When Governor Umo Eno of Akwa Ibom State mounted the altar of his church — All Nations Christian Ministry International, Eket — 23 November 2025, worshippers expected a sermon. What followed instead was an unfiltered governance proclamation: threats, confessions, and a window into how contracts may be awarded and enforced in the oil-rich state.
“If you are blessed in this church and you have a contract, go and finish it, because if you don’t finish it, I will pursue you— with the police and everything,” Governor Eno declared.
|
|
The governor did not stop there. In an emotional tone, he narrated how a young man from his village — Ikot Ekpene Udo — was allegedly awarded a state contract despite never bidding for it.
“The guy has the audacity to tell me, ‘Sir, I did not bid for that job. They just called me, and the money was not enough. I told him, ‘Okay, you’ve reported yourself. You didn’t bid for a job; they called you, you signed, you took the money. Return it. I will jail him.’”
|
|
|
|---|
That statement — and similar remarks — have triggered questions about whether Mr Eno’s administration is adhering to procurement laws or enabling a parallel contract pipeline controlled by personal proximity, loyalty, or church affiliation.
The video in which Mr Eno made the comments has been deleted from his church’s Facebook page after this reporter shared the controversial comments with an aide to the governor.
Contract without bidding
At the centre of the controversy is a story the governor himself told—about the young man from his village, Ikot Ekpene Udo, whom he accused of abandoning a project. He did not disclose the name of the contractor.
That single admission—“I did not bid for that job”—is the most consequential line of the man’s comment. Under Nigeria’s procurement laws, competitive bidding is not optional; it is the legal foundation of public contracting.
Legal practitioners say that if Governor Eno’s account is accurate, it reveals a serious gap between procurement law and practice.
What the law says
Ekemini Udim, a lawyer in Uyo, explained that the Public Procurement Act (PPA) 2007 makes open competitive bidding the default method for awarding public contracts to ensure transparency, accountability, and value for money.
He said admitting that a state contract was awarded without bidding has grave legal implications.
“A public officer admitting that a state contract was awarded without bidding in Nigeria faces severe legal implications, as this is a major criminal offence under the Public Procurement Act (PPA) 2007,” Mr Udim said.
According to him, bypassing competitive bidding falls squarely within practices the law was designed to prevent.
“Awarding contract without public bidding clearly falls under ‘fraudulent practice’ or ‘abuse of entrusted power for private gain.’”
However, Mr Udim noted that Governor Eno currently enjoys constitutional immunity under Section 308.
“The legal challenge here is that the governor is a man under immunity. So he cannot face the law now. But there is still danger; his today’s confession can be used against him after office.”
He added that any civil servant or procurement officer involved in such an award could still face prosecution.
“The law does not exonerate anyone who carries out an unlawful instruction,” he said, warning that conviction carries “a jail term of not less than five calendar years without the option of a fine.”
State law mirrors federal requirements
Another lawyer in Uyo, Augustine Asuquo, stated that the governor’s narrative contradicts the Akwa Ibom State Procurement Act 2022, which closely aligns with federal standards.
He cited Sections 25 to 29 of the law, which mandate open competition, prequalification of bidders, submission of bid documents, and bid security.
“Any bidder that is being considered must place collateral… at least two per cent of the contract sum,” Mr Asuquo explained, noting that this protects government funds if a contractor defaults.
He described it as troubling for a public officer to admit that a contractor was awarded a contract he did not for.
“It is embarrassing for a public officer to say that a contractor did not bid for a contract,” he said. “This law makes it mandatory for every procurement… to be transparently open for every qualified bidder.”
From altar to arrest threats
Beyond procurement irregularities, the governor’s vow to jail the contractor sparked further concern.
“Finish the job or return the money. I will jail you,” Governor Eno had said in the video.
Mr Udim cautioned that a governor has no power to order arrests.
“The governor has no right to ‘order’ for arrest of the contractor. He can only make a formal complaint or petition to the police or EFCC,” he said.
Mr Asuquo was more direct, describing such threats as an abuse of authority.
“Every contract is a civil transaction… What the governor can do is to sue for enforcement, termination, or recovery. It is never open for anybody, including the governor, to arrest the contractor.”
He added that, if any criminality exists, it lies first in the illegal award of the contract itself, not merely in its abandonment.
Church, kinship, and contract access
Throughout his speech, Governor Eno repeatedly referenced church membership and village origin, framing the abandoned project as a personal betrayal rather than a procedural failure.
“You want to disgrace me. Even if you leave the church, I will pursue you.”
Analysts say such language reinforces the perception that access to contracts may be influenced by proximity—religious, communal, or personal—rather than transparent competition.
A procurement expert, who spoke anonymously due to political sensitivity, warned that even the perception of faith-based or kinship-driven contracting erodes trust.
When contracts appear linked to church membership or personal networks, it signals a governance failure—even if criminal intent has not yet been proven, the expert said.
‘No variations’: Policy or personal rule?
The governor also announced what he described as a hardline stance against contract variations.
“Don’t take a contract and expect variations—that is how they used to pack away government money before. I don’t do variations.”
But both federal and state procurement frameworks allow variations under regulated conditions, such as inflation or scope changes. Engineering experts warn that blanket bans often lead to abandoned projects, substandard delivery, or undocumented renegotiations—the very outcomes governments seek to avoid.
Civil society concerns
Joseph Ekong, a political and development scientist with Stakeholders Democracy Network, said proximity-based contracting carries long-term consequences.
He warned that such practices lead to “exclusion and alienation of more competent and technically sound bidders and contractors, poor project delivery, poor or little monitoring and evaluation framework, high frequency of abandoned projects.”
Mr Ekong called for stronger scrutiny from the EFCC and ICPC.
“The twin oversight bodies in Nigeria (EFCC and ICPC) should work with credible media and CSOs… to beam a searchlight on the sharp procurement practices at the state and local government level,” he said.
According to him, procurement violations are not isolated incidents but part of a broader national pattern that demands sustained investigation.
Unanswered questions
Despite the gravity of the disclosures, key issues which PREMIUM TIMES cannot independently verified remain unresolved: Who authorised the contract that never went through bidding? Where procurement officers sanctioned? How many other contracts were awarded through similar informal processes, and how many beneficiaries are linked by church, kinship, or political proximity?
The Commissioner for Information, Aniekan Umanah, did not respond to calls seeking his comment.
Governor Eno insists he takes no kickbacks
“I challenge anybody to say I have asked any contractor for kickbacks.”
But analysts stress that corruption is not defined only by bribes. Process abuse—who gets called instead of competing—can be just as damaging.
READ ALSO: Wike speaks on chances of Fubara winning second term
This story is not ultimately about one abandoned project in Ikot Ekpene Udo. It is about a system where public contracts appear to travel through informal channels, where enforcement is personalised, and where institutional safeguards are replaced by altar-side warnings.
In a democracy, governed by law, procurement should be blind, predictable, and documented—not revealed in fragments from a pulpit.
And sometimes, the most revealing insights into governance are not found in audit reports or court filings, but in moments when power speaks too freely—before applause, and beneath a cross.
