Renowned Sports entrepreneur, Administrator Hon. Shuaibu Ahmed Gara Gombe says his message on his Facebook page handle was not to defame Bukola Olopade and Nilayo Sports Management Limited in any way.
Instead, it was just to tell the company to go and answer before the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, (EFCC), the petition he wrote about the alleged diversion of sponsorship fees by Olopade and Nilayo Management Ltd meant for the Athletics Federation of Nigeria, AFN.
Nilayo Sports Management Company Limited, organizers of the annual Access Bank Lagos City Marathon, had threatened to drag Alhaji Gara Gombe to court for alleged defamation.
The company, until recently owned by Bukola Olawale Olopade, the Director General of the National Sports Commission (NSC), alleged that Alhaji Gara Gombe, who is also the Chairman of Gombe Athletics Association, made defamatory statements against the company in a Live Facebook video.
“The allegations you published meant and were understood to mean that our client is fraudulent, conspires to commit fraud, dishonest and guilty of all allegations,’ wrote Nilayo Sports Management company’s lawyer to Alhaji Gara Gombe.
Nilayo Sports Management Ltd is consultant to the AFN and brokered the deal between the Federation and Premium Trust Bank.
In response to the letter from Nilayo Sports Management Ltd’s lawyer, a defiant Alhaji Gara Gombe insists he has only asked the company to go an answer to his petition before the EFCC after Olopade failed twice to report to the invitations of the anti-graft agency.
Sometimes last year, Alhaji Gara Gombe says he petitioned the EFCC citing unwholesome practices in the execution of the agreement.
In the petition, he asked the EFCC to probe Olopade (who brokered the deal at the time) and Nilayo Sports Management Ltd to reveal the bank account used to warehouse the sponsorship fees of N100 million naira paid, especially, for the first year of sponsorship following an AFN Audit Committee report and admission by the former Secretary General of the AFN, Ms Rita Mosindi that the money was not paid into an SPV account specifically mentioned in the agreement.
‘Article 4, sub-section 4.4 of the contract was specific on this and it says thus: During the performance of this Agreement, an SPV account must be opened with Broker (Nilayo) and AFN as
signatories.’
Alhaji Gara Gombe also wrote in the petition that EFCC should look at how the money was disbursed, including how the broker, Nilayo Sports Management Ltd was paid its commission of N30 million naira, being 30% of the contract sum per year.
‘Olopade and Nilayo Sports Management company should also explain why the N30m commission out of the yearly N100m sponsorship fee was removed before releasing N70m to an account other than the one the agreement insisted the money must be paid into,’ says Alhaji Gara Gombe, saying the payment did not follow the terms of the agreement.
‘Article 4.11 of the agreement is also clear on how the broker should be paid,’ says Alhaji Gara Gombe.
The article says thus: ‘During the performance of this Agreement, the Sponsor (Premium Trust Bank) has no financial obligation to Broker. The Broker shall be entitled to a yearly fee/commission which shall be paid through the SPV account to the tune of agreed percentage between AFN and the broker (Nilayo).
Alhaji Gara Gombe also revealed that article 5.1 of the agreement also specified, in clear terms, who should pay the money.
‘It shall be the responsibility of the AFN to pay the broker’s fee/commission stated in the preceding paragraph.’
‘These are clarifications Olopade and Nilayo are expected to make at the EFCC and that is what I have asked them to do. I never categorically said they have diverted any fund. Let them just explain why the terms of the agreement were not followed in this case and let the EFCC decide whether it is right to violate terms of agreement, especially when it bothers on money,’ added Alhaji Gara Gombe.
Alhaji Gara Gombe says it is the duty of Olopade and Nilayo to ensure the term of the agreement between Premium Trust Bank and the AFN were not violated at any point during the pendency of the agreement.
‘Article 4, sub-section 4.1 of the agreement titled: Guarantees and commitments is clear on this and it reads inter-alia:
‘The Broker hereby guarantees to ensure that: During the performance of this Agreement, the broker must, at any time, ensure adherence of parties to the terms, conditions
and obligations under this agreement and ensure compliance with relevant rules, regulations
