Connect with us

Maritime

The choking grip of foreign Shipping Companies on Nigeria’s Maritime Industry

John Johnson

Due to gross maladministration, policy somersault, pettiness, pecuniary considerations, official corruption and ineptitude, Nigeria has inadvertedly ceded the control of her vast shipping fortunes to the rapacious foreign shipping companies.

Despite her huge coastal attributes and opportunities that it is naturally endowed with, Nigeria has no control over her shipping industry which is being gleefully exploited and feasted on by the domineering foreigners.

All efforts by successive Governments to take firm control of the country’s thriving shipping industry through vibrant indigenous fleet expansion that would take control of her large import and export trade have come to naught as the foreign shipping lines have continued and consistently maintained their vice grip on the sector.

Nigeria is a naturally endowed coastal nation with a coastline of more than 800km and an exclusive economic zone of more than 200 nautical miles.

It’s predominantly import- dependent economy is supported by six active ports and six petroleum exportation terminals which stimulate its thriving commercial shipping activities.

With its huge but largely unproductive population that has insatiable appetite for foreign goods, Nigeria shipping industry therefore has a natural pull for foreign shipping lines which filled the void created by the   indigenous fleet to take control in the absence of strong and effective regulatory environment.

Engineer Abiodun Ilori, a Master Mariner, said Nigeria should not be carried away by its natural coastal attributes without proper utilization of the inherent opportunities.

“Our industry is not where it should be yet. You can imagine a small country like Norway that has less than five million people has 27,000 ships in the world. For every five ships that ply the waters of the world, one is a Norwegian flagged ship. Those are maritime nations we need to learn from. How did they get there? One Norwegian company has 650 ships.

‘’ I don’t like unnecessary speculations and just talking to make ourselves feel good by saying we have 840 nautical miles adjoining our coast, 10,000 miles of inland waterways. When we gather, that is what we talk about all the time. No one remembers that Norwegian waters are frozen eight months in a year because of the weather. It has never been an excuse for them not to develop their shipping industry’’

*Nigeria’s aborted dream to control her shipping fortunes*

Nigeria made a bold attempt at harnessing her maritime potentials and take control of her immense cargo throughput when in 1957, it floated an indigenous shipping line called Nigerian National Shipping Line(NNSL) which started operations in 1959 with three vessels which steadily grew to 16 vessels by 1964.

Government, through deliberate policies, sought to strengthen and empower the National shipping line and other private indigenous shipping companies to dominate the Nigeria shipping space.

By 1988, the NNSL fleet has grown to 24 vessels. The government, through the then National Maritime Authority(NMA), the forerunner to the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency(NIMASA),granted six indigenous  shipping Companies a ‘national carrier’ status, including state-owned NNSL.

The then NMA planned to extend this privileged status to more indigenous shipping companies in order to reduce the control of trade by foreign shipping companies.

The Shipping Policy Decree of 1987 which established the then NMA gave approval for 50-50 share between the foreign and indigenous shipping lines for non-conference cargo.

Despite these deliberate efforts by government to empower indigenous shipping lines and the state-owned NNSL to take firm control of the nation’s shipping space, unfortunately the 24 vessels of Nigerian national carriers including the NNSL could only take 11 per cent of the cargoes at the Nigerian ports.

The NNSL and the private companies with national carrier status subsequently suffered from financial problems and lacked the facilities needed to attract cargoes.

In the 1990s, several of the NNSL vessels were seized in different parts of the world for alleged breach of contracts and unpaid bills, leading to its eventual liquidation in September 1995.
Its assets were assumed by its successor, National Unity Line (NUL).

The NUL, fully owned by the then Nigeria Maritime Authority, began commercial operations in July 1996 as Nigeria’s national flag carrier with only one vessel called MV Abuja.

In August 2005 the government put the NUL up for sale with no vessel but had shipping license.

With no one to buy the moribund NUL, a fresh bid to re-launch the National Carrier in 2011 hit the rock.

Subsequent efforts to revamp the dead national carrier, including the current efforts of a hybrid government committee headed by Barrister Hassan Bello, the Executive Secretary of Nigerian Shippers Council, have not yielded any result.

*The foreign Shipping lines bare their fangs*

With the several efforts of government to boost and empower indigenous shipping companies becoming futile and unsuccessful, the foreign shipping lines which have been waiting in the wings eventually swooped on the Nigerian shipping space, taking absolute control of the operations in the sector without competition from the non-existent local fleet.

From the early year 2000 when government has failed in its attempts to encourage indigenous carriers to take a dominant position in the shipping activities in the country, the foreign lines have had a vice hold on the sector, subjecting Nigerian importers to untold hardship through multiple and arbitrary charges.

They have been carrying out their operations with impunity and in flagrant disregard and disobedience to the regulatory authority.

The shipping lines have treated and still treating the directives from the Nigerian Ports Authority(NPA), the landlord and technical regulator, the Nigerian Shippers Council(NSC), the commercial regulator and the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency(NIMASA) with scorns and ignominy.

With weak regulatory environment and timid regulators, the foreign shipping lines have continually played gods, imposing arbitrary and multiple charges on their hapless customers who are helpless and harassed.

The atrocities of these shipping companies are being complemented with the equally oppressive regime of charges by the terminal operators who are working hand in gloves to further subject Nigerian importer to modern economic slavery.

Incidentally, some of these shipping companies and the terminals are of the same ownership.
For instance, Mersklines is said to be of the same parentage with the APM Terminal, the owners of the Apapa terminal reputed to be the biggest.

In the same vein, Grimaldi shipping is said to be from the same stable with PTML, the owners of RORO terminal in Tin Can port.

So, with the total control of the most vital supply chain, shipping and terminal operations, the foreign operators are able to build a complete hedge of economic subjugation around the hapless Nigerian importers.

*Shipping Charges as weapons of economic oppression*

Nigerian ports are reputed to be the most expensive to transact business partly due to the arbitrary and multiple charges by the foreign shipping companies and their collaborating terminal operators.

Some of the contentious charges include but not limited to terminal handling charges, container demurrage, Value Added Tax on Cost, Insurance and Freight, Container Deposit and Value Added Tax on container deposits.

Apart from these charges, which the Nigerian Shippers Council in 2010 put conservatively at 40 in numbers, there are other numerous surcharges which the shipping companies willfully impose on Nigerian-bound cargo for flimsy excuses.

According to a study on Impact of Unfair Surcharges and High Local Shipping Charges on National Economies of West and Central African States, Nigeria as a case study, on the Europe-Nigeria trade route, the number of multiple surcharges on Nigeria-bound cargo and the estimated loss to the Nigerian economy due to additional ‘Local Shipping Charges’ on imports exceeded N150 billion in a year.

These surcharges are Bunker Adjustment Factor, Currency Adjustment Factor, War Risk Surcharge, Congestion Surcharge, Peak Season Surcharge.

Others are Extra Risk Insurance Surcharge, Freight Rates Surcharge, Port Operations Recovery Surcharge among others.

In 2010, the Nigerian Shippers Council published a list of some 40 unapproved port charges. These include terminal handling charges, container deposit, container clearing, shipping company charges, demurrage charges, cost-on-turnover, transfer documentation charges, transfer charges, rent charges, equipment charges, manifest amendment charges and tally clerk charges. The discovery prompted the then Transport Minister, Senator Idris Umar, to issue an order for the cancellation of about 12 of the unofficial charges.

*Industry regulators as toothless bull dogs*

Stakeholders have lambasted the industry regulators, especially the Nigerian Shippers Council which is the economic regulator who is supposed to curb the operational excesses of the service providers and the Nigerian Ports Authority which is the technical regulator of the providers as toothless bulldogs capable of barking but lack the will powers to bite.
This timidity, they said, has emboldened the service providers in their exploitative operations.

Mrs Jean Chiazor-Anishere, a maritime lawyer, observed that lack of political will on the part of the regulators to enforce the existing laws, regulations and guidelines has encouraged the shipping companies to behave with impunity.

‘The lack of political will to strictly enforce the existing regulations in the sector has in no small measure emboldened these foreign companies in their act of impunity’’, she declared.

The Nigeria Shippers Council under Chief Adebayo Sarumi as its Executive Secretary was so incapacitated and castrated that it could neither bark nor bite.

Like a whimpering child, the Council, who was supposed to enforce the operational guidelines for the shipping companies, looked on helplessly as they carried on their operations with impunity

However, the Council gave a faith hope that it has recovered from its inertia when the incumbent Chief Executive of the Council, Barrister Hassan Bello, assumed office.

There was a spark of life in its activities which was aided by the commercial regulator status granted it by the federal government.

The Shipping companies and terminal operators under the aegis of Association of Shipping Line Agencies(ASLA) and Seaport Terminal Operators’ Association of Nigeria( STOAN) opposed the emergence of the shippers council as a commercial regulator  as well as its pronouncement of some of their charges as illegal in a bitter litigation war that took them to the Appeal court, which they eventually lost  at the Appeal court.

They had then challenged the powers of the Shippers Council to regulate their activities, declare some of their arbitrary charges as illegal and demand for refunds of some of their excessive charges at the Federal High court in 2015 where they lost.

They took the battle to the Appeal court when the upper court affirmed the position of the Council in 2018.

However, the Council has failed to leverage on this court affirmation to force the hands of the shipping companies and their collaborators in terminal operations to obey the rules of the land.

The Council under Hassan Bello has engaged more in advocacy for cheaper and legal shipping charges in a conciliatory manner rather than strict enforcement of regulations guiding the operations of the service providers.

Angry stakeholders have accused Barrister Bello of engaging more in oration and rhetoric on the impunity of the shipping companies than whipping them to line.
Early in the year ,Bello promised the harassed users of shipping services that  shipping charges would be reduced by 35 per cent by the second quarter of 2020(April-June) as the agency is concluding negotiations with shipping companies.

“After that, NSC will negotiate with terminal operators and government agencies ,that would be in the third quarter and it would further reduce cost,” he said.

Importers and their agents who spoke to this magazine confirmed that no such reduction in charges has occurred even at the commencement of the third quarter of the year.

Instead, the shipping companies and the terminal operators are become daring every day in their impunity and exploitative behavior

The angry stakeholders said the Council, in its recent engagement with the service providers, has been full of “sound and fury that signifies nothing”

They readily made reference to the scorn and flagrant disobedience of the service providers to the order made by both the Shippers Council and NPA over demurrage waivers that should be granted during the Covid-19 lockdown.

The Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) in April, had directed that all terminal operators should suspend all applicable terminal storage fees (demurrage) on consignments for an initial period of 21 days effective March 23. It also extended the demurrage-free period by another 14 days from April 13.

In another memo issued on April 8, NPA said it would “grant credit notes commensurate to the rental reliefs granted by the terminal operators to importers within the 21-day free storage period.”

Similarly, the Nigerian Shippers Council (NSC), directed all shipping companies to suspend demurrage charges on cargoes during the period of the COVID-19 lockdown effective March 30th.

Executive Secretary, NSC, Hassan Bello, added that demurrage charges during this period should be refunded to the consignee or his authorised agent.

But all these directives by the two leading port regulators were partially obeyed by the service providers with no consequence.

In 2018, at the height of gridlock on the Lagos port access road, the NPA ordered the shipping companies to establish holding bays to keep their empty containers which were found to be the cause of the gridlock, with the warning to sanction erring companies.

However, four shipping companies Maerskline, Cosco Shipping, APS and Lansal, all foreign companies, were given 10-day suspension by the NPA for violating the directive.

Shockingly, the four erring companies, without fully complying with the directive, were hastily left off the hook by the NPA before the expiration of the period of their suspension.

Such was the timidity of the regulators which the stakeholders blamed for the impunity of the shipping companies.

The NPA has always displayed high level of timidity towards curbing the excesses of the service providers whose operations it is meant to regulate as technical regulator.

A source in the agency said regulating shipping rates is out of the NPA purview.

‘’Freight is not under our control as it is a relationship between shipping lines and consignees.

“It should equally be noted that NPA has very limited control over shipping regulations possibly due to reporting patterns of agencies operating in the maritime sector to diverse supervisory ministries.

“Not until the activities of various players in the industry are integrated to operate a single window (one-stop-shop) that we could see reduction in the cost of shipment into Nigeria’’, the source declared in an apparent attempt to justify lack of will power of NPA to call the shipping companies to order.

*What makes the Shipping companies thick?*

Stakeholders agreed that it was not for lack of regulations but the will powers by the relevant authorities to enforce them has been what has continued to embolden the service providers in their oppressive acts.

Also, the absence of competition from the indigenous operators who are less motivated has given undue advantage to the foreign operators.

Chief Issac Jolapamo, the Founding President of Nigerian Indigenous Ship Owners Association(NISA), gave a chilling insight into the politics behind the continued subjugation of Nigerian Shipping industry to the control of the foreigners.

According to him, the foreigners had willing collaborators among some powerful Nigerians who are working hands in gloves to perpetuate the control of the foreigners for their selfish interests.

It warned vthat the country shippind business will be under the vice control of the foreigners as long as the government fails to break the yoke through conscious and deliberate efforts spear headed by a bold and nationalistic leader that will call the bluff of the foreigners.

He declared that the only Nigerian leader who could have done this was former President Olusegun Obasanjo whom he said tried but failed because he did not listen to the right advice.

The respected ship owners lamented that the few indigenious operators who were bold and could posed a threat to the conspiracy agaist the development of the shipping sector have been silenced through economic castration.

He gave a further explanation to what happened.

‘’Most of the shipping companies in Nigeria are foreign controlled and that is why the indigenous ones have no headway.

“It is when Nigeria is ready to break away from their control that is when we can break away from it.

“It is when we are ready.

“We need will- powered government to break away Nigeria from their control.

“Nigerians are their chairmen and board of directors. It is a very tricky  situation.

“These people are powerful who have direct access to government.

‘It is when we are ready to do it our own way that is when we can break from their control.

It was due to the selfish interests of our leaders that we have not been able to break the stranglehold.

‘For instance, a tanker shipping company to be owned by the NNPC that was conceived over 40 years ago was not allowed to take off due to the pecuniary and selfish interests of some powerful Nigerians who muzzled the project from conception. They rather wanted foreign tankers to be lifting our oil because of what they could make out of such foreign domination.

“So , the foreign domination in Nigeria is not something one can break easily because they are so entrenched .

“It needs a leader who has guts and is nationalistic with strong political power who can deliver Nigeria from this foreign domination..

“That was what happened in China and other Asian countries which control their own freight markets today.

“The only Nigerian leader who could have broken the foreign domination in Nigerian shipping industry was former President Obasanjo who really tried but failed because he didn’t listen to the right advice.

“These people crippled Cabotage regime before it even started.  They knew the effects of a successful Cabotage on their operations so they crippled our refineries and resorted to importation of refined petroleum products.

“They went to CBN and queried the bank why it was paying for imported fuel discharged at Lagos ports and asked that they move the point of discharge to Benin Republic and Ghana.

“Do these countries produce oil?

“They also crippled few of the outspoken indigenous ships owners so they could have their ways.

“It was a deliberate and complicated web of conspiracy between the foreigners and the powerful cabal in Nigeria to allow the Nigeria shipping industry to be subjugated for their selfish interests.

“This has made our regulatory agencies to be toothless bulldog.

“Some of us have struggled to ensure we break this yoke but we have been frustrated and incapacitated, businesswise.

“Now there is nobody to bell the cat, to lead the campaign for the emancipation of Nigerian shipping industry.

“Except the leadership commences a  programme that will break the jinx.

“Their agents within the government have effectively frustrated the efforts of some of the indigenous operators whom they consider as threats to their illicit practices.

“The experience is so frustrating.

“That is the same reason they weakened the Nigeria Indigenous Ship Owners Association(NISA) which had been given them a serious challenge.

Mrs Anishere also gave an insight into why the foreign shipping lines are audacious.

“Acts of impunity in this context would refer to the arbitrary hike in the cost paid on freight amongst other monopolistic tendencies, “she said.

She explained that majority of shipping companies in Nigeria unfortunately are owned by foreigners.

According to her; “there are no competitive indigenous ship owners, which is one of the major reasons foreign shipping companies are so powerful and unchallenged”.

“Overtime, our shipping laws and regulations have aided and abetted the unruly behaviours of these foreign shipping companies, thereby making it near impossible for freight forwarders and dockworkers to engage in a level playing ground”.

Chiazor-Anishere also noted that lack of political will to enforce the existing regulations is making the shipping companies behave the way they are doing.

“The lack of political will to strictly enforce the existing regulations in the sector has in no small measure emboldened these foreign companies in their acts of impunity, “Chiazor-Anishere said.

She observed further that inconsistency in policies and issuance of ambiguous policies are a contributory factor to the problem of foreign domination in the Nigerian maritime sector.

She also maintained that another challenge faced by indigenous shipping companies is the availability of capital.

She said: “World over, shipping is known to be a very capital intensive enterprise.

Ultimately, the indigenous shipping companies do not have the capacity to compete with the foreign companies, hence the monopoly of market”

Mr Francis Uchechukwu Aniezechukwu, a legal consultant and Director -General of Sea Empowerment Initiative(SEI) declared that the regulators that are supposed to regulate the shipping companies are not working.

“They are not doing the oversight function as they should. There is no law that empowered shipping companies to collect container deposit in Nigeria.

“I have written to NSC to show me the law and the statutes but what they are telling me is that there was a contractual agreement and such agreement is a product of a statutes

Aniezechukwu  maintained  that one of the reasons they  cited in terms of container deposits is that it is only a guarantee that they collect to show that the containers must come back.

“I say it ought not to be because the freight forwarders they are dealing with are not touts but freight forwarders that are licensed by the federal republic of Nigeria.

“So, if you think containers will not be returned, take an insurance for containers because the making of container deposits in doing business in Nigeria is enormous.

“N200,000 per a container deposit for a ship that has as much as 10,000 containers. Do you know how much that is translated to?
“Nigerian shipping companies are reaping close to N80 billion yearly on container deposits alone, “he said.

He, however, noted that when these containers are returned, the deposits are never refunded. According to him; “they come up with the idea that it was delayed and deposit time paid has been exhausted and there is nothing you can do about it because the regulators are not regulating.

“If I have my way, I will take a regulator that will regulate the regulators”.

Aniezechukwu also said that shipping companies collect demurrages at will because they are not being regulated.

“We have so many petitions written to NSC but NSC never asked us. I don’t know the reason why they are not doing what they are supposed to do but I think they don’t have the capacity to do what they are supposed to do.

“Government is an institution itself and Government made them regulators. There is a court decision that the regulators have right and rule. The Federal High Court said that they are statutory regulators of the shipping companies and if they refused to do what they are supposed to do, it’s as a result of their negligence or complacency, “he said.

Emeka Akabogu, a maritime lawyer queried the multiple charges imposed on importers/shippers and said that what constitutes some of the charges are unnecessary if things are done in accordance with global best  practices.

Eugene Nweke, a maritime expert observed that the concession of the seaports has not curbed high charges.

He said that shipping companies and concessionaires capitalise on the timidity of industry regulators, weak and compromised regulatory environment  to fleece importers/exporters of millions of naira.

“It is every unfortunate that importers have nobody to protect their interest. Apart from increasing terminal and other shipping charges, shipping companies and concessionaires compel importers to pay for demurrage at the ports even when it is the terminal operators that caused the delay”, he lamented.

Nweke also blamed the high propensity for revenue without commensurate provision of enabling environment as an incentive for the shipping companies to impose arbitrary charges on the hapless users of their services.

“There are some questions you ask they will be staring at you. Ideally, shipping companies are supposed to be regulated by the economic regulators. The economic regulator is assumed to be independent but must also project the policies of the government.

“Now where some government agencies that are in contractual agreement with some of these people have not provided enabling ground for them to thrive and want to come back to regulate them, what do you do?

‘The Nigerian Shippers’ Council finds itself in a big quagmire and NPA needs to put in place regarding the contractual agreement between them and the terminal operators.

“How do you reconcile the fact that a carrier berths in your water and it takes two weeks to berth and when it berths, it takes another week to discharge, where is the turnaround time? How do they recoup?

‘Is the government firm? Nigerian Shippers’ Council is out to regulate the entire maritime industry and part of what they are to do is to get the shipping companies to get consistent pricing system.

“But have we as a nation put in place a sustainable pricing or costing system. There are fluctuations here and there, so what do you want Shippers’ Council to do?

“Do you think that the government is not aware that the cost of doing business in Nigeria is higher than other African countries? Government is out to drive revenue generation, they rate their performance based on revenue generation and not based on efficiency of services.

“Government should give directives and stand by it. The government has the responsibility of calling any shipping company that thinks it has any backing to order to show that the country is larger than any individual.

All attempts to get the reactions of the foreign shipping companies were roundly rebuffed as they build almost impregnable wall of secrecy around their operations.

But we were able to go round the cocoon of secrecy the weaved round their operation to get their thought.

A source close to some of these foreign companies whispered to our correspondents that the business environment in the country is politically unstable, stifling and unfriendly.

‘’The environment in Nigeria is not business- friendly. Government regulatory environment is concernment more to impose a lot of levies and charges on the operators without providing an enabling environment for your business to thrieve.

“So the only way to survive and break even and also recoup our vast investments is by passing these plethora of charges from NPA, NIMASA and other regulators to the final consumers, hence what you guys regard as arbitrary charges on our customers are inadvertently caused by the stifling regulatory environment”, the source, who denied any collaboration with some powerful Nigerians, declared.

Kayode Farinto, a member of the governing board of the Council for the regulation of Freight Forwarding in Nigeria(CRFFN) seemed to concurred with the argument of the shipping companies.

“I am one of the people that believe that the shipping companies are the major problem in the country. I am shifting grounds in view of what I have seen. The blame doesn’t go to them alone, chunk of it goes to government agencies as well.

“I took my time to do my research and I notice that NIMASA charge lots of money on a vessel, there is what we called gross tonnage of a vessel, which means that the bigger your vessel, the higher the money you pay to NIMASA and they have been collecting this in dollars and with the MD of NPA concerning these charges against Shipping companies.

“For example, NIMASA is charging for Maritime Environmental and Management Protection Levy, NPA is charging Pollution charges and they are the same charges collected from a Shipping line.

“And because Nigeria is a market where every vessel would like to come due to our burgeoning population so, to survive these shipping companies tend to slam charges on whoever has consignment over a vessel.

“You can’t be charging for Environmental Protection Levy and NPA at the same time charging for Pollution charges”

Speaking further, the Vice President of Association of Nigerian Licensed Customs Agents(ANLCA) said that when a vessel calls on the Nation’s water-way, NIMASA charges 3 three percent Freight on each container, stating that NIMASA collects about $100 for 1 by 20ft container and $200 dollars for 1 by 40ft container.

While other stakeholders believed that failure to pass the Port and Habour bill as well as National Transport Commission bill was part of the reasons the foreign service operators are difficult to tame, others like Yinka Bakare, the President of National Association of Freight Forwarders and Air Consolidators who is also a member of the governing council of CRFFN, alleged that most of these foreign companies are backed by powerful Nigerians and government officials who are giving them the much needed latitude to exploit the Nigerian shippers and importers.

Comrade Adewale Adeyanju , the President General of Maritime Workers Union of Nigeria shared the same sentiment when he said that most of these shipping companies always put Nigerian politicians as their Chairmen or members of the board who will give them cover to perpetrate their impunity.
‘They took unfair advantage of their godfathers in government and business world to further perpetuate their unfair trade practices in the country’’, the angry stakeholders said.

As Chief Jolapamo warns, the end to this domination by the foreign shipping companies may still not be in view as long as there are no deliberate efforts by a bold and willing Nigerian leader to break the stranglehold.

Just like George Floyd said to his white murderers in the United States of America, the Nigeria shippers/Importers who are groaning under the choking grip of their foreign exploiters, are gasping for breath, saying, ‘’we can’t breathe’

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Headlines

MARAN convenes public discourse on controversial ICTN among contending parties 

Funso OLOJO 
Following the controversies that have trailed the planned introduction of the International Cargo Tracking Note, (ICTN), the Maritime Association of Nigeria, MARAN has disclosed that it is time to put the controversies to rest once and for all.
To this effect, the association, the leading maritime beat association in the industry, is set to organise an all important roundtable to examine all pertinent issues and controversies surrounding the concept and proffer lasting solutions.
The roundtable will bring together relevant players in the industry under one roof at the MARAN International Press Center in Apapa on Thursday, February  27, 2025 to dissect the subject – matter and point to the way forward.
Some of the key stakeholders expected at the event include Dr. Eugene Nweke of the Sea Empowerment and Research Center, SEREC, Dr. Segun Musa, Managing Director, Widescope Group will be on hand to deliver insightful address.
Other critical stakeholder expected at the event include Dr. Alban Igwe of the Importers Association of Nigeria and a representative from the Shippers’ Association Lagos State,SALS.
Two critical government agencies, the Nigerian Shippers’ Council, NSC who warehouses the ICTN, shall be delivering a paper on “Prospect And Challenges Of Proposed ICTN: NSC’s Perspective”, while the Nigeria Ports Authority, NPA, the former custodian of the project ,shall also be speaking on “Prospect And Challenges Of Proposed ICTN, NPA’s Perspective” on that day.
Speaking on the need for the roundtable, Mr. Godfrey Bivbere, President, MARAN, disclosed that there is an urgent need to put the controversies surrounding the issue to rest once and for all
“Since the news of the planned reintroduction of the ICTN filtered out, there have been widespread controversies from both the protagonists and antagonists of the concept, with each divide justifying its position”, the MARAN President noted.
“It has been a subject that has polarized the maritime industry and as the leading maritime beat association in Nigeria and in furtherance of our advocacy role, MARAN has decided to bring all the contending players under one roof to settle this issue once and for all in order to move forward and develop our sector which is very critical to the nation’s economy”, Bivbere concluded.
Continue Reading

Headlines

Freight Forwarders call out NPA over duplication, illegal imposition of payment of ETO Call- up system fee on importers

Funso OLOJO
Freight Forwarders, under the egies of the Council of Managing Director of Licensed Customs Agents(CMDLCA) has accused the Nigerian Ports Authority(NPA) of illegally imposing the payment of fees for the ETO Call- up system on importers and their agents.
The National President of the Association, Mr Lucky Ayis Amiwero, make this allegations in his petition to the Managing Director of the NPA, Dr Abdulahi Datsotho.
In the petition dated January 25th, 2025 and a copy each sent to the Secretary of the Government of the Federation, Minister of Finance, Presidential Enabling Business Environment committee(PEBEC) and the Nigerian Shippers’ Council, Amiwero claimed that the payment of ETO Call- up system fees was not backed by any law.
He further submitted that the payment was a duplication as the importers and their agents have already paid for the service under the Port lease/ concession agreement as vehicle entry permit (VEP) and tenure parking rate(TPR) under maximum tariff for cargo due.
According to him ” ETO CALL-UP SYSTEM is not tied to any service on Import or Export for the processing of goods.
“it has no service that directly involves service to Importer/Licensed Customs Agents(LCA) but is an  infrastructure developed for the access of Transport in to the Port, as a result of faulty Port Lease/ Concession Agreement that exclude Trailer Park and Holding Bay  which clearly contravenes  Trade Facilitation Agreement(TFA)”
Amiwero said that it was the responsibility of the NPA to free flow of traffic in and out of the Port to facilitate trade and not that of the importers and their agents.
He said the agency has to do this with passing its financial implications to the importers and their agents.
” It is strictly Nigerian Ports Authority(NPA)  responsibility  to regulate Traffic, within the Limit of a Port or the approach to a Port  under Section  32-(a) .
“it is the legal responsibility of the authority(NPA) to provide for ease of access to the port , it is part of Nigerian Port infrastructure which is to facilitate trucks in to the Port.
“It is the responsibility of the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) to regulate the Traffic and not that of the Licensed Customs Agents/Importer.
” The ETO CALL_UP system is an infrastructure that is owned and operated by NPA contractor to perform NPA function,   due to faulty lease agreement  which, initially excludes Trailer Parks and Holding bay from the Lease / Concession, Agreement ,creating the bottleneck and gridlock to Access the Port.
“The Lack  of legal framework to regulate the Economic interest in the Port, has given the Concerned Agencies in the Port, room to impose all  kind of illegal fees on the cargo interest without concern for Service tied to charges and who is responsible for  payment.
“This imposition makes our Ports one of the most expensive and unattractive within the sub-region with multiple charges, levies, fees which are not approved or  cargo related, just like the ETO- Call System introduced by NPA, that has no cargo  service tied to it, is clearly the responsibility of Nigerian Ports Authority(NPA) in line with Section 32-(a) Regulating Traffic, within the limit of the port or approach to the Port”
Amiwero further claimed that ETO Call- up system is part of the development of the Port which falls under the functions of the NPA which is part of the infrastructural development for the movement of vehicles.
Consequent on this, the freight forwarder wanted the NPA to utilise part of the 7 per cent Port development levy collected from importers and their agents on import for the execution and sustenance of ETO Call- up system.
“7% surcharge is paid by Nigerian Importers through the Licensed Customs Agents (LCA) on every import collected since 1978 till date.
“Nigerian Ports Authority(NPA) should utilize part of their 7% to provide for truck access to the  Port going to the Terminals, which is covered statutorily  under section 32-(a)”
He blamed the PBE and the NPA for leasing the existing holding bays for truck which has now resulted to traffic gridlock due to lack of space for trucks.
“The holding bay for trucks, that existed before  port concession agreement within and around the ports, was ceded out to Terminal Operators as well as Land space, without providing alternative.
“All such spaces were ceded to Terminal Operators, forcing the trucks owners to use the available Port access roads to hold empty containers and wait as holding bay awaiting access to the Port to load client consignment”
“Before the ceding of Port operation to Terminal Operator  in 2005, there was no such thing as Gridlock, each Port operated their Holding bay, where tucks wait to load their respective consignments in and out of the Ports.
“The Ports operated their holding bay and trailer parks as follows:
APAPA PORT: Holding bay are in the Port
TIN CAN ISLAND PORT: Its holding bay was at the front of the port
LILYPOND TERMINAL: Its holding bay was under the bridge in front of the Port
BRAWAL/PAN-ATLANTIC JETTY: its holding bay was in front of the Jetty and
TRAILER PARKS: was at Beger by Kirikiri Junction”
Continue Reading

Headlines

Shippers’ Council boss, Akutah Ukeyima, bags best regulator award of the year 2024 

Funso OLOJO 
The Executive Secretary/CEO of Nigerian Shippers’ Council, Mr Pius Akutah Ukeyima, has been conferred with the award of the best regulator of the year 2024

The award was presented to  Akutah at the Top 10 Magazine Man of the Year Award ceremony held over the weekend in Abuja

­
The Best Regulator Award recognized Akutah’s outstanding leadership and contributions to regulatory excellence in Nigeria’s maritime sector.
According to the organiser of the award, Akutah’s efforts have significantly impacted the industry, promoting efficiency and growth.
Other notable distinguished awardees at the ceremony included Sen. George Akume, Secretary to the Government of the Federation, who received the Man of the Year Award, and Chief Mrs. Folasade Tinubu-Ojo, who was honored as Woman of the Year
The recognition underscores Akutah’s dedication to promoting excellence in Nigeria’s maritime sector and his commitment to effective regulation.
Continue Reading

Trending