Once again, the ever-present suspicion among the five registered freight forwarding associations has come to the fore, no thanks to the controversial practitioners’ operation fees. The fee is to be collected by the regulatory agency; the Council for the Regulation of Freight Forwarding in Nigeria (CRFFN).
Before its current nomenclature as ‘practitioners’ operations fees’ and the modality for collection were arrived at, the associations were said to have agreed to its collection, they even signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU).
Once again, the ever-present suspicion among the five registered freight forwarding associations has come to the fore, no thanks to the controversial practitioners’ operation fees. The fee is to be collected by the regulatory agency; the Council for the Regulation of Freight Forwarding in Nigeria (CRFFN).
Before its current nomenclature as ‘practitioners’ operations fees’ and the modality for collection were arrived at, the associations were said to have agreed to its collection, they even signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU).
But in the last couple of weeks, there have been a bedlam between the associations, which have formed two camps. The anti-fees collection camp has the Association of Nigerian Licensed Customs Agents (ANLCA) as the lone voice, while the pro-fees camp is being led by National Association of Government Approved Freight Forwarders (NAGAFF). In this camp, there are: Association of Registered Freight Forwarders of Nigeria (AREFFN, National Association of Air Freight Forwarders and Consolidators NAFFAC and a faction of the National Council of Managing Directors of Licensed Customs Agents.
Since CRFFN came out with a public notice about its intention to commence collection of the fees, there have been press conferences upon press conferences; there have also been petitions and letters by the two camps.
These positions have put a hold on the move by the CRFFN.
But, the idea of collecting monies from clearing agents is as old as the port system itself. There was a time when the leadership of the Association of Nigerian Licensed Customs Agents (as the only association at that time) relied solely on such collections to fund its activities. It usually runs into multi- millions of Naira. They called it ‘association fees’.
As other associations started springing up, the quest to share the ‘booty’ became an issue and apart from the frequent refusal by some individual clearing agents who often refuse to be coerced into paying the fees, it became a common source of funding for the associations, especially at the chapter levels.
With the coming of the Council for the Regulation of Freight Forwarding in Nigeria (CRFFN), the issue of collection of fees took a new dimension. At its first attempt, armed with a ministerial directive, the Council took on the associations to wrestle the purse from them by introducing transaction fees; it was a bitter battle that eventually made the CRFFN comatose. There was no agreement over how proceeds of the fees would be shared.
But, while CRFFN was battling to solicit the support of freight forwarding associations, another group; the Joint Action Committee of Freight Forwarders (JACOFF), was created to contend with the CRFFN.
While CRFFN wanted transaction fees, JACOFF wanted freight forwarders to pay ‘cargo clearance dues’ (CCD) to it. The JACOFF is an amalgamation of freight forwarding associations. They are: Association of Nigerian Licensed Customs Agents (ANLCA), National Association of Government Approved Freight Forwarders (NAGAFF), National Council of Managing Directors of Licensed Customs Agents (NCMDLA), Association of Registered Freight Forwarders of Nigeria (AREFFN) and National Association of Air Freight Forwarders and Consolidators (NAFFAC).
Perhaps because they could not agree, the Minister of Transport, Senator Idris Umar had to outlaw collection of practicing fees by the Joint Task Force of the Association of Nigerian Licensed Customs Agents (ANLCA) and the National Association of Government Approved Freight Forwarders (NAGAFF).
Undaunted, the associations oiled their machineries and resumed collection at SAHCOL, NAHCO at the Murtala Mohammed International airport in Lagos, the Federal Ocean Terminal (FOT) and the West African Container Terminal (WACT); both in Onne port in Rivers state.
The Registrar of CRFFN; Mike Jukwe often affirmed the illegality of such collections. On one occasion, he stated that: “The (CRFFN) Act is very clear, it has stated what the associations are supposed to collect, so whatever they were collecting in the past, with the enactment of the Act and coming to force of the Act, are now illegal,” registrar of CRFFN”
“Anything outside that is illegal and we have to stop it. Police has been informed. The associations know what to collect. Council is working out something, once we get the approval from the minister, they will be directed on what to collect and how to collect it. That will come out soon, but we have to be sure that we have stopped all the mess that is going on then we start doing things as it is done internationally.”
This statement was made about two years ago, yet the collection still remain an issue in the ports (sea and air) as well as land borders.
The one at the Lagos airport is most shocking and embarrassing, whereby a federal institution, such as NAHCO will input such collections into its billing system.
It is a shame that, port concession notwithstanding, the nation’s seaports still remain a honey pot for such collections by freight forwarding associations as mentioned above. It is an embarrassment to both the CRFFN and the Nigerian Shippers’ Council that associations can dare the CRFFN and stop it from collecting a fee that is already in a gazette by the Federal Government. It is also shameful that officials of the CRFFN were beaten up by those who were yet to be identified and arrested by the Police.
Those who have argued that it is the sharing formula of the share of freight forwarding associations of proceeds from the CRFFN’s Practitioners Operations Fees that is at the centre of the current face-off may not be far from the truth.
The sudden volte face by ANLCA is to say the least suspicious, having been part of the various negotiations leading to the release of the gazette.
Another suspicious development is the letter that was purportedly written to the Vice President of the Council of Managing Directors by the office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF). Why is it that the letter wasn’t made public until after almost one month after it was received.
Another suspicious issue that has come up is the sudden demand for elections into the governing council of CRFFN.
We are also a bit suspicious of the stout defence and support that CRFFN is getting from an amalgam of freight forwarding associations, led by NAGAFF. These associations have never been this united.
Discussion about this post