Nestoil Limited and Neconde Energy Limited have denied reports that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) recovered $60 million in an ongoing investigation involving the companies, describing the reports as false, malicious and sponsored.

The companies, in a joint statement signed by their managements, said the publications, which appeared in several national newspapers on Monday, August 17, 2026, were part of a coordinated campaign allegedly sponsored by a lender involved in their ongoing commercial dispute.

The companies said the meeting convened by the EFCC Chairman on July 8, 2026, which the reports purportedly relied upon, was not a criminal interrogation or investigation but a conciliatory meeting aimed at resolving the commercial issues between Nestoil, Neconde and their lenders.

According to the statement, the meeting was attended by senior representatives of Nestoil and Neconde, their financial advisers and legal representatives, including Senior Counsel from Wole Olanipekun & Co., as well as the lenders’ counsel, Babajide Koku, SAN, and representatives of the respective lenders.

Nestoil and Neconde said the EFCC Chairman made it clear during the meeting that the relationship between the companies and their lenders was commercial and that all parties had a mutual interest in protecting the businesses and the wider Nigerian economy.

They further stated that no media representatives or EFCC media team attended the meeting because the discussions were confidential and focused on reaching a settlement.

The companies said the parties subsequently agreed through their respective counsel to document the resolutions reached at the meeting in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). They added that their counsel had exchanged several revisions with the lenders’ legal representatives and that the lenders’ final revision was expected during the week of August 17, ahead of a subsequent meeting for execution.

However, Nestoil and Neconde accused one of the lenders of undermining the settlement process by allegedly sponsoring the August 17 publications, despite an understanding among the parties and their lawyers to refrain from media advertisements or sponsored publications.

They also cited recent Supreme Court decisions in appeals involving Neconde and FBNQUEST Merchant Bank, saying the judgments delivered on April 10 and June 1, 2026, respectively, set aside orders obtained by lenders and removed what they described as judicial impediments to the companies’ operations.

According to the companies, the Supreme Court decisions also affected the purported appointment and powers of a receiver over the companies. They said the Federal High Court had separately suspended the receiver’s purported powers in December 2025.

Nestoil and Neconde further alleged that the lender behind the publications had previously sought to acquire shares in Neconde through its new majority investor and Holding Company Chairman, an offer they said was rejected.

They claimed that negative media campaigns against the companies intensified after the rejection, alleging that the lender was pursuing interests beyond the resolution of the commercial dispute.

The companies also questioned what they described as the use of the EFCC’s name and officials in the sponsored publications, saying the reports created a misleading impression that the commission’s conciliatory intervention was connected to criminal recovery.

Nestoil and Neconde categorically denied any criminality or crime-related recovery implied by the reports and maintained that the dispute remains fundamentally commercial.

They said the latest publications constituted a serious setback to the ongoing resolution process but reaffirmed their commitment to an amicable settlement.

The companies said they had deliberately refrained from disclosing detailed terms of their commercial engagements with the lenders, insisting that such matters were not for public consumption.

They, however, said they reserved all their rights in response to what they described as a deliberate, coordinated and premeditated attempt to damage their reputations and scuttle the settlement process.