The Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPC) has refuted allegations that it paid the sum of N20 billion to ghost consultants and a theft of multi-billion Naira tax due to the Ogun State government.
An online publication had levelled the allegations against the NNPCL.
But, the oil company’s chief corporate communications officer, Garba Deen Muhammad, said in a statement on Monday night that the allegation of a missing N20 billion was absolutely false and baseless and demanded a retraction by the online medium.
“The NNPC Ltd read with utmost dismay, a report by an online platform (Sahara Reporters) alleging a) Paying the sum of N20bn to ghost consultants and b) Theft of multi-billion Naira tax due to the Ogun State Government.
“The NNPC Ltd wishes to state that as a responsible corporate organization, it does not have or deal with ghost consultants.
“At NNPC Ltd, the process of engaging consultants whenever the need arises is clear and verifiable and follow global best practices.
“It is therefore unfortunate that for whatever reason, the said online platform would make such a grievous allegation, mindless of the consequences of such actions. The claim of a missing N20bn is absolutely false and baseless.
“The NNPC Ltd therefore demands that Sahara Reporters retracts the said publication immediately; and going forward, the platform should verify its facts before going to press,” he stated.
On the second allegation of Ogun State Government claiming a back duty tax liability of about N18 billion, against an NNPC subsidiary, the Petroleum Products Marketing Company (PPMC) Ltd, Mohammad said PPMC had objected and challenged the claim through its Tax Consultant.
He added that the matter is currently in court.
“For clarity, PPMC had objected and challenged the claim through its Tax Consultant. Consequently, the Ogun State Government took the matter to court which is not unusual in business circles.
“The matter is currently before the court and NNPC Ltd will prove its case accordingly,” he stated.
The NNPC also advised the online publication to be mindful of the consequences of its actions before taking them, adding that “For a matter that is already in court, as admitted by the online publication, it is sad that any medium can arrive at such subjudiced conclusions as shown by the actions of the online medium.”
