Author: user user

To buttress the point permit me to share the words of Mr. Kio Amachree, a Stochkholm-based Nigerian writer.

On 13th July he wrote the following on X.

‘I do not know a Nigerian who would sell his soul the way the anti-immigrant mobs of South Africa have done this past month. Every unreconstructed apartheid nostalgist is laughing behind his locked gates at how easily these movements were turned against their fellow Africans, doing the dirty work of division for free and making the power grab of others so much easier’.

He added:

‘Ask the obvious question. Who is writing the cheques? March and March charters buses across provinces, prints shirts by the thousand, stages press conferences and floods social media with coordinated campaigns, yet its own public crowdfunding raised barely thirteen thousand rand. Researchers at Wits University say plainly that this is not a grassroots movement of the unemployed, that there is external funding. A Stellenbosch professor calls the movement inorganic, coordinated and amplified by people with a political agenda, with money moving in ways no one can trace. Former President Thabo Mbeki calls it what it is, a funded counter-revolutionary project that does not come from the people. Somebody with deep pockets is bankrolling the spectacle of Black South Africans hunting fellow Africans, and every day the financiers stay hidden, the beneficiaries of a divided, burning South Africa sleep more peacefully behind their locked gates. Follow the money and you will find the true authors of this shame’.

He added:

‘The movement is led by Jacinta Ngobese-Zuma, a former radio presenter enjoying her fifteen minutes of fame, flanked by Zulu regiments and regional agitators like Mthokozisi Gumede in KwaZulu-Natal. This is not patriotism. It is a political project wearing the stolen clothes of liberation. Stockholm Syndrome is too weak a term for what ails this movement. Its foot soldiers appear to have been taught to hate themselves, and they have no regard for the sacrifice of the thousands of freedom fighters, many sheltered and armed by the very African nations they now terrorize, who gave them the right to breathe as free men and women’.

He concluded with the following:

‘Meanwhile those who dreamt of the good old days of white rule watch Black South Africans do to fellow Africans what apartheid once did to them, and they could not have scripted it better themselves. Every burnt shop, every checkpoint, every whip raised against a Zimbabwean domestic worker or a Nigerian trader is a gift to those who always said Africans could not govern themselves. The freedom fighters who died from Sharpeville to Soweto did not die for this. South Africans deserve to know whose money is buying their liberation back from them, rand by rand’.

Amachree is right.

South African Minister of Justice, Mamoloko Kubayi hit the nail on the head when she said ‘foreign entities are stoking unrest in South Africa’.

The truth is we do not have to dig too deep to know just who those foreign entities are when we consider the words of an essay written by Israeli columnist Grant Arthur Gotchin that was published on January 2nd 2026 in the Times of Israel in which he argued that ‘Africa must fragment and South Africa must be the first to fragment’.

The objective is clear.

It is an imperialistic and neo-colonialistic design and construct whose purpose is to destroy, divide and rule us ALL.

Outside of that permit me to ask Minister Ntshaveni and those that think like her the following questions.

Are the majority of Nigerians in South Africa not properly documented, hard working, responsible, decent people who have major investments there?

Is it fair for you to suggest that the majority of Nigerians in South Africa are undocumented and illegal immigrants, drug dealers and criminals who ‘live in shacks’ when you know very well that this is not the case?

Is it Nigerians that bring drugs into your country through your ports and borders?

Is it Nigerians that manufacture drugs there?

Is it Nigerians that make up your police force, customs and law enforcement agencies that colluded with the drug dealers to bring drugs in and sell them?

Is it Nigerians that consume drugs in your country or force others to consume them?

Are Nigerians the only ones that are involved in the drug trade in South Africa?

Are 98% of the people in South African prisons South Africans and not Nigerians?

Is it not a fact that, as South African Minister of Correctional Services Dr. Pieter Groenewald recently confirmed, there are only 28,000 foreign prisoners in South Africa and that less than 300 of them are Nigerians?

Does this not torpedo the absurd notion that all Nigerians that reside in South Africa are criminals, scammers and drug dealers?

Have any Nigerians been implicated or accused in the ongoing Madlanga Commission of Inquiry which is probing allegations of corruption and drug related crimes or is it only South Africans including South African law enforcement and Government officials?

There was a 2 billion rand (120 million USD) drug bust in South Africa recently which involved South Africans and nationals of a South American country. There were no Nigerians involved.

The two former Heads of the South African Police that were prosecuted for drug trafficking and the suspended head of the South African Police that is under investigation for drug trafficking and corruption today are NOT Nigerians but South Africans.

All these events and facts speak volumes and clearly point to the fact that the commission of crimes in South Africa and elsewhere are not the exclusive preserve of Nigerian nationals.

There is no doubt that there is a drug and crime problem in South Africa in which some Nigerians are involved and we hold as much contempt and disdain for them as you do for indulging in such heinous crimes that brings so much misery to South African families.

We urge you to deal with such criminals decisively within the confines of your laws and we will assist you in this in any way that we can.

To however allege or imply that ALL Nigerians and ONLY Nigerians are involved in such criminality is disingenious and false.

Was a South African woman who was carrying her three year old child not arrested at Murtala Mohammed Airport in Lagos in early July smuggling large amounts of cocaine into our country?

Was another South African not caught smuggling 7.5 kilograms of heroine in Thailand a few days later?

Does this mean that all South Africans are drug dealers?

Surely not!

Did the South African Ministers that treated Ireti Bakare Yusuf with such contempt and accused her of being rude and disrespectful simply because she asked Minister Ntshaveni whether she thought she ought to apologise to Nigerians for suggesting that we were all drug dealers do the right thing?

Was treating a female journalist that asked a legitimate question in that way and even subjecting her to threats of being thrown out of the hall and being manhandled by aggressive and hostile security officers not unacceptable?

Is this the way to build bridges between our two countries and does this attitude and behaviour towards a respected Nigerian journalist reflect the fact that many in South Africa, including some in Government, view our people as nothing but criminals?

There are thousands of documented Nigerians in your country lawfully who are doing a great job in numerous responsible professions and spheres of human endeavour, who are adding immense value to your community, who are employing and providing essential legal, medical and academic services for your people and who are hardworking, proud and law-abiding citizens.

Many have even married South African nationals and are raising their children in your country.

They are indeed your guests and we expect you to treat them as such and not set them up for persecution and villification by referring to them as drug dealers and criminals.

I take strong objection to this mischaracterisation of our citizens and it is indeed painful that a country of 250 million people that contributed so much to your liberation struggle and that has opened its markets and borders to your companies and nationals for so many years can be referred to and treated in this way.

I call for caution and restraint.

Permit me to add the following.

Some have tried to frame the hostility, violence, challenges and insults that black African foreign nationals, including Nigerians, are facing in South Africa as a consequence of a ‘migration problem’.

I respectfully disagree.

According to census figures the number of documented and undocumented foreigners living in South Africa is 3 million.

3 million out of a population of 64 million can hardly be described as a migration crisis.

The problem that South Africa has is one of wealth creation and distribution and not migration.

The migrants are simply the scapegoats for what is essentially the failure of the state to effectively fight poverty and better the lives of its citizens.

The sooner the poverty problem is solved the sooner Afrophobia and the murderous hate and violence that goes with it will cease.

That should be the focus and objective of South African Government officials and the South people and not the demonisation and mischaracterisation of Nigerian nationals, or any other African nationals, that reside in their country.

We want to have a productive and mutually respectful relationship with South Africa which will enhance trade and strong strategic relations with our country and not one of disrespect and recriminations.

As a Nigerian that has immense respect and profound admiration for the struggles and sacrifices of your heroes past like Nelson Mandela, Oliver Thambo, Walter Sisulu, Steve Biko, Chris Hani, Thabo Mbeki, Govan Mbeki,

F.W. De Klerk, Desmond Tutu, Alan Boesak, Tokyo Sexwale, Joe Slovo, Winnie Mandela, Jessie Duarte and so many others I sincerely hope and pray that we can achieve this.

Wisdom and diplomacy insists that sovereign nations must treat one another with respect in order to strengthen and build strong bilateral relations.

This is especially so when there is so much at stake.

Thankfully for every repugnant expression of racism, arrogance, ignorance and hate from the likes of Jacinta Ngobese- Zuma and others we have expressions of fraternity, understanding, appreciation and Pan-African solidarity from seasoned and experienced South African leaders and diplomats like Minister Firoz Chachalia and Mr. Zane Dongor and therein lies the hope for the future.

Extremists and racists that are working for a foreign power and that have a hidden agenda from both sides of the divide shall not prevail and shall not set us apart.

Whatever our challenges and our concerns about one another may be we will sit down, work them out and stay together all for the sake of our respective nations and the benefit of Mother Africa.

As High Commissioner of Nigeria to South Africa it is my primary duty to strengthen ties between our two great nations and ensure that our relationship remains strong, respectful, mutually beneficial and cordial.

In addition to that I have a duty to protect the interests of every Nigerian in South Africa that is properly documented and that abides by the law.

I shall not fail in these duties or be found wanting.

Responsible diplomacy and law enforcement is the way out of the challenges that South Africa are facing with illegal migration and drug related crimes and not the blanket villification of a fellow African nation.

This is especially so given the fact that that African nation offers nothing but support and good tidings for the Government and people of South Africa, a country we have loved and respected for many years.

(END OF PART 5)

(Chief Femi Fani-Kayode is a former Minister of Culture and Tourism, a former Minister of Aviation and the Ambassador-Designate of Nigeria to South Africa)

President Bola Tinubu has ordered the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to vacate the order freezing the accounts of the Osun State Government.

In a statement he personally signed on Thursday, the president said while he was not opposed to the EFCC’s exercise of its statutory powers, the timing of the action raised some concerns.

The EFCC on Wednesday froze the account of the Osun State Government, citing alleged fraudulent handling of ecology funds, intervention funds and Federal Account Allocation Committee (FAAC) account to the tune of N11 billion.

The anti-graft agency took the action ten days to the state’s governorship election.

Governor Ademola Adeleke of the Accord party is contesting against two major candidates: Munirudeen Bola Oyebamiji of the All Progressives Congress (APC) and Najeem Salaam of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

Adeleke, who addressed journalists in Osogbo, the state capital, said the freezing of the account was unconstitutional because no court order was obtained before the directive was issued.

But the EFCC explained that the state government’s account was frozen to save public funds from being looted.

The commission, in a statement by its spokesman, Dele Oyewale, said some officials of the state had earlier been quizzed by investigators of the commission, saying what precipitated the freezing was the unwarranted movement of funds from the accounts to different suspicious accounts since August 2, 2026.

I feel embarrassed – President

President Tinubu said he feels embarrassed by the EFCC action because the timing could create the impression that the Federal Government is interfering in the state’s forthcoming governorship election.

Tinubu said actions taken by federal institutions were often attributed to him as President, regardless of whether he had prior knowledge of them.

He said, ‘I must state that I feel deeply embarrassed not by the EFCC’s exercise of its mandate backed by a court order, but by the timing of the agency’s action.

‘This is so because every action taken by an institution of State, especially at the Federal level, is always credited to me, as the President, even when I may not have had any prior knowledge of the action.

‘Since assuming office, I have consistently maintained that anti-corruption and law enforcement agencies must be allowed to discharge their statutory responsibilities independently, professionally, without fear or favour, or political interference.

‘I have therefore deliberately refrained from directing or interfering in the operational activities of the EFCC or any other investigative or prosecutorial agency because I firmly believe that strong democratic institutions, operating within the confines of the law, are indispensable to democratic good governance and the rule of law.

‘As President, I am committed to allowing institutions of State to function and take any action they consider necessary in the interest of proper governance without the need for any prior approval. Indeed, that is why institutions are set up by law with clearly defined powers.

‘While I am yet to be fully apprised of the facts which informed the action of EFCC in approaching the court to obtain the said order freezing the Osun State Government account, I am not in the slightest doubt that the timing of the action of EFCC is inauspicious, and therefore I feel compelled to intervene.

‘Osun State is only a few days away from its gubernatorial election. Therefore, nothing ought to be done to give an impression that the EFCC or indeed any other agency of the federal government is being used to interfere with the election.

‘Based on the foregoing premise, I am duty-bound to issue a directive on this issue in consonance with the overriding public interest in preserving public confidence and the integrity, credibility, and fairness of our democratic process.

‘Accordingly, I have directed the EFCC to immediately proceed to the court to vacate the order and discontinue whatever action it has instituted against the Osun State Government in this regard.’

EFCC unfreezes account

Efforts to get an official update from the EFCC were futile as several calls to the spokesman of the anti-graft agency, Dele Oyewale, were not answered.

But a senior official at the commission confided in Daily Trust that another official letter has been sent to the management of the First Bank conveying the President’s directive to the bank.

The official, who did not want his name in print because he wasn’t authorised to speak, said: ‘A letter has been sent to the banker to remove the PND restriction on the state government’s account following Mr President’s directive. Nobody should view this from the perspective of the fact that EFCC is not independent.’

Lawyers, CSOs fault Tinubu’s directive

Human rights lawyer Inibehe Effiong said President Tinubu’s directive to the EFCC to unfreeze Osun State Government accounts undermined the commission’s independence and raised concerns about political interference.

‘Whatever decision the EFCC takes, they may have taken it as an independent arm of government. The President cannot be directing the unfreezing or freezing of accounts. Even though the EFCC is an agency of the executive arm of government, it is created as an independent agency under the law,’ Effiong said.

According to him, the EFCC Establishment Act does not confer supervisory authority on the President over the commission’s statutory responsibilities.

‘What this does is undermine the independence and integrity of the EFCC, and it speaks to political interference,’ he said.

Effiong questioned whether similar presidential directives had been issued in other investigations without public knowledge.

‘If the President is now giving directives in respect of the Osun matter, how many other cases has he given such directives that the public does not know about? We cannot simply trust the President to do what is right when he has a clear partisan interest in matters,’ he said.

Another lawyer, Victoria Adaji, urged the President to demonstrate impartiality by allowing the justice system to function without interference.

‘The President should prove to Nigerians that he is neutral by ensuring justice is served in matters that require so in the country,’ Adaji said.

She maintained that the EFCC’s statutory independence should have been respected.

‘The EFCC is an independent institution, and the President should have understood that better rather than interfering in the matter,’ she added.

Also reacting, Human Rights Lawyer, Udochukwu Onoh, questioned both the President’s authority to issue such a directive and the legal process through which the court granted the order freezing Osun State’s accounts.

Udochukwu also argued that the state government ought to have been given a fair hearing before the order was granted.

‘When we view it from the angle of infringement on fundamental human rights, how could a court grant such a motion without a fair hearing on both sides? The Osun State Government should have been invited to court and granted a fair hearing,’ he said.

He warned that even a temporary freeze on a state’s accounts could cripple governance and essential public services.

Describing the President’s intervention as political interference, Udochukwu said the EFCC should be allowed to discharge its statutory mandate without external influence.

‘Tinubu’s directive strange, eroding trust’

Also, a constitutional lawyer, Basil S. Kpenkpen, Esq., argued that the President’s directive has significant legal consequences for both the directing authority and the investigative Institution.

‘It’s very strange and undemocratic, the order constitutes a severe violation of the right to fair hearing under Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution, and it carries significant legal consequences for both the directing authority and the investigative institution.

‘What the Federal Government has done in law amounts to speculation, suspicion and doubt which cannot stand,’ the senior lawyer told one of our correspondents.

On his part, another senior lawyer, Peter Abang, called on the EFCC to put its boots on the ground and assure Nigerians of its independence and accountability in the fight against corruption in Nigeria.

According to him, the directive may have tainted the independent image of the commission, arguing that anyone would, after this event and a series of other actions taken by the EFCC, be justified to hold the view that the commission cannot do anything except as directed by the Executive.

But Mustafa Adedibu, another constitutional lawyer, said the president should be commended for dousing the tension in the state.

Adedibu said, ‘The directive by Mr President for the EFCC to unfreeze Osun State Government’s account is, in my honest opinion, supposed to be a bit of relief to the nation as a whole.

‘The action of the EFCC to freeze the account of the state, however well-intended, is truly ill-timed, as the President rightly posited, and the President has just done the right thing.’

Also, civil society organisations criticised President Tinubu’s directive, warning that the intervention could undermine the anti-graft agency’s independence and public confidence in anti-corruption efforts.

The Country Director of Accountability Lab Nigeria, Friday Odeh, and the Chancellor of the International Society for Social Justice and Human Rights (ISSJHR), Jackson Omenazu, separately argued on Thursday that any concerns arising from the EFCC’s actions should be resolved through the courts rather than executive intervention.

Odeh, who spoke to Daily Trust, said Tinubu’s directive left Nigerians with ‘two readings,’ both of which, according to him, cast the EFCC in a negative light.

‘Nigerians are left with two readings, and both are bad. One, the EFCC acted on its own and is now overridden by Aso Rock, which means it has no operational independence. The second assumption is that the EFCC did not act on its own, and the reversal is damage control,’ he said.

He argued that the President’s intervention had weakened whatever case the commission intended to pursue over the alleged mismanagement of ecological funds in Osun State.

Odeh also called for reforms governing the freezing of government accounts, saying any post-no-debit order on a state’s statutory allocation account should require a publicly disclosed court order, a defined duration and safeguards to protect workers’ salaries and pensions.

Similarly, Omenazu said the President lacked constitutional authority to interfere in an ongoing EFCC investigation or direct the agency on matters already before it.

‘The President does not have the constitutional authority to interfere in an ongoing EFCC investigation or direct the agency on matters that are before it. He should allow the law to take its course and respect the independence of institutions established by the Constitution and the laws of Nigeria,’ Omenazu said.

He maintained that the EFCC, being a statutory body, was expected to discharge its responsibilities independently and without executive interference.

‘The EFCC is a creation of statute and is expected to discharge its responsibilities independently, without executive interference. The President can only exercise powers that are expressly conferred on him by the Constitution and other extant laws. He cannot override the law or substitute his personal directive for due legal process,’ he said.

Omenazu added that any dispute arising from the commission’s actions should be resolved through the courts.

Free El-Rufai too, Atiku challenges Tinubu

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has challenged President Tinubu to direct the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, ICPC, to release former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai, arguing that if the president could order the EFCC to vacate its freeze on Osun State’s government account, he has no basis to claim powerlessness over El-Rufai’s continued detention.

Atiku, in a statement by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, said: ‘Having now demonstrated that he can issue direct operational directives to anti-corruption agencies whenever he considers it expedient, President Tinubu owes Nigerians an explanation as to why he cannot exercise the same authority in the case of Mallam Nasir El-Rufai,’ Atiku said.

ADC: President’s directive on Osun curious, unusual

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) said the President’s admission that he directed the EFCC to discontinue the action undermines claims of the agency’s independence or neutrality, thereby confirming that the President actually directs the operational conduct of the anti-graft agencies.

In a statement signed by Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, the National Publicity Secretary of the ADC, the party claimed that the reversal was a response to sustained public outrage rather than a voluntary act of restraint, noting that the anti-graft agency would not have acted so recklessly in the first place if it did not presume the authorisation of the federal government.

It said: ‘What we find most curious about the statement is the President’s repeated reference to an alleged court order authorising the freezing of the Osun State Government’s accounts. This is a remarkable new twist. In all of its public statements on this matter, the EFCC never once claimed that it had obtained a court order.

‘The Commission consistently defended its actions on the basis of its statutory powers and what it described as ‘preventive mandate.’ At no point did it inform Nigerians that a court had authorised its actions.’

Operatives of the Edo State Police Command have rescued four victims abducted by suspected kidnappers along the Lagos-Benin Expressway.

The victims were rescued by the police in collaboration with members of the Vigilante Group of Nigeria (VGN), local hunters and other sister security agents.

The command spokesperson, Eno Ikoedem, in a statement, said the police received information that armed men, numbering about three and dressed in vigilante uniforms, had blocked the Ugbokun axis along the Lagos/Benin Expressway with logs of wood and leaves, attacked motorists and abducted some occupants into the forest.

She said upon receipt of the report, the Divisional Police Officer, Okada Division, immediately mobilised a combined team of police operatives including vigilante, local hunters and other security partners to the scene.

According to her, the operatives swiftly embarked on an aggressive bush-combing operation enhanced by drone technology to search and aid the rescue mission.

She said following the sustained pressure mounted on the criminals, they abandoned the captives and fled, leading to the rescue of the victims.

The spokesperson, who gave the names of the victims as, Muritala Babatunde, Bello Aminat, Otor Prince, and Yeiyah Gift, said they had been reunited with reunited with their families.

She disclosed that operations were ongoing to apprehend the fleeing suspects and bring them to justice.

A fierce debate over the allocation of Nigeria’s aviation revenue took centre stage at the House of Representatives Committee on Aviation on Thursday as the Nigeria Civil Aviation Authority (NCAA) and the Nigerian Airspace Management Agency (NAMA) presented opposing arguments on the proposed review of the sharing formula for the five per cent Ticket Sales Charge (TSC) and Cargo Sales Charge (CSC).

The public hearing, convened by the National Assembly, focused on proposed amendments to the Civil Aviation Act that could significantly alter the distribution of the statutory charges collected from airline ticket and cargo sales among aviation agencies.

While the NCAA urged lawmakers to retain and even increase its share of the fund to strengthen safety oversight, NAMA argued that its growing operational responsibilities and ageing infrastructure justify a larger allocation from the existing pool.

Daily Trust reports that the industry has been sharply divided since the National Assembly commenced a move to amend the Act.

Under the existing legislation, the NCAA collects five per cent TSC and shares among aviation agencies.

Under the extant sharing formula, the NCAA retains 56%; NAMA takes 22%; the Nigeria Meteorological Agency (NiMet) gets 9%, NCAT receives 7% while the Nigerian Safety Investigation Bureau (NSIB) gets 6 %.

But the proposal before the National Assembly seeks to slash the NCAA’s share to 40 per cent while NAMA’s 22% is jerked up to 40 per cent.

NCAA demands restoration of 65% of ticket sales

At the public hearing organised by the House of Representatives yesterday, the NCAA demanded the restoration of its original 65 percent share of the 5 percent ticket sales charge (TSC) and cargo sales charge (CSC).

Director-General of Civil Aviation, Capt. Chris Najomo, warned that reducing the agency’s allocation would weaken Nigeria’s aviation safety oversight and place the country at odds with international standards established by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).

Najomo stressed that the NCAA, as the nation’s independent aviation regulator, is responsible for certifying, inspecting and supervising airlines, airports, maintenance organisations, training schools, aviation personnel and the country’s air navigation service provider, NAMA.

According to him, unlike other aviation agencies, the NCAA does not generate significant commercial income because it performs sovereign regulatory functions aimed at ensuring public safety.

He disclosed that the five per cent Ticket Sales Charge accounts for about 83 per cent of the Authority’s funding, while all other regulatory fees contribute only 17 per cent.

‘The NCAA is Nigeria’s State Safety Oversight Authority. Our responsibility is to regulate every aviation service provider in the country in accordance with national laws and ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices,’ he said.

Najomo further revealed that Nigeria recently achieved an Effective Implementation score of 91.3 per cent during ICAO’s Coordinated Validation Mission, but recorded its weakest performance-just 50 per cent-in the area of financial resources available to support safety oversight.

He argued that cutting the NCAA’s funding would worsen the very deficiency identified by ICAO and undermine Nigeria’s ability to maintain global aviation safety standards.

The Director-General also cited increasing challenges in recruiting and retaining qualified aviation inspectors due to inadequate funding and poor remuneration, warning that safety oversight could be compromised if the Authority’s financial base is weakened.

He maintained that international best practice requires air navigation service providers such as NAMA to recover most of their operating costs through user charges paid by aircraft operators rather than passenger ticket charges.

According to him, NAMA already has about 16 statutory commercial revenue streams, including en-route navigation charges, terminal navigation charges, calibration fees, consultancy services and telecommunications services.

Others are over-flight and en-route international charges, domestic en-route charges, charges on Class B message charges, terminal navigation charges, sales of aeronautical information, among others.

He noted that these sources account for approximately 75 per cent of NAMA’s total revenue, while the Ticket Sales Charge contributes only about 25 per cent.

NAMA seeks 56%

However, Managing Director of NAMA, Engr. Farouk Ahmed Umar, presented a contrasting position, insisting that the current allocation no longer reflects the agency’s enormous operational responsibilities.

He explained that NAMA currently receives only 22 per cent of the statutory five per cent charge, translating to just N11 from every N50 generated through the levy on a N1,000 ticket or cargo sale.

Under the proposed amendment, the agency is seeking an increase to 56 per cent of the existing pool, insisting that the proposal would not raise ticket prices but merely redistribute the current revenue.

Umar said the agency’s operational costs have risen significantly over the years while navigation charges have remained largely unchanged since 2008 despite inflation, exchange rate volatility and increasing costs of maintaining modern air navigation systems.

He noted that NAMA is responsible for air traffic control, surveillance systems, navigation aids, communication infrastructure, aeronautical information services and continuous maintenance of safety-critical facilities across the country.

According to him, the agency also faces the urgent challenge of replacing ageing radar infrastructure under the Total Radar Coverage of Nigeria (TRACON) programme and investing in digital airspace management technologies.

The NAMA boss further sought legislative backing for the agency to receive 90 per cent of fees generated from obstacle evaluation and WGS-84 aeronautical surveys, arguing that while the NCAA issues Aviation Height Clearance Certificates, NAMA undertakes the specialised technical assessments that determine whether proposed structures constitute hazards to aircraft operations.

He assured lawmakers that NAMA supports strict accountability measures, including automated revenue collection, quarterly financial disclosures, annual independent audits and transparent procurement processes.

Umar also called for harmonisation of conflicting provisions in the Civil Aviation Act and the NAMA Act regarding the agency’s statutory share of the Ticket Sales Charge.

Ojikutu seeks rational review

Retired Group Captain John Ojikutu in his presentation called for a comprehensive review of the formula.

Ojikutu, a respected aviation security expert and industry analyst, argued that the existing revenue-sharing arrangement among the NCAA, NAMA, NCAT, NSIB and NiMet lacks a rational basis and requires urgent reassessment.

According to him, the allocation of the 5 per cent charges collected from commercial aviation operators should be guided by objective operational realities rather than a fixed percentage formula that does not adequately reflect the responsibilities and resource demands of each agency.

Ojikutu said a more equitable approach should consider key factors such as the number of aeronautical personnel employed by each organisation, the volume and sophistication of equipment deployed, the number of operational locations across the country, hours of operation and other relevant service obligations.

He explained that the charges paid by non-aeronautical operators are designed to support the continuous provision of essential aeronautical safety services required for the smooth operation of Nigeria’s aviation industry.

‘These services are not optional. They are mandatory requirements under the Nigeria Civil Aviation Regulations and are also part of Nigeria’s obligations to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) for both domestic and international air transportation,’ he noted.