for the project, to determine whether any payments were secretly routed as kickbacks to NNPCL officials or funneled through fronts, shell companies, or foreign accounts,” he said.
Among the critical questions the EFCC is expected to explore are:
•Was the $1.5 billion contract awarded through a transparent and competitive bidding process, in compliance with Nigeria’s Public Procurement Act?
•Were there any conflicts of interest between NNPCL officials and Tecnimont S.p.A. that may have compromised the process?
•Was the cost of the contract justified, and how does it compare with similar refinery projects in other countries?
•Were there cost escalations, and if so, were they technically justified or arbitrary?
•Were payments to the contractor tied to verifiable project milestones?
•Were advance payments backed by adequate performance bonds or bank guarantees?
•Were any premature or irregular disbursements made that may suggest misappropriation or fraud?
•Did the execution of the revamp align with the contractual technical specifications, and who should be held accountable for the refinery’s abrupt shutdown soon after reopening?
•Could sabotage have played a role in the failure of the refineries to remain operational, and if so, who stands to benefit?
•What role did NNPCL’s internal audit and external monitoring mechanisms play during the project? Was the Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP) adequately involved?
•Are there signs of over-invoicing, use of ghost contractors, duplicate payments, or other red flags suggesting financial malpractice?
•What was the performance history of Tecnimont on similar contracts, and does it raise questions about the firm’s capacity or intent?
•Who are the beneficial owners of subcontractors and partners involved in the project? Were shell companies or questionable joint ventures used to divert public funds?
•How did NNPCL’s transition to a limited liability company under the Petroleum Industry Act affect procurement oversight and accountability?
• What has been the real economic impact of the refinery revamp? Were the promised jobs, skills development, and local content targets met?, among others.
With both the Port Harcourt and Warri refineries idle again despite high-profile reopenings and extensive media coverage, Nigerians are demanding answers. The EFCC’s investigation—backed by potential international collaboration—is being seen as a critical test of the government’s willingness to hold powerful actors accountable in the oil and gas sector.
Officials say the outcome of the probe will be made public and could result in prosecutions if criminal conduct is uncovered. “The inclusion of Interpol is a clear signal that authorities are prepared to follow the money trail across borders to get to the truth,” our source said.