The Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission has declared its intention to proceed with investigations into Engineer Farouk Ahmed, the immediate past Authority Chief Executive and Chief Executive Officer of the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority, notwithstanding the formal withdrawal of the petition against him.
The anti-corruption agency announced on Wednesday night that it had received correspondence dated January 5, 2026, titled ‘Notice of Withdrawal of Petition against Engineer Farouk Ahmed,’ from Dr. O.J. Onoja, SAN and Associates, the legal representatives of Alhaji Aliko Dangote, who had originally submitted the complaint.
The Commission’s position was communicated in a statement signed by its Spokesperson and Head of Media and Public Communications, Okor Odey, issued late Wednesday night, clarifying the agency’s statutory obligations and its determination to pursue the matter regardless of the petitioner’s decision.
According to ICPC, the letter from Dangote’s legal counsel informed the Commission that the petitioner had withdrawn the petition dated December 16, 2025, in its entirety. The correspondence also indicated that another law enforcement agency had assumed responsibility for the matter, though the identity of this agency was not disclosed in the ICPC statement.
“The letter from O.J Onoja SAN, states that the petitioner has withdrawn the petition dated 16th December, 2025, submitted against Engineer Farouk Ahmed, the immediate past ACE/CEO of the NMDPRA in its entirety and that another law enforcement agency has taken over,” Odey stated in the release.
However, the Commission made clear that the withdrawal would not halt its investigative processes, citing specific provisions within its establishing legislation that grant it broad powers to pursue corruption cases independently of petitioners’ wishes once investigations have been initiated.
“The ICPC wishes to state categorically that in line with the provisions of sections 3(14) and 27(3) of its enabling Act, the investigations in the interest of the Nigerian people and the Nigerian state have already commenced and are presently ongoing,” the statement read.
The Commission emphasized that its statutory mandate compels it to continue examining the allegations, regardless of whether the original complainant chooses to pursue the matter or not. This position reflects established legal principles within Nigerian anti-corruption jurisprudence, which recognize that corruption offences constitute crimes against the state rather than private wrongs, and therefore cannot be withdrawn at the discretion of individual petitioners.
“The ICPC will therefore continue to investigate this matter in line with its statutory mandate and in the interest of transparency, accountability and the fight against corruption for the benefit of Nigeria,” the statement concluded.
The Commission’s invocation of sections 3(14) and 27(3) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act 2000 is particularly significant. Section 3(14) empowers the ICPC to carry out investigations into allegations of corruption even in the absence of formal complaints, while section 27(3) grants the Commission authority to proceed with prosecutions based on its own findings, independent of petitioners’ cooperation or withdrawal.
These provisions were deliberately included in the ICPC Act by lawmakers to prevent powerful individuals or entities from using petition withdrawals as mechanisms to frustrate anti-corruption investigations, particularly in cases where settlements or external pressures might influence complainants to retract their allegations.
The development represents the latest chapter in what has become a high-profile case involving two prominent figures in Nigeria’s oil and gas sector. Alhaji Aliko Dangote, Africa’s wealthiest individual and chairman of Dangote Group, which operates the Dangote Petroleum Refinery, had submitted the original petition to ICPC barely three weeks ago, raising allegations against the former NMDPRA chief.
While the specific contents of the December 16, 2025 petition have not been publicly disclosed by either party, the complaint emerged against the backdrop of widely reported tensions between Dangote Group and Nigerian petroleum regulatory authorities over various policy and operational matters relating to the downstream petroleum sector.
The NMDPRA, established under the Petroleum Industry Act 2021, serves as the regulatory authority overseeing Nigeria’s midstream and downstream petroleum operations, including refining, transportation, storage, distribution, and marketing of petroleum products. The agency wields significant regulatory powers that directly affect major players in the sector, including the Dangote Refinery, which commenced operations in 2024 as Africa’s largest single-train refinery.
Engineer Farouk Ahmed led the regulatory body during a critical period of transition in Nigeria’s petroleum sector, marked by the removal of fuel subsidies, the operationalization of the Dangote Refinery, and ongoing efforts to liberalize the downstream petroleum market. His tenure witnessed several policy decisions and regulatory actions that affected various stakeholders, including major refiners, importers, and marketers.
The fact that another law enforcement agency has reportedly assumed responsibility for the matter, as indicated in the withdrawal letter, suggests that the issues raised in the original petition may still be under investigation through alternative channels. Nigeria operates multiple anti-corruption agencies with overlapping mandates, including the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission and the Code of Conduct Bureau, among others.
However, ICPC’s firm stance that it will continue its own parallel investigation underscores the Commission’s interpretation of its constitutional and statutory independence, and its determination not to cede jurisdiction over matters that fall within its mandate simply because petitioners have withdrawn or because other agencies may be involved.
The Commission’s public reaffirmation of its commitment to transparency, accountability, and the fight against corruption reflects broader concerns within Nigeria’s anti-corruption architecture about the integrity of investigative processes and the need to insulate such processes from external interference or manipulation.
