By Efe Onodjae
The management of Corpran International Limited, has dismissed allegations surrounding the development of the Nigeria Police Housing Scheme in Mbora District, Abuja, describing claims by a former legal representative of the company (names withheld) as false, malicious and misleading.
In a statement, the company and its Managing Director, Mr. Andy Chime, said assertions linking the project to the alleged “shady sale” of police barracks and involving former Inspectors-General of Police were unfounded and aimed at discrediting a legitimate housing initiative.
According to the company, the Mbora project was not a sale of police property but a structured joint venture between the Nigeria Police Force, NPF, and Corpran International Limited, designed to provide affordable housing for police officers.
The statement explained that the partnership was established through a Memorandum of Understanding, MoU, signed on July 27, 2015, under which Corpran International Limited financed, designed and executed the development of 52 housing units at Plot 1848, Mbora District, Abuja.
It added that 50 percent of the housing units were offered to police officers at discounted rates as part of the welfare objective of the scheme. “The project was duly completed and commissioned by the then Inspector-General of Police, Idris Kpotum,” the company stated.
Corpran alleged that the controversy stemmed from a personal property dispute involving the legal representative of the company who was said to have been allocated a housing unit in the estate on goodwill grounds.
According to the company, the legal representativee allegedly failed to meet the agreed payment terms and refused to settle the outstanding balance for the property, prompting legal action to recover the unit.
The company also addressed reports by the International Centre for Investigative Reporting, ICIR, regarding the financing of the project, noting that the matter had become the subject of litigation before the Federal High Court.
It cited suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1630/2023, stating that issues concerning the transparency of the project’s financing had been brought before the court.
Corpran maintained that funding for the estate followed established procedures for real estate development and mortgage financing, stressing that attempts to portray the arrangement as irregular were misleading.
