For Nigeria, some victories are bigger than the headlines that announce them.
The International Chamber of Commerce arbitration ruling in Paris dismissing Sunrise Power and Transmission Company Limited’s multibillion-dollar claims against Nigeria is one of them.
It is a victory for the Nigerian taxpayer, a victory for the rule of law and, perhaps most importantly, a victory over the culture in which questionable contractual arrangements can become an endless burden on the country and hold strategic national projects hostage.
The dispute over the Mambilla Hydroelectric Power Project has dragged on for years. It has consumed public attention, generated litigation and arbitration across administrations, and threatened to turn what should have been a transformative national infrastructure project into another costly legal liability.
That Nigeria has emerged from the latest arbitration without having to pay the billions of dollars being claimed is therefore significant.
The tribunal dismissed Sunrise’s claims and also ordered the company and its promoter, Leno Adesanya, to reimburse 75 per cent of Nigeria’s legal fees and expenses, according to the Federal Government. The ruling represents a major development in a dispute that has hung over the Mambilla project for years.
President Bola Tinubu deserves commendation for the seriousness with which his administration approached the matter.
This is not simply about celebrating an arbitration award. It is about the principle behind the government’s defence: Nigeria must be prepared to protect its commonwealth when claims are made against it, while continuing to respect legitimate investors and its international obligations.
Tinubu captured this balance when he said Nigeria remained committed to genuine investors and its legal obligations but would continue to defend the country against what he described as opportunistic claims.
That is the right posture.
Nigeria cannot attract serious investment if it is perceived as a country that does not honour legitimate contracts. But neither can it protect its interests if every questionable or disputed agreement is treated as an untouchable obligation simply because somebody has placed a price tag on it.
The Mambilla case illustrates why due process, documentation and institutional vigilance matter.
The original agreement dates back to 2003, while the dispute subsequently became the subject of arbitration and later litigation around a settlement agreement. Former President Olusegun Obasanjo testified during the proceedings and maintained that he had not authorised the original contract. Former President Muhammadu Buhari also testified concerning the dispute and said he had not approved the 2020 settlement agreement.
Those testimonies mattered.
So did the participation of former officials and other witnesses who helped the tribunal understand how the controversial contractual arrangements came about.
It is therefore important to acknowledge the contributions of Obasanjo and Buhari, as well as former ministers Babatunde Fashola and Suleiman Adamu and other Nigerian officials and experts who provided evidence during the proceedings.
Nigeria’s legal team also deserves recognition.
Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice Lateef Fagbemi and the lawyers who represented Nigeria faced a complicated dispute involving agreements, amendments, previous proceedings and enormous financial claims. Their successful defence has now helped remove what President Tinubu described as the “single biggest legal hurdle” standing in the way of the Mambilla project.
That hurdle is now gone.
But this is where the real work must begin.
Nigeria should not celebrate the arbitration victory and then return Mambilla to the cemetery of abandoned projects.
The Federal Government must now move decisively to determine how the project can be revived, properly structured, transparently procured and ultimately delivered.
The Mambilla project has long been envisaged as a 3,050-megawatt hydropower development in Taraba State. The Federal Ministry of Power has previously identified it as one of Nigeria’s major hydroelectric opportunities.
That potential should not be allowed to remain trapped in government documents.
Nigeria needs electricity. Nigerian businesses need electricity. Manufacturers need electricity. Farmers need electricity. Homes, hospitals, schools and digital businesses need electricity.
And this is where Mambilla becomes much bigger than a power project.
Hydropower can provide large-scale generation without depending on daily fuel deliveries in the way thermal plants do. More importantly, a properly conceived multipurpose Mambilla development could have wider economic implications for Taraba and the surrounding region.
The dam and associated infrastructure can support agricultural activity, irrigation and water management while creating opportunities for tourism and other economic activities. Nigeria’s own power-sector documents have recognised the wider contribution hydro projects can make to agriculture, manufacturing and tourism.
That is why the Federal Government should begin the next stage immediately.
The appropriate ministries and agencies should establish a clear post-arbitration roadmap: review the project’s technical and financial structure, update feasibility studies where necessary, determine the most appropriate procurement and financing model, and commence a transparent process for awarding the project.
There must be no repeat of the circumstances that brought Nigeria into this legal predicament in the first place.
If Mambilla is eventually awarded to a contractor or consortium, the process must be transparent, competitive and subjected to the highest standards of due diligence. Nigeria cannot afford another contractual controversy around a project of such national importance.
The Tinubu administration has an opportunity here to demonstrate that protecting Nigeria’s interests and attracting investment are not contradictory objectives.
They are complementary.
A government that protects public assets against questionable claims builds confidence. A government that insists on transparent contracts gives genuine investors greater certainty. And a government that successfully resolves a longstanding legal obstacle should have the courage to take the next step and deliver the infrastructure that was at the centre of the dispute.
Mambilla has waited long enough.
For decades, Nigerians have heard promises about transforming the country’s power sector. Some projects have moved forward, while others have remained trapped by funding, contractual disputes, institutional weaknesses and political changes.
The ICC ruling offers a rare opportunity to turn one of those long-running stories around.
Tinubu and his team should take the victory from the courtroom to the construction site.
The President deserves credit for standing behind the defence of Nigeria’s interests. The Attorney-General, the Federal Ministry of Justice, the legal team, former presidents, former ministers, witnesses and officials who contributed to the proceedings all deserve recognition.
But the greatest tribute to everyone who helped free Nigeria from this legal embarrassment would be to finally deliver Mambilla.
Nigeria should not have to choose between defending its commonwealth and developing its infrastructure.
We can do both.
The arbitration has cleared the legal path. Now government must clear the administrative, financial and technical path.
Let Mambilla rise.
Let the electricity flow.
And let the people of Taraba and Nigeria finally begin to enjoy the economic opportunities that have been promised for far too long.