Michael Aondoakaa, Nigeria’s former minister of Justice and Attorney-General of the Federation, has asserted that Nigeria has a strong legal basis to reclaim the presidential jets recently seized on the order of a French court.
The seizure was initiated by Zhongshan Fucheng Industrial Investment Co. Ltd, a Chinese firm involved in a protracted legal dispute with the Ogun State government over managing an export processing zone.
The jets in question include a Dassault Falcon 7X currently in Paris, and a Boeing 737 and Airbus A330, both undergoing maintenance in Switzerland. The total value of the seized aircraft exceeds $100 million. One of the jets – A330 was later released to Nigeria on Friday.
Aondoakaa, speaking on Arise TV Morning Show, on Monday, emphasised the doctrine of sovereign immunity, which he believed was the key to Nigeria’s case.
“Presidential planes are not used for commercial functions; they are used basically for state purposes and should enjoy absolute sovereign immunity,” Aondoakaa stated.
“I can’t see where a presidential plane anywhere in the world, including China, can be used for commercial transactions. Nigeria still has a strong case to make to retrieve those presidential planes because they enjoy absolute sovereign immunity. The Chinese people ought to release our planes. On the doctrine of sovereign immunity, they have no right to presidential planes because they are not for commercial transaction” he stressed.
The ex-minister explained that sovereign immunity was generally divided into two types: absolute and restricted. Absolute sovereign immunity applies to state-owned properties used for governmental functions, which are protected from legal actions like seizure or attachment, unlike properties used for commercial purposes.
The former minister also questioned the legal processes that led to the seizure. He highlighted that in England—the seat of arbitration—the recognition of foreign judgments excludes sovereign immunity in cases involving commercial transactions. However, he argued that since the presidential jets are not commercial assets, they should not have been subject to such legal actions.
Aondoakaa raised concerns about the response of Nigerian legal representatives during the enforcement proceedings, suggesting that there may have been lapses in protecting Nigeria’s interests, particularly concerning the planes, which he insisted are protected by sovereign immunity.
The Senior Advocate of Nigeria also critiqued the international arbitration process, noting potential procedural errors. Aondoakaa pointed out that the arbitration should have first exhausted diplomatic channels, as stipulated in the bilateral treaty between Nigeria and China. He suggested that if these channels had been properly utilised, the arbitration could have been avoided or delayed.
Aondoakaa further expressed concerns about the treaties and agreements Nigeria enters into, pointing out that they often contain strong arbitration clauses that could be detrimental to the country.
“I have seen the contents of the treaty, very strong contents. I was very worried whether the minister of justice, even that of Ogun State, or the minister of justice of Nigeria was consulted. For the first issue, I looked at Article 4 which talked about expropriation. That’s a new development in international arbitration.
“I was shocked that somebody signed it. That was the beginning of the problems we had. The treaty had two strong arbitration clauses in paragraphs eight and nine”, he said.
The former minister urged President Bola Tinubu to constitute a presidential committee to review existing bilateral trade treaties, warning that many of these agreements could pose significant risks to Nigeria if not carefully scrutinised.
