Despite sustained improvement in maritime security within Nigerian waters, Lloyd’s of London has maintained its classification of the region as a war risk zone—a decision that continues to impose heavy insurance burdens on shipping companies operating in and around Nigeria. This comes amid growing concerns from industry stakeholders, who accuse the global insurance giant of deliberately ignoring new security realities for financial gain.
Efforts to obtain clarification from Lloyd’s of London have proven futile. A formal email sent to the management of Lloyd’s by this newspaper (Shipping Position Daily) on April 3, 2025, seeking an update on the parameters used for war risk classification and whether any reassessment had been conducted in light of improved security, was acknowledged but never answered. In its brief response, Lloyd’s stated: “Thank you for your email, we are currently looking into this for you and will get back to you soon.” More than a week later, no further communication has been received, despite several follow-up reminders.
Industry experts have questioned the basis for Lloyd’s continued classification of Nigeria as a war risk zone, particularly after the International Maritime Bureau (IMB) removed Nigeria from its global piracy list in 2022.
The experts cited a drastic reduction in attacks in the Gulf of Guinea. Nigeria’s multi-billion-naira investment in maritime security, including the deployment of the Deep Blue Project, increased naval presence, and international partnerships, has significantly improved safety in its waters.
Speaking to Shipping Position Daily, a senior official of the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA), who pleaded anonymity, described Lloyd’s inaction as “a subtle form of exploitation,” insisting that the prevailing security condition no longer supports the classification of Nigeria as a high-risk country. “We have invested so much to clean-up our waters. The data is there. Even international shipowners have acknowledged the improvement. So what else do they want?” the official queried.
A Lagos-based maritime lawyer, Mrs. Nnena Wilson said Lloyd’s continued silence raises questions of transparency and accountability. “The maritime insurance framework must be data-driven, not profit-driven. If the facts on the ground no longer support the designation of Nigeria as a war risk zone, then Lloyd’s should come forward and explain their rationale or update the record. Their refusal to respond to direct and legitimate inquiries only further fuels the suspicions that this is about revenue, not risk.”
Echoing this concern, another anonymous maritime lawyer told Shipping Position Daily that the IMB’s reports confirm that piracy has been “reduced to the barest minimum” in Nigerian waters. He added that while Nigeria’s exclusion from the war risk classification might seem like a legal cause, it is, in fact, more complex.
“Insurance is a commercial commodity; privately negotiated between parties,” he explained. “Lloyd’s is not contracting with Nigeria directly but with individual ship owners. The government of Nigeria may not have a legal basis to challenge Lloyd’s in court, but advocacy and diplomatic engagement remain viable options.”
The lawyer further suggested that Lloyd’s risk assessment might go beyond piracy. “Their basis may shift to kidnapping risks, vessel interdictions, or delays. So, from a legal standpoint, Nigeria’s challenge is less about litigation and more about building a compelling, persuasive case rooted in data and diplomacy.”
Checks by our correspondent revealed that international stakeholders have acknowledged the changing security landscape. In 2022, the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), alongside Nigeria and other West African nations, launched a joint strategy to eliminate piracy threats in the Gulf of Guinea. The initiative emphasized increased collaboration, data sharing, and best practices to sustain regional security.
However, despite these developments and repeated calls by Nigerian stakeholders for Lloyd’s to reassess the country’s status, the underwriters remain unyielding. Maritime operators continue to pay war risk premiums, sometimes amounting to as much as $5,000 per vessel per trip—a cost they argue could be redirected toward port development or infrastructure upgrades if Nigeria were delisted.
Otunba Sola Adewunmi, a ship owner, laid part of the blame at Nigeria’s doorstep. “Let me be frank with you,” he said. “When you allow foreigners to determine your business terms, this is what happens. Nigeria has not played its politics right in the global maritime domain. We are not at war; we are not Somalia, nor Afghanistan, yet we continue to pay these premiums.”
Adewunmi stressed that the failure of Nigerian authorities to engage in global maritime politics and consistently defend national interests has allowed external players to dominate and profit unfairly. “When critical maritime decisions are taken globally, Nigeria is often absent. Our politics is not structured to protect our economic interests. The cost of imported goods is higher; partly because of these premiums, and ultimately, it’s the Nigerian people who suffer.”
Our correspondent gathered that the situation has triggered speculation that Lloyd’s and its cohorts may be unwilling to delist Nigeria, due to the lucrative nature of war risk premiums.
Stakeholders say the prolonged classification, in the face of mounting evidence of improved security, reeks of economic sabotage against a developing country trying to create a more competitive maritime environment.
Meanwhile, the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) said it has intensified its campaign to eliminate war risk insurance (WRI) surcharges on Nigeria-bound cargoes — a move the agency said could save the country an estimated $400 billion annually, according to the agency’s Head of Public Relations, Osagie Edward.
Speaking last month, Edward argued that despite Nigeria’s substantial investments in maritime security and its subsequent removal from piracy-prone lists by global security trackers, foreign insurers have continued to impose hefty WRI premiums on vessels calling at Nigerian ports.
According to him, Nigeria has paid over $1.5 billion in WRI premiums over the past three years to major global insurance firms, including Lloyd’s of London and Protection and Indemnity (P&I) insurers. “The cost implications are enormous,” he said. “For instance, a Very Large Crude Carrier (VLCC) worth $130 million pays $445,000 per voyage as war risk surcharge. For a modern container vessel valued at $150 million, it goes up to $525,000 per voyage.”
He further revealed that global shipping lines have introduced additional charges such as Maersk’s $450 container transit disruption fee, while others impose war risk surcharges of $40–$50 per twenty-foot container, all of which add significantly to the cost of shipping into Nigeria.
Edward stressed that despite Nigeria’s improved maritime security profile, international insurers have refused to acknowledge the safer operating environment, thereby placing an unjust financial burden on the country’s shipping and trade sectors.
