The first time that licensed customs agents picketed the premises of a terminal operator or shipping company, that is after the ports were concessioned to the private sector was on January 17, 2007, when the National Council of Managing Directors of Licensed Customs Agents led by Mr Lucky Amiwero rallied members of the association to seal-off the corporate head office of a terminal operator at Tin Can Island port; Port and Cargo Handling Services Limited.
The first time that licensed customs agents picketed the premises of a terminal operator or shipping company, that is after the ports were concessioned to the private sector was on January 17, 2007, when the National Council of Managing Directors of Licensed Customs Agents led by Mr Lucky Amiwero rallied members of the association to seal-off the corporate head office of a terminal operator at Tin Can Island port; Port and Cargo Handling Services Limited.
The aggrieved agents accused the terminal operator of arbitrary charges and of giving their customers crazy bills. And to give vent to their anger, the clearing agents led by Mr 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 Lucky Amiwero-led protesters would have forcefully taken possession of the premises of the indigenous terminal operators or better still, the security personnel of the company would have risen to the challenge and they would have (by right) rough-handled the agents. The effect would have been a free –for- all.
A similar occurrence took place last week as licensed customs agents took on shipping companies and terminal operators to demand for a waiver on all categories of demurrage on account of the recent nationwide strike.
Some terminal operators and shipping companies that failed to waive the charges had their offices picketed by officials and members of the associations.
The action of the agents necessitated an intervention by the land lord of the nation’s seaports; the Nigerian Ports Authourity (NPA), which promised to prevail on the terminal operators and shipping companies to consider the clearing agents’ requests.
On the strength of the NPA’s promises, the licensed customs agents removed the blockades from the shipping companies and terminal operators, only for them to realize that indeed, NPA has no powers to cause a reduction in charges or a waiver of demurrage on the private operators of the port system.
This fact makes the need for a regulator all the more expedient.
Perhaps, it is still in order to ask that, before the ports were handed over to the private sector, does it mean that the arrow-heads did not envisage that in a land lord-tenant relationship and where there are perhaps, other ancillary interests, there are bound to be frictions and that neither of the parties can be allowed to play adjudicatory role because of the vested interests.
If NPA actually has the powers to regulate the Nigerian port system, it would not need to persuade shipping companies and terminal operators to accede to the demands of the licensed customs agents.
Could it be that the Bureau of Public Enterprises (BPE) which spearheaded the process was ignorant. Is it that the ministry of transport and the ministry of finance; both of which were the government immediate eyes in the exercise did not also understand that the emergence of other interests will create frictions in a post-concession NPA?
Perhaps, the bodies are not as liable as the National Assembly, which almost six years since the ports were concessioned, is yet to finish work on the Port and Harbour Bill, which incorporate the Independent Port Regulatory Agency; the arbiter that the port system badly requires.
The recent face-off between agents and suppliers of shipping services is a pointer to the urgency of the need for an independent regulator to superintend affairs of players in the Nigerian port system.
We repeat for the umpteenth time on this page that the National Assembly owes the Nigerian maritime sector stakeholders the responsibility of passing the Port and Harbours Bill into law.
Discussion about this post