Connect with us

Commentaries

Atiku’s border promise: Between political expediency and Nigeria’s national interest

Okey IBEKE

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar’s promise to reopen Nigeria’s land borders if elected president in 2027 may appeal to traders and border communities who depend on cross-border commerce.

But the promise raises a more important question: what exactly does he intend to reopen?

The Federal Government has challenged the premise of the proposal, insisting that Nigeria’s borders are not closed.

Minister of Interior, Olubunmi Tunji-Ojo, recalled that Seme, Illela, Maigatari and Mfum borders were reopened in December 2020, followed by Idiroko and Ikom for goods and services in April 2022.

The present administration also opened Kamba and Tsamiya borders in Kebbi State in February 2026.

Atiku reportedly made his promise on August 26th, 2026 while receiving a political support group in Abuja.

He said he would reopen the land borders and develop southern ports to boost trade if elected in 2027, arguing that restrictions had hurt legitimate trans-border commerce, contributed to business failures and pushed some young entrepreneurs into unemployment.

There is undoubtedly a case for making Nigeria’s border administration more efficient. Border communities depend on trade with neighbouring countries, while Nigerian businesses need access to regional markets.

Unnecessary delays, poor infrastructure, excessive bureaucracy and multiple checkpoints are already being addressed.

Legitimate traders should be able to move their goods without avoidable obstacles.
But legitimate trade is not the same as smuggling.

The fact that Nigerians have traded across these borders for generations does not, by itself, make every such activity lawful.

Trade is legitimate when it complies with the law: goods are brought through approved entry points, properly declared and documented, applicable duties and taxes are paid, and the relevant regulations are observed.

A trader who meets those requirements is engaged in legitimate commerce. Someone who avoids approved routes, conceals goods, evades duties or brings prohibited commodities into the country is smuggling, irrespective of how long the practice has existed.

This distinction matters because compliant businesses already bear the costs of operating within the law.

Importers and manufacturers pay duties, taxes, regulatory charges, transportation costs and other expenses.

Allowing competitors to evade those obligations gives the law-abiding businessman a disadvantage and distorts the market.

This is why the Nigeria Customs Service is simultaneously facilitating legitimate trade, protecting government revenue and enforcing import and export regulations.

Its growing use of automation, risk management and digital processing is aimed at reducing friction for compliant traders while improving the detection of suspicious transactions.

The sensible objective, therefore, is smarter border administration that makes lawful commerce easier without giving illicit trade room to flourish.

There is also a security dimension that any serious border policy must confront. Nigeria’s borders are vulnerable to the movement of arms, narcotics, trafficked persons and other illicit goods, while some restrictions have been imposed specifically because of terrorism and insecurity.

Tunji-Ojo made this point in responding to Atiku’s references to Cameroon, Chad, Niger and Benin.

He explained that the Banki and Amchidé crossings with Cameroon were closed in 2014 because of the Boko Haram insurgency, rather than because of the 2019 trade policy.

Some crossings were subsequently reopened following security and stabilisation efforts involving Nigeria and neighbouring countries.

That history makes it difficult to treat border management as simply a matter of removing economic restrictions.

A crossing that is commercially useful can also be exploited by criminal networks, making security considerations an unavoidable part of any decision to relax controls.

If Atiku’s proposal is to simplify documentation, improve infrastructure, eliminate unnecessary bureaucracy, strengthen regional trade and make it easier for legitimate small-scale traders to operate, then those objectives are difficult to oppose.

They are consistent with Nigeria’s efforts to deepen regional commerce under the African Continental Free Trade Area.

But if “reopening the borders” means changing the rules that distinguish legitimate commerce from illicit activity, Nigerians deserve to know.

Which controls would be removed? Which duties would change? Would Customs declarations remain compulsory? Would prohibited goods remain prohibited? How would legitimate businesses be protected from cheaper smuggled alternatives? And what safeguards would remain against the movement of arms, narcotics and other illicit commodities?

These questions are not technicalities. They are the substance of a credible border policy.

There is also an unmistakable political attraction in Atiku’s promise. With the 2027 election approaching, appealing directly to traders and border communities offers a politically convenient message: remove the restrictions and revive commerce.

But presidential policy cannot be reduced to what sounds attractive during an election campaign.

Atiku has every right to challenge the policies of the present administration and offer an alternative.

Indeed, criticism of government policy is an essential part of democratic politics. But a presidential candidate should also be expected to explain how his alternative would work, what it would cost and what safeguards would protect the wider national interest.

Nigeria needs more legitimate trade with its neighbours, not less. It needs better border infrastructure, faster clearance, simpler procedures and stronger regional integration.

None of these requires abandoning the government’s responsibility to regulate what enters the country.

The better approach is to make legitimate trade easier without making illegal trade easier.

That means technology-driven customs procedures, transparent documentation, efficient border infrastructure, predictable charges and risk-based inspections.

Traders who comply with the law should encounter fewer obstacles; those who deliberately evade it should not be allowed to gain an unfair advantage.

Atiku’s 2027 proposal should therefore be judged not by the emotional appeal of “reopening the borders” but by the policy behind the slogan.

If he believes the present system is unnecessarily restrictive, he should identify the specific restrictions he intends to remove.

If he believes legitimate border trade is being suffocated, he should explain how he would formalise and facilitate it without encouraging smuggling.

And if security controls are to be relaxed in particular areas, he should explain how the resulting risks would be managed.

That is the level of debate Nigerians should expect from someone seeking the presidency, especially one like him that was a very senior Customs officer.

The danger is that, in the rush to distinguish himself politically ahead of 2027, Atiku may be offering a simple answer to a problem that is anything but simple.

Border communities need economic opportunities, but Nigeria also needs revenue, lives and economic protection, regulatory compliance and national security. These interests are not mutually exclusive.

Atiku’s ambition to return to the presidency is legitimate. But the pursuit of that ambition should not turn border policy into a political bargaining chip.

The question Nigerians should ultimately ask is not whether the borders should be “opened”.

It is whether Atiku’s proposal would expand legitimate trade while protecting Nigeria’s economic and security interests—or simply loosen rules that exist for a political reason.

That is the real issue behind the 2027 border promise.

 

Mr Okey IBEKE is the Principal Consultant, International Trade Advisory Services Ltd

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Commentaries

The CVFF Controversy: Why  war of words won’t buy Nigerian ships

Monday Discourse with Ibrahim Nasiru

The ongoing conversation regarding the disbursement of the Cabotage Vessel Financing Fund (CVFF) to indigenous shipping owners has taken a dramatic and highly confusing turn.

For over twenty years, local shipowners have looked forward to this fund as the critical lifeline that would finally allow Nigerians to own high-capacity vessels, dominate our own coastal waters, and stop foreign ships from taking over our maritime economy.

But while the bureaucracy delayed, the narrative became deeply fractured.

The maritime industry was recently rocked by a shocking revelation from former NIMASA Director-General ,Temisan Omatseye, at the 2026 Shipping Correspondents Association of Nigeria (SCAN) Summit.

Omatseye exposed what he described as a legacy structural error, claiming that dollar receipts collected from local operators were historically swept and converted into Naira by the Accountant-General’s office to chase higher domestic interest rates.

In a swift and aggressive counter-response dated November 1, 2026, the current Director-General of NIMASA, Dr. Dayo Mobereola, flatly dismissed the claims.

Mobereola insisted that there has been absolutely no conversion of the dollar-denominated component of the fund, asserting that all USD contributions remain fully intact within the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).

This public clash between a former helmsman and the current leadership creates a massive transparency crisis.

In the global maritime industry, shipping assets are priced strictly in US Dollars. If Omatseye’s account of past historical conversion is true, then a massive portion of the fund’s purchasing power has vapourized due to the recent steep devaluation of the Naira.

If Mobereola’s denial is correct, then the full $700 million value remains intact.

To settle this confusion once and for all, the Ministry of Marine and Blue Economy must move beyond mere press statements.

The government must immediately open its financial records and publish the certified CBN account balances of the CVFF.

Stakeholders deserve an independent audit, not a war of words.

Meanwhile, the long-awaited application portal launched by the Ministry continues to run straight into a banking brick wall.

Out of nearly a hundred applications, disbursements remain stalled because Primary Lending Institutions (PLIs) are demanding rigid credit terms, strict 15% cash equity, and long-term cargo guarantees.

As leaders within the Nigerian Indigenous Ship-owners Association (NISA) and the Shipowners Association of Nigeria (SOAN) have long lamented, many local shipowners are already heavily indebted, with their existing assets trapped by AMCON.

Demanding heavy cash equity and unachievable bank conditions to access their own contributed funds is simply setting local operators up to fail.

What does this portend for Nigeria?

Foreign vessels will continue to dominate our coastal waters, taking away billions of dollars in freight capital, while our youth lose out on thousands of seafaring jobs.

Minister Adegboyega Oyetola and NIMASA must stop the endless circular arguments. The government must immediately engage genuine indigenous shipowners, simplify the rigid banking rules, and provide full account transparency.

Our blue economy cannot float on a sea of endless delays and conflicting balance sheets. It is time to let Nigerian shipowners see the books, access the funds, and secure our waters.

Ibrahim Nasiru, a public affairs analyst, writes from Abuja 

Continue Reading

Commentaries

Beyond Shiny Tech: Why Africa’s smart ports must build  plumbing before AI

Monday Discourse with Ibrahim Nasiru

At the African Ports Conference (COPAF 2026) in Casablanca, Morocco, the Managing Director of the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA), Dr. Abubakar Dantsoho, dropped a piece of unvarnished realism that should govern all future maritime discourse on the continent.

Speaking on the theme of artificial intelligence and cybersecurity, Dantsoho issued a vital warning: African ports must establish effective, uncompromised digital foundations before they rush to deploy artificial intelligence (AI).

In an era where public officials routinely weaponize trendy buzzwords like “AI,” “Big Data,” and “Smart Governance” to perform administrative progress, Dantsoho’s perspective is a refreshing return to structural logic.

Smart ports, he rightly argued, must be measured by tangible operational realities—faster vessel turnaround times, shorter cargo dwell times, lower costs, and watertight revenue accounting—not by the sheer volume of technology purchases.

The numbers coming out of Nigeria’s maritime sector suggest that getting the basic digital foundations right yields immediate economic dividends.

The deployment of foundational tools like the “Eto” truck call-up system, alongside initial frameworks for the Port Community System, catalyzed a staggering 24.8 per cent increase in Nigeria’s cargo throughput.

This foundational digitisation is precisely why the World Bank’s Container Port Performance Index recently recorded strong upward trajectory rankings for both the Tin Can Island and Apapa Ports.

But as Nigeria embarks on its massive $1 billion Lagos ports modernization program, we must face the hard, structural truth that lies beneath these celebratory statistics.

Digitisation is not merely about software procurement; it is about political will and institutional harmonization.

For over a decade, Nigeria’s biggest maritime bottleneck has not been a lack of computers, but the fierce, territorial resistance from various state agencies refusing to plug into a single, unified data ledger.

A “Smart Port” cannot exist in a vacuum where customs, immigration, terminal operators, and security agencies run isolated, analogue silos designed to preserve bureaucratic fiefdoms and rent-seeking opportunities.

If the $1 billion modernization fund is spent buying sophisticated AI predictive maintenance tools and automated vessel planning systems while the National Single Window remains structurally sabotaged by agency politics, we will simply end up with a highly automated system that accelerates corruption and bottlenecks.

You cannot run a predictive AI algorithm on data that is manually altered or hidden by a human clearing agent at the wharf.

Dantsoho is entirely correct: we must build the digital plumbing before we chase the AI crown.

Going into 2027, the yardstick for evaluating the NPA’s modernization program must not be the number of smart cameras or automated gates installed.

The true metric of success will be the complete, legally enforced integration of all port stakeholders into a single data ecosystem.

Until the data flows seamlessly and transparently from the vessel to the final exit gate without human friction, any talk of an “AI-driven smart port” is mere window dressing.

We must fix the foundations first, or watch a billion dollars clear out into the ocean of unfulfilled potential.

Ibrahim Nasiru, a public affairs analyst, writes from Abuja.

Continue Reading

Commentaries

Choking in Apapa, idle in Calabar: Fixing Nigeria’s one-sided maritime system

Monday Discourse with Ibrahim Nasiru

For decades, Nigeria has been doing something completely upside down with its maritime business

We have over 850 kilometers of beautiful coastline, yet we force almost all our international trade to squeeze through just two choked locations: Apapa and Tin Can Island in Lagos.

The result? Nightmare traffic jams, crazy demurrage fees, and local businesses dying because their goods are trapped at sea for weeks.

But from what we saw at the World Maritime Day celebration in Lagos, a real, common-sense change might finally be on the horizon.

The Minister of Marine and Blue Economy, Adegboyega Oyetola, laid out a very clear plan under the theme, “From Policy to Practice: Powering Maritime Excellence.” ,

He promised that the government is fully committed to modernizing ports outside Lagos—specifically Onne, Warri, and Calabar—while building new deep seaports in places like Ondo, Ibom, and Bonny.

He also unveiled a big drive to train young Nigerian sailors to global standards so they can compete for jobs anywhere in the world.

As an analyst who looks at the actual numbers, this is where we need to pay close attention.

The ministry has already scored some big wins. Getting the United States Coast Guard to lift its long-standing security restrictions on ships coming from Nigeria is a massive deal.

It means fewer delays, lower shipping insurance costs, and cheaper goods for ordinary Nigerians when those savings drop down the supply chain.

Also, moving our local fish production from 1.1 million to 1.4 million metric tonnes shows that things are actually moving.

However, during her keynote presentation at the event, maritime expert, Mrs. Mfon Ekong Usoro, hit the nail on the head.

She reminded stakeholders that Nigeria’s maritime future depends entirely on moving from sound paperwork to actual, visible results.

Let’s tell ourselves the home truth: the real success of Oyetola’s ministry will not be judged by the fine speeches or brilliant policies presented at luxury hotels.

It will be judged by how quickly we can break the monopoly of the Lagos ports.

Opening up the eastern and southern ports is no longer just a good idea; it is a matter of economic survival.

When you make Onne, Warri, and Calabar fully functional, you instantly bring life back to regional economies, create thousands of local jobs, and make things cheaper for tens of millions of citizens living outside the South-West.

But a port is completely useless if you cannot get goods out of it. You cannot run a modern port if you rely only on heavy trucks fighting broken roads.

Oyetola’s ministry must work hand-in-hand with the Ministry of Transport. We need to see working rail lines laid straight into the ports of Onne and Calabar, connecting them directly to Inland Dry Ports like Baro and Onitsha.

Also, the government must use the new Nigerian Ports Economic Regulatory Agency(NPERA)  Act to completely crush the official corruption, crazy hidden charges, and delays that have historically scared international shipping lines away from our eastern ports.

The roadmap is there, and the international community is already noticing through the lifted US security restrictions.

Now, the federal government needs the political muscle to build the rail and road connections to back it up.

It is time to move from policy to practice, open up our eastern waterways, and let the whole country breathe.

Ibrahim Nasiru, a public affairs analyst, writes from Abuja 

Continue Reading

Trending