By Adedapo Adesanya

Nigeria’s private security firm, Tantita Security Services Limited (TSSL), has entered into an agreement with a United States–based Textron Systems for the supply of unmanned aerial vehicles (drones) in a move aimed at curbing crude oil theft in the country.

Textron Systems said the drones would support security operations around Nigeria’s oil and gas infrastructure, which has continued to face threats from crude oil theft, vandalism and sabotage.

The deal also includes provisions for training and the possible acquisition of additional aircraft as Tantita expands its operations, building on a previous US Foreign Military Sales delivery of Aerosonde drone systems to Nigeria.

The Aerosonde Mk. 4.7 is designed to operate without a runway, using a hybrid quadrotor system for vertical takeoff and landing before transitioning to fixed-wing flight. The system can carry multiple payloads and conduct extended surveillance missions.

Speaking on the development, Executive Director, Operations and Technical, Mr Waredi Enisour, said Tantita officials were in the United States to inspect the drone operations and understudy the associated technical processes.

Mr Enisour added that with the latest technological acquisitions by Tantita, incidents of crude oil theft are expected to decline significantly, as the drones will provide extensive surveillance coverage across the Niger Delta region.

He disclosed that Tanttia is the first private security firm in Nigeria to acquire the Aerosonde UAV which hosts ISR capabilities.

Tantita is a company owned by a former militant leader, Mr Government Ekpemupolo, commonly known as Tompolo. Over the years, the federal government has collaborated with the former militant leader for the protection of critical oil and gas infrastructure and securing permanent peace in the oil-rich Niger Delta Region.

Oil and gas remains Nigeria’s economic mainstay, contributing nearly 90 per cent of forex earnings and 70 per cent of national revenue. However, constant oil theft over the years has made it impossible for the country to hit its peak production of 2.5 million barrels recorded in 2005, although improvement has occurred in recent years, there have been more hands-on approach.

By Adedapo Adesanya

The Minister of Power, Mr Adebayo Adelabu, has dismissed allegations of N128 billion in misappropriated public funds linked to his ministry and the Nigerian Bulk Electricity Trading Plc (NBET), insisting the irregularities occurred before his administration.

In a statement issued by his Special Adviser on Strategic Communications and Media Relations, Mr Bolaji Tunji, the minister, who is rumoured to be gunning for the Oyo State Governor position, clarified that he assumed office in August 2023, while the audit report under scrutiny pertains to the 2022 financial year.

The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) in a statement issued on Sunday tasked President Bola Tinubu to investigate allegations that more than N128 billion could not be accounted for by the ministry and NBET Plc.

The group urged Mr Tinubu to give directive to the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), and the appropriate anti-corruption agencies to look into the allegations of the missing N128 billion.

It declared that anyone suspected to be responsible should face prosecution as appropriate, especially if there is sufficient admissible evidence, and any missing or diverted public funds should be fully recovered and remitted to the treasury.

In his response, the Minister said he has no objection to calls for investigation, but noted that it was important to clearly state that he was appointed in August 2023, whereas the audit report in question relates to the 2022 financial year.

“The issues raised in the referenced audit report pertain entirely to a period before the minister’s tenure. The call for investigation, therefore, has no bearing on the operations or financial activities of the ministry under the current administration.

“The Office of the Minister reaffirms its commitment to transparency and accountability and will co-operate fully with any legitimate process aimed at addressing legacy issues in the power sector, while remaining focused on its mandate of delivering stable and reliable electricity to all Nigerians,” the statement declared.

The statement also highlighted Mr Adelabu’s reputation for transparency and due process, noting that he is “widely regarded for his strict adherence to due process, probity, transparency, and accountability, as demonstrated in his previous roles in both the public and private sectors, and remains resolute in safeguarding this reputation.”

By Adedapo Adesanya

The Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday ordered the Minister of State for Petroleum Resources (Oil), Mr Heineken Lokpobiri, and others, including the Attorney-General of Federation (AGF) and the Nigeria Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRC) to maintain status quo pending the hearing and determination of a case involving four oil fields.

Justice Emeka Nwite gave the order after Mr Ambrose Unaeze, who appeared for the plaintiffs; Hi-Rev Oil Limited and Hi-Rev Exploration and Production Limited, moved the application to the effect.

In the suit, marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/2678/2025, Justice Nwite had, on December 22, 2025, ordered the minister, the AGF and NUPRC to show cause why the reliefs of the plaintiffs in their motion ex-parte should not be granted.

The judge made the order after Unaeze moved the motion dated and filed on December 11.

The oil and gas companies had sought an order of interim injunction restraining the defendants or whomsoever is acting on their behest from selling, assigning or allocating the Yorla South (Petroleum Prospecting Licence (PPL) 2A32 – OML 11) located in Rivers.

The order is to also restrain the defendants from allocating Akiapiri (PPL 2A48 – OML 25) located in Bayelsa; Diebu Creek East (OML 32) also located in Bayelsa and Idiok (PPL 2A41 – OML 67) located in Akwa Ibom, “same being direct replacements for Utapate Oil Field (formerly part of OML 13) and OPL 2002, previously allocated to the plaintiff but was later withdrawn by the defendants, pending the hearing of the interlocutory application in this suit.”

Giving four grounds why their application should be granted, the lawyer said the companies were previously allocated the Utapate Oil Field (formerly part of OML 13) and OPL 2002, but were unreasonably withdrawn by the Federal Government.

He said parties had a settlement agreement for the replacement of the Utapate Oil Field, which was accepted or adopted and it became consent judgement.

Mr Unaeze stated that the firms had taken substantial steps and offered consideration in respect of the grant of the licence to operate OPL and licence to establish a petroleum refinery.

He argued that the companies’ legal right is being threatened by the defendants, pursuant to the threat to sell or allocate the oil fields at Yorla South, Akiapiri, Diebu Creek East, and Idiok to third parties via the defendants’ offer to the public for round bid, hence, the need for the interim order.

Although the judge did not grant the order, he, however, ordered the defendants to appear on Monday (yesterday).

When the matter was called on Monday, Unaeze informed the court that an order was made for the defendants to show cause why their relief should not be granted.

The lawyer said the 1st and 3rd defendants (minister and NUPRC) just served on him their memorandum of conditional appearance, counter affidavit and preliminary objection in court and that he would need time to respond.

Mr Unaeze, however, applied that the defendants, who were duly represented in court by their lawyers, should give an undertaking not to take any action that might affect the subject matter pending the hearing and determination of the case.

“This is because of the nature of the case and the risk the res (subject matter) may face before the next adjourned date,” he said.

Speaking, Mr Oyinlade Koleoso, who appeared for the 2nd defendant (AGF), said they filed a counter affidavit and a preliminary objection, though they were yet to serve same.

When the judge asked him if he had filed affidavit to show cause, Mr Koleose said he believed that the processes he had filed would take care of that.

The lawyer told the court that based on Mr Unaeze’s application, their submission was that the AGF was not in the position to allocate oil blocks.

The 3rd defendant (NUPRC)’s lawyer, J. A. Olugbade, disagreed with Mr Unaeze’s application.

He said he opposed the plaintiffs lawyer’s prayer since he had already filed a counter affidavit and a preliminary objection.

B. J. Tabaya, counsel for the 1st defendant (minister), said he did not have the instruction of his client to make such undertaking sought by Unaeze.

Delivering the ruling, Justice Nwite, who granted Unaeze’s application, ordered the parties to maintain status quo pending the hearing and determination of the matter.

The judge then adjourned the matter until January 26 for hearing.