National Biosafety Management Agency Awards Building Construction Contract To Company Into Financial Investment In A Suspected Diversion Of Funds

Secrets Reporters

In what appears to be another episode in Nigeria’s long-running soap opera of public fund mismanagement, SecretsReporters can authoritatively report that the National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA) awarded a contract for the construction of its corporate headquarters to a company legally registered to engage solely in financial investments — a potential breach of corporate law, raising red flags of contract fraud, bid manipulation, and a suspected diversion of public funds.

According to official procurement data obtained from the Nigeria Open Contracting Portal (NOCOPO), the NBMA awarded a ₦49,998,009.45 contract for the “Construction of Corporate HQ Building” to a company named Royal Value International Limited. The contract, with reference OCDS-GYL66F-535022001-000041, was awarded on November 13, 2024. The procurement method used was National Competitive Bidding. Yet, the record shows that there was only one bidder — Royal Value International Limited — which raises serious concerns about the integrity of the process and hints strongly at foul play and backdoor arrangements.

A thorough investigation into Royal Value International Limited reveals that the company was incorporated on September 7, 2001, with RC number 426744. It is a private company limited by shares and remains active as of September 14, 2024. The most troubling revelation is the nature of its registered business.

According to its memorandum of association, the company was established “to carry on the business of an investment company and for that purpose to occupy and hold either in the name of the company or in that of any nominee shares, stocks, debentures, debenture stock, bonds, notes, obligations and securities issued or guaranteed by any government, sovereign ruler, commissioners, public body or authority, supreme, dependent, municipal, local, private company or otherwise in any part of the world.” Nowhere in this object clause is there any indication that the company is licensed or empowered to engage in construction, real estate development, or building infrastructure of any kind.

Under the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA 2020), Section 41(1) states clearly that a company shall not carry on any business not authorized by its memorandum, and any action taken beyond those powers is ultra vires and void. This means that unless the company amended its object clause to include construction as one of its authorized business activities — and such an amendment was registered with the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) — then the contract it entered into with NBMA is not only improper but illegal.

Legal analysts confirm that without the appropriate object clause, the company has no legal capacity to bid for or execute a building construction project. Therefore, the NBMA’s contract award to Royal Value International Limited is in clear violation of both procurement laws and company law, and could potentially be nullified.

What makes the matter more suspicious is the procurement detail showing that there was only one bidder. For a contract of almost ₦50 million to attract only one participating company undermines the basic principles of competitive bidding. There is no record of a shortlist or unsuccessful bidders, nor is there any indication that public advertisement was done in a way that encouraged fair competition.

Further analysis reveals that the two persons with significant control of the company — Adamu Muhammed Abba and Lateef Muritala Gbolagade — were both appointed on the same day, May 30, 2023. This raises additional suspicion that the company may have been reactivated or strategically positioned ahead of time specifically to secure the NBMA contract. This pattern is commonly observed in the use of shell companies in public procurement fraud.

According to the NOCOPO project summary, the full amount of ₦49,998,009.45 was paid, with 100% completion claimed and no variation or amendment reported. There is no information on whether standard project execution requirements such as performance bonds, insurance guarantees, or proper due diligence were observed.