By Tse Tse Tuk, Aminu Adamu
On Saturday, 13 September 2025, Nigeria’s national electricity grid suffered another disruption after a forced outage on the Aba–Itu 132kV Single Circuit transmission line cut bulk power supply to Akwa Ibom State and parts of the Port Harcourt Electricity Distribution Company (PHED) network.
The incident plunged Uyo, Eket, Itu and surrounding communities into darkness within minutes. Authorities described the event as a “system disturbance.” However, documents and petitions seen by The North Journals suggest the outage may be linked to alleged procurement irregularities dating back several years.
At the centre of the controversy is the procurement and proposed deployment of GAP and TS conductors on the Aba–Itu transmission line, despite documented operational failures elsewhere and the availability of alternative technologies with established performance records.
A strategic asset and a foreseeable failure
The Aba–Itu 132kV transmission line is a critical infrastructure asset supplying electricity to Akwa Ibom State and supporting grid stability across parts of the South-South region. Its failure on 13 September resulted in an immediate loss of bulk power to PHED, triggering widespread outages across major residential and industrial areas.
The incident occurred against the backdrop of a persistently unstable national grid since the privatisation of Nigeria’s power sector in 2013. Available industry data indicate that the country has experienced hundreds of partial and total grid collapses over the past decade.
The Transmission Company of Nigeria (TCN) has acknowledged at least 20 grid collapses between 2020 and 2024, while independent industry assessments place the number between 105 and over 162 incidents in roughly ten years.
Industry stakeholders, however, argue that the Aba–Itu outage stands apart, alleging that it was not merely a technical failure but the result of questionable procurement decisions.
Petition to BPP raises concerns
Gigawatt Energy Ltd, a Nigerian power-sector company, has petitioned the Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP), requesting an urgent meeting to address what it described as “observed irregularities” in the procurement process for the Aba–Itu 132kV transmission line.
A copy of the petition seen by The North Journals shows that a technical committee had previously reviewed the performance of GAP conductors following operational failures on other transmission lines, including the Papalanto–Ota and Kebbi lines.
In those cases, public safety advisories were reportedly issued, warning residents against walking beneath installed GAP conductors due to safety risks. The petition states that the outcome of those assessments led to the removal of the conductors from service.
Despite these findings, the same conductor technology was allegedly approved for subsequent projects, including the Aba–Itu line.
Allegations of repeated procurement failures
Gigawatt Energy alleges that the GAP conductor was introduced into TCN’s network during the tenure of a former Managing Director, Usman Gur Mohammed. According to the petition, the conductor has a history of failure in India and other countries, where it reportedly caused operational losses before being discontinued.
The company further claims that more than 4,000 kilometres of GAP conductor, valued at about 50 million dollars, were procured during that period but later abandoned at TCN’s Ojo Stores in Lagos after being deemed unsuitable for deployment.
“The same pattern is repeating itself,” the petition stated, warning that similar outcomes could occur if corrective action is not taken.
Disregard for established alternatives
The petition also alleges that TCN ignored alternative conductor technologies with proven performance records. Gigawatt Energy cited its Aluminium Conductor Composite Core (ACCC) High Tension Low Sag (HTLS) conductor, which it said has been deployed successfully within TCN’s existing network.
Unlike GAP conductors, ACCC technology has an established track record, including independent testing and verified field performance.
However, the company alleged that TCN proceeded to procure several thousand kilometres of GAP conductor and is preparing to deploy them on projects financed through donor funding and international loans guaranteed by the Federal Government.
The petition described the move as a “booby trap” that could result in project failure while leaving Nigeria burdened with long-term debt and unusable infrastructure.
Concerns over untested TS conductor
Gigawatt Energy also raised concerns about the proposed introduction of the TS conductor, which it described as untested and not yet installed anywhere on Nigeria’s transmission network.
While promoters of the technology have highlighted the strength of its core, the company argued that core strength alone does not guarantee long-term operational performance.
According to the petition, transmission infrastructure requires extensive performance history, independent certification and years of successful field deployment benchmarks that both GAP and TS conductors allegedly do not meet.
Allegations of institutional capture
As the statutory operator of Nigeria’s transmission grid, TCN is responsible for recommending materials that ensure safety, reliability and grid stability.
Gigawatt Energy alleged that the continued promotion of unproven or failed technologies raises concerns beyond technical misjudgment, pointing instead to possible institutional capture.
The petition accused a group of senior TCN officials of operating without adequate oversight, potentially engaging in regulatory circumvention, collusive procurement practices or actions that undermine project outcomes.
According to the company, the Aba–Itu outage may be a manifestation of deeper systemic issues within the transmission sector.
Legal implications and cost exposure
The allegations, if proven, could amount to violations of the Public Procurement Act (PPA) 2007. Relevant provisions include:
- Section 16(1)(a)(b): which requires transparency, accountability and value for money in public procurement.
- Section 16(6): which mandates that only fit-for-purpose goods be procured.
- Section 58: which criminalises procurement fraud, collusion and wilful breaches of procurement procedures.
Industry estimates place Nigeria’s potential exposure including procurement costs, stalled projects, replacement works and system disruptions, at approximately ₦71 billion.
Calls for regulatory action
Gigawatt Energy has urged the Bureau of Public Procurement to investigate the allegations, sanction any officials found culpable, and blacklist GAP and TS conductors from deployment pending certified testing and internationally recognised validation.
Under its statutory mandate, the BPP has the authority to suspend or nullify procurements and blacklist suppliers or technologies that fail due-diligence requirements.
Beyond the blackout
The September 2025 blackout, industry stakeholders argue, was not merely another grid disturbance but a warning sign.
As Nigeria continues to grapple with persistent power failures, the Aba–Itu incident highlights concerns that grid instability may be exacerbated not only by ageing infrastructure but by procurement decisions allegedly driven by abuse of authority and disregard for technical evidence.
Until the allegations are fully investigated and accountability enforced, critics warn that similar power disruptions may continue to occur.
