Enugu govt refutes allegations of land grabbing against officials

The Enugu State Government has issued a strong rebuttal against allegations of land grabbing, which it claims were falsely attributed to its officials by the online platform Sahara Reporters. The government clarified that a recent report concerning the New Enugu Smart City and Coal City Eastern Alliance Estate was based on a misunderstanding of corporate structures.

“

The motive of the story is betrayed by the writer’s intentional avoidance of evidence and facts, which would have cast doubt on the headlines and negated the conclusions reached by the report.

Sahara Reporters had named several current and former government officials, including the Secretary to the State Government, as alleged beneficial shareholders in Coal City Eastern Alliance Limited. The report suggested the state government had acquired lands and transferred them to this private firm. However, the Commissioner for Information and Communication, Malachy Agbo, stated that the named entities were Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs), an internationally recognized practice for managing government interests in corporate projects.

Agbo explained that the officials mentioned served as nominal shareholders and directors, appointed solely to protect the public's interest in these state-owned projects. He asserted that the report deliberately ignored crucial facts, such as the absence of any financial benefit or even sitting allowances for these board members. Furthermore, the government highlighted that these SPVs were administered by officials from previous administrations, whose roles concluded with their terms.

“

For example, while the story pretends that Enugu State government officials who were on the board of these SPVs were land grabbers and beneficiaries of the assets of the company, the report turns a blind eye to the fact that the board members did not benefit a kobo from the company.

The government criticized the report's motive, suggesting it intentionally overlooked evidence that would have contradicted its headline claims. It pointed out that the officials named occupy the same positions as their predecessors, implying no assets or shares would have been left for them to improperly acquire. The rebuttal emphasized that a diligent inquiry would have revealed the facts and dispelled the allegations of wrongdoing.

“

Not even a sitting allowance was paid to any of the board members during their time on the board of these SPVs.