Presidential Jets Immune From Attachment – AGF Fagbemi Condemns Aircraft Seizure
2 min read
The Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, says aircrafts on the presidential fleet are sovereign assets used solely for sovereign purposes and are therefore immune from attachment by any entity.
Fagbemi said this in a statement issued by his Special Assistant, Media, on Thursday in Abuja.
He said that this followed an interim attachment of three presidential aircrafts undergoing routine maintenance in France made pursuant to ex parte orders issued by the Judicial Court of Paris.
READ ALSO; Don’t Interfer In Tenure Of Our Union Leaders – NLC Tells Nigerian Govt
“The actions by France,1 it would be recalled was on account of alleged debt owed by the Nigerian government.
“The office of the National Security Adviser, NSA, and the Attorney General of the Federation, AGF, and Minister of Justice are currently weighing both diplomatic and legal means.
“They have set in motion both legal and diplomatic steps to ensure the discharge of the inappropriate orders against the aircrafts, which are covered by sovereign immunity.
“While further actions are being put in place to resolve the entire dispute through available legal means, the firm position of the federal government remains that the aircrafts in question are sovereign assets used solely for sovereign purposes and are therefore immune from attachment as Zhongshan has sought to do,’’ he said.
He said the orders were dated 7 March and 12 August, 2024 at the instance of Zhongshan Industrial Investment Company Limited, a Chinese company seeking to enforce a Final Award granted in its favour on 26 March, 2024, against the Ogun State government.
The arbitral award arose from an arbitration proceeding commenced in 2018 following a contractual dispute between the Chinese company and Ogun State government.
The claimants say that though the dispute originated from engagements of Ogun State government, the consequential enforcement actions were being directed against the Federal Government and its assets.
It claimed that this was in line with extant principles of international law which holds that the actions of a substantial or local entity are attributable to the state or country itself.
