Below is reproduced the White Paper on which the Ogun State Government has been acting in converting to public trust some of the private property and concerns of a former Governor of the state, Otunba Gbenga Daniel, and reversal of some of the actions and policies of the immediate past administration in the state:
OGUN STATE OF NIGERIA GAZETTE
Published by Authority NO. 6
ABEOKUTA – 9th February, 2012
Vol. 37
OGUN STATE NOTICE NO. 9
CONTENT
The following is published as a supplement to the Ogun State Gazette
Views and Decisions of the Ogun State Government (White Paper) on the First Report of the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into all Land Allocations, Acquisitions, Sale and Concessions of Government Properties and Administration of Land Policies, Rules, and Regulations between January 2004 and May 29 2011 and other matters connected therewith. A103-A133
By the Governor’s command
Barrister Taiwo A Adeoluwa
Secrtary to the State Government Abeokuta
18th January, 2012.
OG.S.L.N 9 OF 2012
VIEWS AND DECISIONS OF THE OGUN STATE GOVERNMENT (WHITE PAPER) ON THE FIRST REPORT OF THE JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF INQUIRY INTO ALL LAND ALLOCATIONS, ACQUISITIONS, SALE AND CONCESSIONS OF GOVERNMENT PROPERTIES AND ADMINISTRATION OF LAND POLICES, RULES, AND REGULATIONS BETWEEN JANUARY 2004 AND MAY 29 2011 AND OTHER MATTERS CONNECTED THEREWITH.
1. On 16th September 2011, His Excellency the Governor of Ogun State, Senator Ibikunle Amosun FCA inaugurated a five-member judicial commissions are as follows:
(a) Hon Justice Abiodun Akinyemi – Chairman
(b) Mr Dipo Onabanjo – Member
(c) Mr Ayobami Biobaku – Member
(d) Arch (Mrs) Bisi Olumide – Member
(e) Mr Niyi Oguntula – Member
Arch (Mrs) Bisi Olumide declined the offer of appointment and did not take part in the Commission’s activities and proceedings.
2. The terms of reference of the Judicial Commission of Inquiry are to:-
(i) Inquire into all allocations of State land between January 2004 and May 29, 2011 by all Ministries, Departments and Statutory agencies charged with the exercise of the power of allocation whether such allocation be by way of sale, lease, grant or any other manner of land transfer with a view to identifying whether such allocations involved breaches of policies, guidelines, rules, regulations or procedures resulting in non-payment or under-payment of appropriate fees, loss of opportunity to the State for industrial, commercial and agricultural development or any other situation which in the opinion of the Commission is not in the public interest;
(ii) inquire into the structures, systems, methods, policies and procedures of land administration in Ogun State between January 2004 and May 29, 2011 with a view to determining the adequacy, conformity with best practices and transparency of the systems, methods, policies and procedures, and identifying instances of impropriety in land allocation and acquisition;
(iii) inquire into the acquisition of any interest in land or property in Ogun State by any public officer or public office holder in Ogun State between January 2004 and May 29, 2011 (either directly or through any person) or by any body corporate in which such public officer or office holder (with or without his spouse and children), has majority shareholding with a view to determining whether such acquisition was in abuse or misuse of power or authority or in breach of the rules, regulations, policies and guidelines governing the acquisition of such interest in land or property;
(iv) inquire into sale, lease, grant, concession or any other form of transfer of interest in any property held in the corporate name of Ogun State Government or in the name of any of its Ministries, departments, statutory agencies or any body corporate owned by Ogun State Government between January 2004 and May 29, 2011 with a view to determining whether or not such sale, lease, grant or other form of transfer was in the public interest and in conformity with best practices;
(v) identify individuals, institutions and groups involved in the breaches, abuse or misuse of power, loss of revenue and other acts, omissions or losses enumerated in (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv) above and extent of their involvement;
(vi) recommend appropriate measures and sanctions against such individuals, institutions and group identified in (v) above;
(vii) recommend appropriate policies, guidelines, rules, regulations and structures of land administration in Ogun State to prevent the future occurrence of the breaches, lapses and losses identified by the Commission and
(viii) make appropriate recommendations on any other matter which in the opinion of the Commission is relevant or incidental to the foregoing.
3. After its inauguration, the Commission by public notice invited memoranda from members of the public and about one hundred and sixty (160) were received. The Commission commenced sitting on 25th October 2011, held twenty six public sittings up till 13th December, 2011 and examined over one hundred witnesses.
4. The Commission submitted its first report to His Excellency the Governor of Ogun State on 16th December 2011. Although called an “interim repor” the Chairman of the Commission, Hon Justice Abiodun Akinyemi emphasized that the report is final in respect of the allocations acquisitions, concessions, corporate organizations and individuals covered in the report. The Chairman stressed that the need to submit a first report was to enable the Governor-in-Council look into the recommendations of the Commission as they touch and concern matters that are very important to the State economy and fundamental to the public welfare.
5. On 3rd January 2011, the Governor constituted a five member committee to review the Commission’s first report. The committee has compared the findings and recommendations of the Commission with the Commission’s terms of reference and found that all the twenty four matters treated in the report were covered by terms (i), (ii),(iii), (iv), (v) and (vi) of the terms of reference. This draft document of views and decisions will follow the pattern of the Report.
6. Land is a prime asset in Ogun State not just for the Government but also for the people. As a result, the setting up of this Judicial Commission has met with universal approval and support. This is evident from the number of memoranda received, the witnesses who testified and the eager expectations of the people of Ogun State both in Nigeria and abroad. The committee has painstakingly examined the Report and come up with the views and decisions set out hereunder. Subsequently, the Governor-in-Council met, deliberated upon and ratified the reports.
7. CONCESSION OF LOMIRO OIL PLANTATION TO JB FARMS LIMITED
OBSERVATIONS/FINDINGS OF THE COMMISSION
(I) The provision in the concession Agreement requiring the concessionaire to invest the sum of N450 million in the farm over 10 years is vague as it does not clearly specify how and what the money should be spent on. Specifically, it is not clear whether or not it is to be spent re-planting or regeneration of the farm and replacement of the processing mill, all of which are very crucial factors that will affect the reversionary interest of the State.
(II) There is no provision in the Agreement on how much of the farm (in acreage) the concessionaire should replant during the concession period, only that he should leave palm trees with a life-span of at least 14 years. The implication of this is that the concessionaire has the unilateral discretion to decide how much to replant and may not do any replanting at all until about seven years to the end of its tenor, busying itself with only harvesting what has been planted and nurtured over the past several years by the Government.
(III) No proper valuation of the farm was done before the arrangement with the Concessionaire was hurriedly made.
(IV) On the spot inspection of the Farm revealed that the Mill inherited by the concessionaire has been completely abandoned and left to rot away. No effort has been made to either replace or repair it. Bunc
hes (produce) from the Farm are presently being transported from the farm to the Concessionaire’s private Palm oil Plantation elsewhere supposedly for processing. In other words, Lomiro Oil Plantation is presently serving only as a feeder to the concessionaire’s private farm elsewhere and no efforts is being made to commence re-planting in the near future.
(V) Since taking over the farm in 2010, the concessionaire has not added ANY value to it nor replanted a SINGLE palm tree. Rather all it has been doing is simple harvesting and selling off what is on the farm. Interestingly, going by the fact that the concessionaire paid the sum of N5m to the government in its first year, being 5% of turn-over, and intends to pay at least N13m to the government in the current year, being also 5% of this year’s turn-over, by the admission of the company’s chief executive while testifying before the commission, it means that the company has made a staggering turn-over of about N360m in two years by merely selling off products from the farm without investing any money at all, thereby making huge profit while the government would have only received a paltry sum of N18m.
(VI) There is no effective monitoring, if any at all, by Gateway Holdings Ltd, the concessionaire authority.
(VII) The overall implication of the present arrangement if left to continue is that at the end of the concession period, all that the State would be left with would be a shell or carcass of an Oil Plantation, consisting only of old and unproductive trees and a few young ones, because the present arrangement will not ensure any viable and profitable reversionary interest in the farm for the State.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
(a) The present concession agreement is not in the overall interest of Ogun State, being onerous, one-sided, and grossly exploitative and meant only to strip or plunder the State of a precious asset. Consequently it is recommended that the present Agreement be either RE-NEGOTIATED or RESCINDED by the government.
(b) Gateway Holdings Ltd lacks the professional capacity or expertise to monitor or supervise the project. It is recommended that the Agricultural Development Corporation be strengthened and given the task of monitoring or supervision any new or renegotiated arrangement decided upon by the government.
GOVERNMENT ‘S VIEWS
(a) The agreement between the Ogun State Government and JB farms Limited has no provision for renegotiation. The recommendation of REVOCATION is accepted.
(b) Government accepts recommendation (b) subject to the restructuring of the Agricultural Development Corporation to enable it perform its role effectively.
(c) In order to make these recommendation useful the Government will immediately stop access to and operation on site by JB Farms Limited to prevent looting and vandalism.
8. CONCESSION OF REMO RUBBER PLANTATION TO OJA-OMO AGRO-ALLIED LIMITED
OBSERVATIONS/FINDINGS
(I) ADC which had managed the farm for several years and could have afforded GHL the benefit of its expertise and experience was not involved in the concession arrangement or negotiation of terms with the concessionaire.
(II) No proper valuation of the Farm was done before the arrangement with the Concessionaire was hurriedly made.
(III) The term of 60 years granted to the Conessionaire is grossly exploitative and not in the interest of the State. The tapping of rubber starts from age 6 to around 25-30 years. Therefore, it does seem that the 60 years term granted is deliberately intended to avail the concessionaire of the opportunity of having two life-spans of rubber-tapping, before handing back to the State, an aged farm which is no longer productive and therefore has no financial benefit to the State.
(IV) Physical inspection of the farm revealed that since it took over, the concessionaire has added no value whatever to the farm. No trees have been planted on the farm by concessionaire in the one half years it has had possession of the farm.
(V) The plantation was in a parlous state, with weeds almost everywhere.
(VI) There is absence of any serious supervision or monitoring of the operations of the concessionaire by GHL.
(VII) Illegal tapping of rubber is going on unabated on the farm by unknown persons.
(VIII) Machinery handed over to the concessionaire by ADC when it took over are no longer on the farm, without any plausible explanation of their whereabouts by the concessionaire.
(IX) In view of the absence of a formalized Agreement , there is no provision anywhere typing the concessionaire to any conditions or warranties so as to leave behind for the State at the end of the concession period, a viable reversionary interest.
(X) In view of all the above, the Commission is of the view that this Concession is onerous, extremely one-sided, not well-thought out, and certainly not in the best interest of Ogun State and its people.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
(a) that the Agreement be RESCINDED forthwith; or
(b) that Government re-negotiates fresh terms with the concessionaire after a thorough investigation of its antecedents, relationships, financial and professional capabilities and any underlying agreements or third-party involvements it may have or intend concerning the farm.
GOVERNMENT’S VIEWS
(I) Government accepts recommendation (a) since the contract document was not executed but recommendation (b) is not accepted.
(II) The Government will immediately take over and secure the assets of farm
(III) No refund should be made to the concessionaire until the assets stripped off the plantation are accounted for and restored.
9. CONCESSION OF APOJE FARMS TO EGJA MIRAMAR LIMITED
OBSERVATIONS/FINDINGS
(I) The present concessionaire, EGJA-MIRAMAR LTD is nothing but a clone or re-incarnation of EGJA-MECENG NIGERIA LTD, whose tenure at the farm from 2003 was an abysmal failure and woeful financial disaster for the State, going by available records presented before the Commission by both GHL and ADC.
(II) The chief promoter and controlling mind of EGJA-MECENG, OBA (ENGR.) ISIAKA OLAJIDE AJEDE, THE OGIRIMADAGBO AKIN ILODO, IJEBU-MUSHIN, in evidence before the Commission boasted that he was also the chief link through whom the present concession agreement was granted to EGJA-MIRAMAR. In this evide4nce before the Commission, the Kabiyesi admitted that he is a shareholder of the concessionaire and that he was instrumental to the grant of the concession agreement to the company.
(III) ADC who previously managed the farm was not involved in the concession arrangement.
(IV) The concessionaire has no business plan or programme of development for the farm. Even though the agreement stipulates that it shall invest N1 Billion in the farm within the first 10 years, there is no detailed program of how this is to be done.
(V) There is no functional Oil processing Mill on the farm as the 6-ton Oil Mill handed over by ADC to EDGA-MECENG had been burnt during the management term of EGJA-MECENG. Physical inspection by Commission revealed that the concessionaire has resorted to very crude and extremely backward local method of processing.
(VI) There is no replanting or regeneration programme going on in the farm and no evidence of any such effort intended in the near future by the concessionaire.
(VII) There is no plausible of financial, professional or even managerial capacity of the concessionaire to manage the farm successfully so as to meet the desire and aspiration of the State.
(VIII) In almost one year of being in possession, there is absolutely no evidence of any investment by the concessionaire. Yet, there is evidence that the concessionaire has being harvesting the bunches in the farm, albeit, in a crude manner.
(IX) In spite of requests made, the con
cessionaire was unable to provide any record of its activities or performance on the farm since it took over.
(X) The Commission found that there is an almost total lack of monitoring or supervision by GHL, due either to lack of capacity, inefficiency or outright non chalance.
(XI) No proper valuation of the farm was done before the arrangement with the Concessionaire was hurriedly made.
(XII) It is worthy of note that the Acting Managing Director of GHL, Mr. Salami admitted before the Commission that the concessionaire has not performed well and that with what is now known, it is obvious that the company lacks the capacity to handle the project and has committed several breaches of the Agreement.
(XIII) There is a very high level of communal disenchantment and hostility from the local community arising principally from the unproductive manner both EDJA-MECENG and EDJA MIRAMAR had operated the farm and the non-involvement of the community in the concession agreement.
(XIV) To continue with the present agreement with EDGA MIRAMAR will continue to result not only in loss of financial opportunities for the State, but also loss of employment opportunities for citizens of the State.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
In view of all the above, the Commission recommends an outright cancellation of the concession agreement with EDGA-MIRAMAR, as it is nothing but an exploitative sham aimed only to benefit a few, and totally against the public interest. It is further recommended that any new arrangement to be reached by government should involve ADC and the local community and be properly monitored to ensure strict adherence to agreed terms and conditions. A principal consideration must be the need to ensure a viable and profitable reversionary interest to the State which can only come about by an effective replanting/regeneration program.
GOVERNMENT’S VIEWS
Government accepts these recommendations. The Concession agreement is cancelled forthwith.
10. CONCESSION OF GATEWAY HOTEL, OTA TO MIDC LIMITED AND SUB-LEASE TO ARTEE INDUSTRIES LIMITED
OBSERVATIONS/FINDINGS
(I) The Business plan submitted by the concessionaire stipulated that it would complete the refurbishment of the hotel within 18 months of taking possession. It took possession of the hotel in January 2009, but more than two and half years after taking possession, the concessionaire has done virtually nothing in this regard.
(II) The concessionaire has breached several important terms of the Agreement, such as the provision of insurance policy for the hotel, setting up of an Operating committee, etc.
(III) Clearly evident is the fact that the concessionaire LACKS the financial capacity to deliver on the project. Indications of this fact emerged quite early when it failed to pay the balance of the signature fee on schedule, could not honour its obligation to construct the shopping arcade and had to enter into an amended agreement with a third party (ARTEE INDUSTRIES LTD) to undertake the construction. The inability to refurbish the hotel on schedule is principally due to lack of funds as admitted by the CEO of the company. While testifying before the Commission. Mr. Gboyega Isiaka, former GMD of GHL, who mid-wifed the concession admitted before the Commission that MIDC had failed woefully to perform and that he even threatened several times to terminate the contract due to serial default on the part of the company. He tendered before the Commission three (3) letters of termination written to MIDC to terminate the contract.
(IV) The Concessionaire and GHL subsequently entered into a Tripartite Agreement with ARTEE INDUSTRIES LTD, by which ARTEE INDUSTRIES LTD was granted a Development Lease for a term of 23 years less 3 days (i.e the unexpired residue of the term granted to MIDC) in respect of an area measuring approximately 2.153 hectares (the shopping arcade) to be used for a SHOPPING MALL. Due to the inability of MIDC to procure the funds needed to build thr shopping arcade, and the agreement of ARTEE to finance the construction, the three parties (MIDC, GHL and ARTEE) agreed to execute another agreement by which ARTEE would be granted a further term of 15 years by GHL, and also an additional land area of 8-10 hectares to be used by ARTEE for support services as consideration for these additions to other agreed terms. However the new agreement embodying these new terms is yet to be formally executed by the parties. It needs be mentioned that ARTEE has already paid about N135 million to MIDC in consideration of the development lease.
(V) While MIDC is evidently incapable, ARTEE appears quite capable and very eager to proceed with its side of the project. It is to be noted that ARTEE are the owners/operators of the well-known PARK AND SHOP brand and their presence in OTA, will result in a lot of benefits to the economy of the area and the State.
RE3COMMENDATIONS:
(a) The Commission recommends that the concession Agreement with MIDC be terminated forthwith in view of the several fundamental breaches and the clear demonstration of financial incapacity by the company, and a new investor/partner with verifiable financial ability and demonstrable expertise and commitment be sought for the hotel.
(b) The Commission is of the view that the arrangement with ARTEE is severable from the one with MIDC, and should be allowed to continue, subject to further discussions with the company with a view to renegotiating some of the terms relating to the yet to be executed Lease Agreement. The commission recommends that Shopping Arcade area be SCREENED OFF from the hotel, and that the government does all in its power to encourage ARTEE to remain, in view of the benefits that the presence of PARK AND SHOP shopping mall will attract to the State. In this light, government is urged to take into cognizance the commitment the company has shown and the consideration it has already paid to both MIDC and GHL.
GOVERNMENT’S VIEWS
(I) Government accepts recommendation (a)
(II) Government does not accept recommendation (b) as the agreement with ARTEE is not severable from the one with MIDC being a tripartite agreement. Further more the shopping arcade cannot be screened off from the hotel.
(III) Fair and legitimate expenditure of MIDC and ARTEE will be scrutinized, verified and refunded, if established.
(IV) ARTEE will be eligible to participate in the fresh bidding process upon terms, if any.
11. CONCESSION TO GATEWAY HOTEL IJEBU ODE ANNEX TO PRAEMAK COMMERCIAL INVESTMENT COMPANY LIMITED
OBSERVATIONS/FINDINGS
The concessionaire of this hotel withdrew his interest in the hotel following the resolution of the House of Assembly concerning concession agreements. While testifying before the commission, the concessionaire/stated categorically that he was no longer interested as the House of Assembly had ‘nullified’ the agreement. He therefore prays for a refund of his financial expenses on the Hotel so far.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Commission recommends that GHL/Government verify the claim of the concessionaire and refund to him any justifiable aspect of his claims.
GOVERNMENT’S VIEW
Government accepts this recommendation.
12. CONCESSION OF GATEWAY HOTEL ABEOKUTA TO A.A. ENTERTAINMENT AND TOURISM LIMITED
OBSERVATIONS/FINDINGS:
The Commission found that the concessionaire has performed fairly well in fulfilling the terms oof the concession Agreement. On the spot assessment by the Commission revealed extensive refurbishment work going on and there is evident commitment on the part of the concessionaire to meet the expectations of government.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Agreement with the concessionaire be allowed to continue subject to proper monitoring and supervision to ensure that there is no deviation at any point from the agreed terms. The Commission however further recommends t
hat the Government engages the concessionaire in further discussions/re-negotiations in respect of several provision of the agreement particularly the following clauses 4.5, 6.2, 7.1, 9.1, 9.4.2, 11.1.5, 11.2.3, 11.1.9, 11.5.9 and 13.
GOVERNMENT’S VIEWS
(a) The Governor- In- Council accepts that the concession agreement be renegotiated immediately.
(b) Government notes that the concessionaire has carried out extensive renovations on the hotel. Government and the concessionaire had met several times to agree new terms for the concession, namely, for the concessionaire to proceed to complete the renovation works immediately and to operate the completed facility for a maximum term of 10 years with 7.5% of the Gross Revenue payable to Ogun State
(c) A new agreement will be executed on the new terms agreed by the parties.
(d) Compliance with the new terms of maximum 10 years tenure and 7.5% gross revenue accruable to Ogun State shall be fundamental and of the strict essence to the validity of the agreement.
13 CHIEF AKIN AKANDE AND OTHERS (ABEOKUTA GOLF CLUB)
OBSERVATIONS/FINDINGS
1. The Commission observes that although the original allocation and grant of the alleged Certificate of Occupancy complained of took place before 2004, the actions of the Government on the land between 2003-2011 falls within the Terms of Reference of the commission, thus vesting it with jurisdiction to look into the entire matter.
2. The Commission found as a fact that the said Parcel of land in issue was indeed originally allocated by the Ogun State government to ABEOKUTA GOLF CLUB and NOT Abeokuta Golf International Ltd.
3. The Commission found further as a fact that the government was misled into issuing the said Certificate of Occupancy meant for ABEOKUTA GOLF CLUB to Abeokuta Golf International Club Ltd whose chief promoter is Apagun Oluwole Olumide and that the survey plan attached to the said certificate was wrongfully and clandestinely altered after the certificate of occupancy had been signed by the Governor to achieve the intended mischief. This action by itself taints the said Certificate of occupancy rendering it a suspect document.
4. The Commission found that between 2003-2011 the Ogun State Government established the Hilcrest Estate and also excised some land for Mamu Village extension out of the original 79.351 hectares allocated to the ABEOKUTA GOLF CLUB.
(VI) Although the Commission summoned the said Apagun Oluwole Olumide to testify before it, he did not honor the invitation.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
(a) The commission recommends that the certificate of Occupancy registered as no 7 at page 7 in vol.476 dated 29th October 1992 issued to Abeokuta Golf International Limited be revoked and, upon application, a fresh one with the correct and exact land size dimensions and abuttal properly demarcated be issued to the ABEOKUTA GOLF CLUB and handed over to the registered trustees of the Club.
(b) The commission recommends that the Hillcrest Estate and the mamu Village excisions granted out of the original land allocated to the Abeokuta Golf club, be allowed to stay in the public interest.
GOVERNMENT’S VIEW
Governments accepts these recommendations.
14. REGENERATION CHURCH OF GOD, aka ABRAHAM’S TABERNACLE, SAGAMU
OBSERVATIONS/FINDINGS
(i) The Commission found as an incontrovertible fact that the church known as ABRAHAM’S TABERNACLE situate at Church estate, Oba Erinwole road, GRA, Sagamu, was built by the erstwhile Governor of Ogun State OTUNBA GBENGA DANIEL in honour of his father, his Grace, the Most Rev. ABRAHAM ADEBOLA DANIEL
(ii) Incorporation documents of the Church confirm without doubt that three of the named registered trustees of the church, to whom the ex-governor issued the certificate of occupancy, were his close family members namely: OLABUNMI OPAWOLE (Wife), ADEBOLA IREDE DANIEL (Son) and MOST REV. ABRAHAM ADEBOLA DANEIEL (Father).
(v) The Commission found as an incontrovertible fact that the said church ABRAHAM’s TABERNACLE was built on a parcel of land comprised in the certificate of Occupancy No 0033337 dated the 14th day of May, 2011 registered as no 60/60/761 at the Land Registry, Abeokuta and signed personally by the erstwhile governor, OTUNBA GBENGA DANIEL.
(VII) The following irregularities were found in the processing of the allocation made to the Church;
(a) The application form for land allocation was obtained on 4th of January 2011.
(b) The application form was filled and submitted on 20th January 2011.
(c) The application form shows that it was sworn to at the High Court Registry Abeokuta on 13th September, 2010.
(d) All receipts for payments connected with the land such as premium, annual ground rent, capital contribution, preparation of certificate of occupancy, (except government survey), were all made on 4th January 2011 (the same day the land was applied for,) as evidenced in the copies of the receipts and endorsements on the application form.
(e) The letter of Allocation of the land issued by then Director General Lands, Surv. Gbenga Ogunnoiki, was issued on 9th July 2009, almost two years before the land was applied for.
(f) Even the survey plan of the land, dated 11th October 2010, was done long before the land was applied for.
(g) The allocation (9th July 2009) was done even before the name in which it was allocated was registered on 8th June 2010.
(v) As at the time the allocation was made on 9th july 2009, and the certificate of occupancy issued on 14th May, 2011, other private citizens had subsisting valid titles on portions of the land. For example, one Mr. Dele A. Dada had subsisting title evidenced by a deed of Assignment to which the Governor’s consent was granted on the 1st day of February 2006. The assignment was predicated upon a Certificate of Occupancy registered as no 13/13/142 dated 13/8/80, registered at the Lands registry Abeokuta. His land is plot 3 Block XLIX.