Former Edo State Governor, Godwin Obaseki, has flatly rejected a summons issued by the Edo State House of Assembly to appear before its ad-hoc committee investigating the financing and ownership of the Museum of West African Arts (MOWAA) and the Radisson Blu Hotel projects.
Obaseki, who was scheduled to face lawmakers on Thursday, 4 December, dismissed the invitation as “offensive and laughable”, insisting the Assembly has no basis to question him on matters currently before a court.
The legislative probe, initiated at the request of Governor Monday Okpebholo, is examining the funding structure and ownership status of the two multi-billion-naira projects—N3.8 billion in State investment for MOWAA and N28 billion committed to the Radisson Blu development.
In letters signed by committee secretary Bekisu Oshone Wilson, the panel invited several former officials and private-sector figures central to the projects, including former Finance Commissioner Joseph Eboigbe, former Attorney General Oluwole Osaze-Uzzi, Tilbury House Nigeria Ltd’s Managing Director, HIMC Project Manager Pramod Thorat, Afrinvest Capital boss Ugochukwu Anigbogu, as well as the heads of Meristem Trustees Ltd and Emerging Africa Trustees Ltd.
The committee stressed that the attendance of all invitees was crucial to its work.
But Obaseki’s media adviser, Crusoe Osagie, said the former governor would not participate in what he described as an improper attempt to reopen issues already submitted to judicial scrutiny.
“It is sub judice for the former Governor to appear before the Edo Assembly in a matter already in court. Why subject him to another round of questioning on the same issues?” Osagie said.
In a similar stance, MOWAA’s management has also declined to honour the invitation. Counsel to the museum project, Olayiwola Afolabi, argued that while lawmakers are free to make recommendations, the court will ultimately determine the outcome of the dispute.
The Assembly is expected to continue its inquiry, though the refusal of key actors to appear raises questions over the depth and direction of the probe—and sets the stage for a potential confrontation between the legislature and some of the state’s most influential political and institutional players.
