Addey Family to Ex-Wife: Stop falsehoods about our late brother, using his confidential documents

The Addey Family of Ihuechi Community in Ahoada West Local Government Area of Rivers State has told Kalinwana Ali, the former wife of their late brother, Arthur Iyenyemenwana Addey, to stop spreading falsehoods about him and using his confidential documents against third parties.

It expressed deep concern over the unauthorised use of confidential family and medical documents against third parties by Ali.

In a comprehensive clarification issued and signed on behalf of the family by Godson Unula Addey, the family said it became necessary to place the true facts on record in order to correct what it described as persistent misrepresentations, especially on social media, which are capable of misleading public institutions, the courts, and general public.

According to the family, Arthur Addey relocated from England to Nigeria in 2016 and, during his stay in the country until his demise on June 5, 2020, was never in full-time employment of Hamilton Technologies Limited, EPSS Private Security Services Limited, or any other organisation as erroneously alleged by his ex-wife and children in their numerous social media campaigns of calumny.

The family explained that the deceased merely rendered professional security consultancy services on a project-by-project basis whenever the opportunities arose, particularly in Offshore Port Facility Security assessments and related assignments.

It further stressed that his involvement with the above-mentioned firms was strictly that of an independent consultant engaged whenever his expertise was required, adding that he neither occupied any official position nor maintained an employer-employee relationship with either of the companies.

Similarly, the family clarified that the Managing Director of one of the companies occasionally permitted the deceased, based on family relationship and professional confidence, to undertake consultancy assignments for specific projects as an independent contractor.

The deceased younger sister, Buduka Julia Addey, stated: “At no time was my late brother, Arthur Addey, employed by either of the companies. 

“He neither earned salaries from the companies nor occupied any position of employment.”

The family further explained that following Arthur’s death during the COVID-19 pandemic, an autopsy was conducted to determine the exact medical cause of death.

The family said: “To facilitate the medical examination, our younger sister, Ms. Buduka Julia Addey, on June 12, 2020, submitted a written factual account of the events leading to his death to the attending pathologist solely to assist the autopsy process.”

According to Buduka, the statement, together with the preliminary death certificate issued for the purpose of conveying the deceased’s remains from Lagos State to Rivers State for burial, was later shared with Arthur’s former wife, Kalinwana Ali, in good faith and purely to keep the deceased’s dependants informed of developments surrounding the medical examination.

The family, however, expressed disappointment that those confidential documents have allegedly been deployed in petitions and proceedings against third parties, including the companies that supported their deceased brother as a non-staff while alive and the medical pathologist who conducted the autopsy.

The Addey family emphasised that the statement prepared by Buduka was never intended for litigation, public circulation, or to support allegations against any individual, company, or institution.

It equally maintained that the preliminary death certificate formed part of the medical process leading to the determination of the cause of death and that any subsequent medical documentation remained entirely outside the family’s control. 

The family therefore categorically dissociated itself from the use of those documents in pursuing claims or petitions against third parties, insisting that no member of the family ever authorised such use.

The statement further noted that some of the issues arising from the matter are already pending before competent courts of law, with certain members of the family joined as parties.

Consequently, the family said it would refrain from commenting on issues currently before the courts, emphasising that its clarification was intended solely to provide factual background information based on matters within the family’s personal knowledge.

The family also addressed what it described as misconceptions surrounding ongoing legal proceedings involving the estate of the deceased.

According to the statement, shortly after Arthur’s burial, Ali instituted legal proceedings against a company on the erroneous assumption that the deceased had been its employee.

Ali, the ex-wife of the deceased, whose family she’s currently battling, had been separated for approximately 12 years prior to his passing and their turbulent marriage legally dissolved.

The family further disclosed that around the same period, disputes arose over the recognition and entitlement of Arthur’s newborn daughter, who was born one month after her father’s passing.

The family further explained that in order to safeguard the interests of all three children of the deceased, they requested Buduka to apply for Letters of Administration solely as a protective measure, with the ultimate objective of establishing a trust arrangement for the welfare of all the children.

According to the family, during the ensuing litigation, attempts were allegedly made to exclude the newborn child from her late father’s estate.

“However, the courts eventually affirmed the child’s entitlement to be recognised as a lawful beneficiary of the deceased’s estate,” Buduka disclosed.

The family also stated that the court held that the earlier Letters of Administration issued by the Customary Court of Appeal should be set aside because that court lacked the jurisdiction to grant such letters, the proper jurisdiction resting with the State High Court.

The family made it categorically clear that there was in fact no estate to administer and consequently no account to render, a position it said had earlier been formally communicated through its solicitors.

The Addey family also declared that having dissociated themselves from the family for years, Ali and her children possess no authority, mandate, or standing whatsoever to represent, speak for, or act on behalf of the Addey Family.

Accordingly, it warned that any publication, representation, or use of the name, image, or identity of any member of the Addey Family without the family’s authorisation should be disregarded by members of the public.

The family further reiterated: “The sole purpose of issuing this clarification and public notice is to preserve the dignity and memory of our late son and brother, ensure fairness to all his children, correct misinformation and discourage the continued misuse of confidential family documents in disputes involving third parties.”