By Sade Williams
Shareholders of Arik Air Limited have dissociated themselves from reports of repossession of Arik Air CRJ 1000 aircraft with registration number 5N-JEE.
In a statement signed by Aideloje Godwin, from the Media Office of the Shareholders of Arik Air, they claimed they were ‘not a party to the said suit no FHC/L/CS/1141/2024’ yet were mentioned in the certified true copies of the court process on the matter.
The Federal High Court sitting in Lagos had recently granted Export Development Canada (EDC), a Canadian financial institution, the right to repossess and tear down the controversial CRJ1000 aircraft with registration number 5N-JEE from Arik Air’s fleet.
However, the shareholders said the claim in the court process that some of its members had earlier asked the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to prevent the original owner of the aircraft from repossessing it, is completely untrue.
In their statement on Friday, they clarified that their petition is on the fraud and mismanagement of Arik Air (in-receivership) from 9 February 2017 by the Receiver Managers and agents of the Assets Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON) and not on CRJ 1000 aircraft.
“We would not have been bothered by the reports since we are not a party to the said suit no FHC/L/CS/1141/2024, which is a fundamental human right enforcement action by Captain Samuel Caulcrick & Ors Vs the Economic & Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). However, we have taken note of the unjustifiable mention of Shareholders of Arik Air Limited in the certified true copies of the court process on the matter and therefore will clarify as follows:
“Contrary to the deliberate misrepresentations of the facts of Arik Air shareholders’ petitions to the EFCC by Captain Samuel Caulcrick in his depositions to the court, our petition is on the fraud and mismanagement of Arik Air (in-receivership) from 9 February 2017 by the Receiver Managers and agents of the Assets Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON). We neither enlisted nor sought the assistance of the EFCC regarding the CRJ 1000 as claimed by Captain Caulcrick in his depositions to the Court.
“However, we state that our petition to the EFCC on the mismanagement of the airline has now resulted in criminal Charge ID/24942C/2024 in the matter of Federal Republic of Nigeria Vs Kamilu Alaba Omokide (Receiver Manager – Arik), Mr Ahmed Lawan Kuru (former MD- AMCON), Captain Roy Ilegbodu (CEO- Arik in Receivership) & Ors. We understand the said CRJ 1000 is an exhibit in the criminal charge. Suffice it to state that the hurried conflation of facts in the press berates true adherence to the practice direction of the cape town convention. It is a contemptuous attempt to overreach the courts with respect to the said CRJ 1000.
“It is curious that the Receiver Manager (Arik in Receivership) and AMCON who legally became the custodians of operations of all aircraft, assets and liabilities of Arik Air vide the Federal High Court exparte order in Suit no FHC/L/CS/175/2017 of 9 February 2017 were not parties in the said repossession suit.”, The statement reads in part.
The shareholders, who further noted that they were not before the court on the subject of the repossession of the CRJ 1000 in reference, said: ‘ This raises fundamental questions to the claims of repossession by Captain Caulcrick and Merchant Express Limited in their media campaigns. The purported repossession of the CRJ 1000 was reported to have occurred in 2022, It is therefore issues for the Receiver Manager, and AMCON collectively, Arik Air being in Receivership from 09 February 2017(a clear 5 years into the receivership by AMCON) ‘
“We restate categorically that Arik Air Limited as operated and managed by Shareholders up to 8 February 2017 was not in default of lease obligations/repayments to both JEM Leasing and Export Development Canada (EDC). Suffice to state that, we did not have any case of repossession of CRJ 1000 between Arik Air Limited and JEM Leasing/EDC. to address, it is surprising that the Receiver Manager, Arik Air (in Receivership) and AMCON are not parties to the case concerning the alleged repossession of the aircraft from Arik in Receivership.
“The Shareholders of Arik Air wish to re-emphasise that the CRJ 1000 repossession matter has absolutely nothing to do with them. Thus, we shall not be surreptitiously dragged into it.
“We wish to advise Captain Caulcrick and his associates to correctly fact check information and desist from misrepresentations. However, our lawyers shall contact Captain Caulcrick and his associates on the subject matter “, the shareholders said.
