Exit of CIG Motors Director Arogundade over fraud: What really went wrong

Exit of CIG Motors Director Arogundade over fraud: What really went wrong

A corporate crisis is unfolding at CIG Motors Co. Ltd as sharply conflicting accounts emerge over the exit of one of its most senior executives, turning what began as an internal governance issue into a potential high-profile financial probe involving the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
At the centre of the storm is Jubril Arogundade, the company’s former Executive Director, whose departure has exposed deep fractures within the automobile firm’s leadership and raised broader questions about corporate governance, debt management and regulatory compliance in Nigeria’s auto sector.
CIG Motors announced at the weekend that it had terminated Arogundade’s appointment with immediate effect, following what it described as a “comprehensive internal investigation” that allegedly uncovered financial misappropriation and abuse of authority. The company said aspects of the findings had been escalated to the EFCC for further investigation.
According to the company, the decision followed a period of suspension and an internal review which concluded that Arogundade’s conduct fell “significantly below the company’s governance, compliance and ethical standards.”
“This action reflects our zero-tolerance stance on financial misconduct, particularly at senior management level,” the company stated, adding that it was cooperating fully with law enforcement agencies while assuring stakeholders that its operations remain unaffected.
However, the narrative took a dramatic turn hours later as Arogundade publicly rejected claims that he was sacked, insisting instead that he voluntarily resigned weeks before the company’s announcement.

READ ALSO:

In a detailed statement, Arogundade said he formally tendered his resignation on December 2, 2025, from both CIG Motors and its subsidiary, Lagride Nigeria Limited, citing irreconcilable disagreements over the company’s financial direction and governance practices.

He described the company’s announcement of his “immediate termination” as misleading and a deliberate attempt to rewrite events.
“My resignation followed serious concerns about a growing debt profile, weak corporate governance and persistent compliance failures,” he said, adding that these issues were repeatedly raised internally without resolution.
More strikingly, Arogundade alleged that longstanding tax compliance issues under the chairmanship of Ms Diana Chen had attracted enforcement action by tax authorities, including a reported warrant of distraint involving sums running into several billions of naira—claims the company has not publicly addressed.
While denying any wrongdoing, the former executive said he was not afraid of scrutiny and would cooperate fully with any lawful investigation by the EFCC, though he maintained that he had not received any invitation from the anti-graft agency.

Until recently, Jubril was widely regarded as the chairman and CEO’s trusted lieutenant, enjoying broad latitude to operate and drive major deals. Several key transactions were initiated and executed under his watch, with CEO Diana Chen often stepping in only at the final stage to ratify decisions already concluded.
Having served for years as General Manager, Jubril was long tipped to emerge as Managing Director when the position became vacant. That expectation, however, proved short-lived. Instead of an elevation, he was appointed Executive Director — a move that, at the time, was seen as cementing his future within the company.
That sense of security unravelled as disputes began to surface involving the company, its customers and business partners, culminating in the dramatic exit of the Executive Director amid allegations of financial impropriety.

Beyond the immediate dispute over whether his exit was a resignation or a termination, analysts say the episode underscores deeper governance tensions within the company. Sources familiar with the internal probe said investigators examined multiple transactions and management decisions that allegedly breached internal controls, though specific details remain under wraps due to the ongoing referral to authorities.
CIG Motors has declined further public commentary, saying the matter is now before relevant agencies.

But with allegations and counter-allegations now firmly in the public domain, the unfolding saga appears set to test not only the company’s internal controls but also the credibility of its leadership narratives.
As regulators weigh the issues placed before them, the CIG Motors case is shaping up as a cautionary tale of how boardroom disputes, when entangled with claims of financial misconduct, can quickly escalate into a full-blown corporate and reputational crisis.