It is already 10 years since former president Olusegun Obasanjo signed the Coastal and Inland Shipping Bill (otherwise called Cabotage) into law at a brief, but epoch-making ceremony at the State House in Abuja.
It is already 10 years since former president Olusegun Obasanjo signed the Coastal and Inland Shipping Bill (otherwise called Cabotage) into law at a brief, but epoch-making ceremony at the State House in Abuja.
Obasanjo’s assent was after both chambers of the National Assembly had painstakingly debated and passed the Bill. Of course, the law makers also subjected it to an elaborate public hearing which was attended by stakeholders who were very critical to the success of the new law. These included ship owners and agents, shipping practitioners (indigenous and multinational), financial institutions, government agencies, including Cabotage Act’s would-be implementing agency, that is, the-then National Maritime Authority (NMA), now NIMASA.
At the conception stage, we recall the then- highly vocal, but now, moribund Nigerian Shipping Companies Association telling the law makers that if the almighty United States of America could make a bold statement of indigenising her coastal shipping business through the Jones Act of 1938, why wouldn’t Nigeria with a coastline of about 870 kilometers and almost 3,000 kilometers and about 22 ½ billion cubic metres of crude oil deposits, 3 ½ trillion cubic metres of hydro carbon and 42.7 billion cubic metres of bitumen deposits embrace protectionism.
With a lofty objective of deliberately reserving commercial transportation of goods and services within Nigeria’s coastal and inland for Nigerian-flag vessels and vessels that are owned by Nigerians, the Cabotage Law of 2003 spelt out four pillars upon which its implementation must rest.
The four pillars are that: Cabotage vessels must be wholly -owned by Nigerians; they must be registered in Nigeria, must be crewed by Nigeria and Nigerian shipyards must build and repair Cabotage vessels.
Between 2004 when the Act came into being and now, there have been about nine ministers of transport and eight directors general at the helm of affairs at the NMA and later the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA).
After about nine years of its implementation (or non-implementation), it is apt to ask the following questions: Why has it been difficult for Cabotage to create (even) marginal employment for the nation’s swelling population of seafarers nine years after actual implementation was to have commenced. Why is it that both NIMASA and the supervisory ministry of transport are more interested in granting waivers to foreign flag vessels to continue trading within our coastal waters in clear circumvention of the provisions of Cabotage? Why is it that nine years down the line, indigenous shipping practitioners are still full of the same lamentations as they were, prior to the enactment of the Act and they still complain that multinationals are dominating the business of shipping in Nigeria?
Can we then ask NIMASA these questions? How many indigenous ship owning company has it registered since 2004 and how many foreign? To what extent has the Cabotage Vessel Financing Fund (CVFF) been useful to Nigerian operators and how many have benefited and how much has been given out.
Sadly, the most glaring indices of failure of the Cabotage Act is the depleted bottoms that Nigeria now has, the mass of unemployed seafarers, the prevalence of foreign interests in our coastal shipping, especially as it concerns rendering of services in the oil and gas sector and in line with the Local Content Act.
In view of the glaring failures, there have been some failed attempts to review the Act, all to no avail.
Suffice it to stress that, it is the efforts of a former minister of transport, Chief Okechukwu Emeka to review the Act that stood out. He had constituted an expert and stakeholders’ committee to undertake the assignment , the committee which was chaired by a former chairman of Senate committee on marine transport, Senator Ugochukwu Uba did a marvelous job , sadly it report has been abandoned in the ministry of transport since then.
For those who care to ask, why did subsequent ministers of transport chose to ignore the report which spells out what should be done to make Cabotage work in Nigeria.
According to the committee, some of the recommendations “require legislative action for their realization, while others require administrative action for their implementation”.
It is our humble opinion, whatever fresh attempts that would be made to genuinely review the Act must make copious reference to the Uba report.
Even though we acknowledge the efforts of both the National Assembly and the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) to embark on a review, we are of the opinion that the Act was badly implemented or was implemented ab initio by people who had no idea of what their mandate as far as Cabotage Act is concerned.
As we all seek a review, it is pertinent to appeal to indigenous ship owners to be fully involved in the process, otherwise the events of the past 10 years will be a child’s play if NIMASA and the National Assembly are allowed to once again take charge of the collective future of the Nigerian shipping business .
Discussion about this post