Bi-Courtney faults Oduah on MMA2 concession agreement

0
SHARE

Bi-Courtney Aviation Services Limited (BASL), operators of the Murtala Muhammed Airport Terminal Two (MMA2), Lagos, has described the claims by the Minister of Aviation, Stella Oduah, against the company, as inconsequential.

Bi-Courtney said in a statement yesterday that it was rather unfortunate that the minister, who was privy to the facts of the agreement between the company and the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN), could deliberately mislead the public by claiming that six versions of the concession agreement between the two parties existed, as she did in a recent newspaper report.

While accusing the minister of mischief, the company explained that contrary to her claims, only one concession agreement exists, adding that this fact is not only clear to all the parties involved in the agreement but had also been affirmed under the relevant laws of the country.

“The concession agreement between Bi-Courtney and the Federal Government is dated April 24, 2003.  Subsequent to this, the parties executed a supplemental concession agreement dated June 24, 2004, and an addendum to the concession agreement dated 2nd February 2, 2007.

“All three documents, in reality, constitute one agreement; they complement each other and are to be read together. All three are genuine and the minister is quite aware of this,” the company stated.

It said the decision to extend the period of the concession from the initial 12 years was jointly taken by the two parties, stressing that it was even FAAN that first suggested extending the concession period to 36 years to which Bi-Courtney eventually agreed.

On the allegation by the minister that the MMA2 terminal was located on the apron, while the parking lot was supposed to be the terminal, Bi-Courtney said the design for the terminal was approved by the Federal Government and FAAN, after due consultation with their consultants, adding that James Cubitt & Associates, the lead project consultant appointed by FAAN, was also involved at every stage of the redesign and redevelopment of the project.

This, according to Bi-Courtney, was beside the fact that FAAN also had a monitoring and inspection team on the project throughout the period of the construction of the terminal, as prescribed by Articles 7 and 8 of the concession agreement.

Also on the minister’s claim that the hotel being developed by Bi-Courtney is not properly sited because it oversees the airside directly, the company countered that the Ministry of Aviation and FAAN approved the site of the hotel and conference centre at their current location, and specifically granted a development lease for them to be so sited.

The statement also said the ownership of the General Aviation Terminal (GAT), which it added FAAN illegally and contemptuously appropriated for its own use, had been settled by all the relevant authorities.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.