In the past few weeks, issues bordering on high port charges in Nigeria have once again come to the fore. The minister of transport, Alhaji Yusuf Suleiman, as well as the managing director of APM Terminal have at different fora attested to the fact that it doing business in Nigerian ports is still very expensive.
Agitations over high port costs led to a strike action by freight forwarders last year when the three main freight forwarding groups withdrew their services from Lagos ports in protest against what they called high cost of doing businesses in the ports.
Suffice it to state that freight forwarders have always complained of arbitrary charges. We also recall that on March 17, 2007, the National Council of Managing Directors of Licensed Customs Agents attempted to seal up the premises of Port and Cargo Handling Services for the same reason of alleged high port charges.
The licensed customs agents had accused the terminal operator of arbitrary charges and of giving their customers crazy bills. To give vent to their anger, the clearing agents, led by their national president, Mr. Lucky Amiwero did the most illegal; they proceeded to seal-off the corporate head office of the terminal operator.
Were it not for the timely intervention of the Police, the protesters would have taken possession of the premises of the indigenous terminal operator or worse still, the security personnel of the company would have risen to the challenge and would have rough-handled the agents.
Although, the 2007 incident and the one of last year shared similarities from the perspective of the aim, but the scope and the steps that were taken prior to the action differ a lot.
The actions against high port charges are not new; it has become a part of concession, so much that freight forwarders have always complained about the charges which are allegedly imposed on them by the terminal operators; in some cases for services not rendered. Their cries have continually fallen on deaf ears.
Freight forwarders have, at every opportunity complained of excessive and arbitrary charges on the part of the terminal operators and shipping companies as well as extortion on the part of customs officers and others.
While sympathising with the freight forwarders and of course the importers, we will like to ask the following questions: where are the importers in all of these and why should they be silent while freight forwarders face the fire? It is also pertinent to ask the embittered freight forwarders if they have adequately carried the Council for the Regulation of Freight Forwarding in Nigeria (CRFFN) in their agitations.
Some stakeholders have also accused licensed customs agents of standing in the front row to accuse terminal operators of high charges, when they are also guilty of imposing ridiculous charges on importers.
Our concern at this point is the hydra headed issue that is called port charges. The freight forwarders do not have regulated charges or scale of charges that are uniform. Secondly, majority of importers do not have sufficient knowledge of the dynamics of port tariffs and charges. Similarly, in spite of port concession, there still exist in the port system several ‘unreceipted’ charges which importers and licensed customs agents pay.
Practically, nothing has changed in the ports except that Nigerian Ports Authourity (NPA) is no longer the master stevedore; having handed over terminal operations to the private sector. Also, Customs now does more of 100 per cent examination than before. The ports system still comprise of institutional players such as the Customs (and its private sector service providers who play significant role), NPA itself, Standards Organisation of Nigeria, National Agency for Food and Drugs Administration and Control, shipping companies, terminal operators, stevedoring companies, dockworkers, Police and other security agencies; to mention a few.
Persistent complaints over alleged excessive charges can not be blamed solely on terminal operators; rather it further exposes the missing leg on which port concession should be standing on.
It is on record that in spite of repeated calls for the creation of a regulatory agency for post-port concession business relationships, government has done nothing.
It is legally not the duty of the NPA to act as commercial regulator and query terminal operators for allegedly imposing higher charges on importers and their agents. It is the duty of the proposed Independent Port Regulatory Commission which is an integral part of the much-expected Port and Harbour Authourity.
We have said it severally that the best gift that the present crop of law makers cab give to the maritime sector is to pass ‘our bills’; including the port bill. This will greatly offer an unbiased platform for commercial dispute resolution.
Discussion about this post