Blue Economy
Declining War Risk Surcharge Validates Nigeria’s Maritime Security Gains, Says NIMASA
Declining War Risk Surcharge Validates Nigeria’s Maritime Security Gains, Says NIMASA
Agency intensifies global campaign to end $400m annual drain on Nigerian trade as Deep Blue Project sustains piracy-free record
By Emetena Ikuku | Waterways News Correspondent, Lagos
The gradual reduction in war risk surcharges being applied to vessels calling at Nigerian ports is a direct reflection of the country’s dramatically improved maritime security environment, the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) has said, even as the agency steps up international pressure to achieve the complete abolition of the levies.
NIMASA Director-General Dr. Dayo Mobereola, whose administration has placed the war risk insurance (WRI) campaign at the centre of its maritime reform agenda, made the point while stressing that Nigeria has not recorded a single piracy incident in over three years, and in 2021, the International Maritime Bureau (IMB) officially removed Nigeria from its list of piracy-prone countries.
Despite this milestone, the financial burden on Nigerian trade remains severe. Available figures indicate that Nigeria has paid over $1.5 billion in the past three years alone to Lloyd’s of London, Protection and Indemnity (P&I) insurance, and other foreign insurance firm. At the vessel level, the impact is equally stark: a Very Large Crude Carrier (VLCC) valued at $130 million attracts a WRI surcharge of about $445,000 per voyage, while newer container vessels valued at $150 million face costs of up to $525,000 per voyage.
Deep Blue Record Goes Unacknowledged
NIMASA attributes Nigeria’s clean security record to sustained investment in the Integrated Maritime Security Architecture. The Deep Blue Project has successfully eliminated piracy in the country’s waters for over 30 consecutive months — a record unmatched anywhere in the world.
The IMO has taken note: IMO Secretary-General Arsenio Dominguez has publicly commended Nigeria’s efforts in securing the Gulf of Guinea. In 2023, the International Bargaining Forum (IBF) further validated Nigeria’s progress by delisting the country from the list of high-risk maritime nations. Yet, the agency says, shipowners and underwriters have been slow to translate these verified gains into meaningful premium reductions.
Dr. Mobereola has been direct in his characterisation of the problem. He argued that war risk premiums are not being determined by actual risk levels but by a cartel profiting from the status quo, and that even a decade of zero incidents would not result in reductions unless Nigeria forces the issue.
Surcharges Compound Cost of Trade
The WRI levy is not the only additional cost weighing on Nigerian-bound cargo. Maersk has introduced a transit disruption surcharge of up to $450 per container, while other shipping lines impose a war risk surcharge of $40 to $50 per 20-foot equivalent unit. The compounding effect of these charges falls hardest on importers, freight forwarders, and ultimately consumers. NIMASA estimates that full abolition of the WRI on Nigerian routes could save the country upwards of $400 million annually in unnecessary insurance payments to foreign underwriters.
Diplomatic Offensive Widens
NIMASA has escalated the campaign across multiple international forums. Under the directives of the Minister of Marine and Blue Economy, Adegboyega Oyetola, Dr. Mobereola took Nigeria’s case to international stakeholders, urging them to support the removal of war risk insurance premiums. In a major diplomatic move, he engaged Chatham House, where he met with Dr. Alex Vines, Director of the Africa Programme, who agreed to escalate the matter to the United Nations. The agency has also engaged directly with the world’s leading shipowner and cargo associations — BIMCO, the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), INTERCARGO, and INTERTANKO — pressing each body to formally recognise Nigeria’s changed security profile and advocate for premium reductions with their underwriting partners.
The responses have been cautiously encouraging. Stinne Taiger Ivo, Deputy Secretary General of BIMCO, acknowledged Nigeria’s progress and stated that shipowners should take the lead in pushing for lower premiums. Zhou Xianyong of INTERCARGO similarly assured NIMASA of support in Nigeria’s campaign to be delisted from war risk insurance premium zones.
Structural Obstacles Remain
Stakeholders caution that diplomatic goodwill alone will not resolve the issue. Security analysts have pointed to procedural anomalies that distort Nigeria’s risk rating in global underwriters’ assessments. Stakeholders argue that routing incident reports through Abidjan instead of the Nigerian Navy delays responses and unfairly worsens Nigeria’s security rating, and that misalignment between Best Management Practices West Africa protocols and Nigeria’s own security procedures distorts the country’s image.
The Head of Research at Sea Empowerment and Research Centre, Eugene Nweke, has lamented that despite reported improvements, high international war risk assessments continue to burden port users. Former NIMASA Director-General Temisan Omatseye has also urged that inter-agency coordination be strengthened, arguing that the Nigerian Navy alone cannot carry the entire security burden and that the Marine Police, Customs, and Immigration must each fulfil their statutory maritime responsibilities.
Nigeria Watch — Analysis for Port Sector Stakeholders
The modest reduction in war risk surcharges now being observed is a positive signal, but the battle for full abolition remains unfinished. For terminal operators, freight forwarders, and shipowners operating on Nigerian routes, the persistence of WRI adds a systemic cost layer that erodes competitiveness relative to other West African hubs. Every container bearing a $40–$50 war risk levy, stacked on top of Maersk’s $450 transit disruption charge, translates directly into elevated landed costs for goods passing through Apapa, Tin Can Island, and Onne.
NIMASA’s strategy — combining diplomatic pressure through Chatham House and the UN, direct engagement with BIMCO and INTERTANKO, and the moral authority of a verified four-year piracy-free record — is structurally sound. The weak link remains the procedural architecture around incident reporting and the continuing misalignment between BMP West Africa and Nigerian Navy protocols, which feed underwriters’ models with data that overstates residual risk. Until those reporting pipelines are fixed, Lloyd’s and the P&I clubs will retain a technical basis for maintaining elevated premiums regardless of the political pressure NIMASA brings to bear.
The broader implication for the port sector is this: a successful outcome would not merely reduce freight costs. It would materially improve Nigeria’s competitiveness as a transshipment and cargo destination, strengthen the economics of the proposed national shipping line, and reduce the dollar outflow from an already pressured foreign exchange environment.
NIMASA’s DG is right that Nigeria cannot win this fight alone — but the agency is assembling the coalition it needs.
Oyetola Woos Turkish Investors for Fisheries Sector, Vows to Protect Artisanal Fishers
By Okeoghene Onoriobe | Waterways News
The Minister of Marine and Blue Economy, Dr Adegboyega Oyetola, has thrown Nigeria’s fisheries sector open to Turkish investment, insisting that any fresh capital coming into the industry must strengthen and not sideline the millions of Nigerians who depend on artisanal fishing for a living.
Oyetola made the pledge while receiving a delegation from Turkish fisheries and aquaculture firm CRD Impex, led by the company’s General Manager for Fisheries, Cem Tarhan, at his Abuja office. He told the investors the Federal Government was ready to create an investment-friendly climate for credible local and foreign players willing to bring capital, technology and modern value-chain solutions to the sector, on condition that such investment remains inclusive.
“We welcome investors who can bring capital, technology, expertise and modern value-chain solutions to the sector. However, investment must be inclusive and sustainable. It must complement and empower our artisanal fish producers, not undermine their livelihoods,” the Minister said
He listed inadequate infrastructure, poor access to modern fishing technology, weak cold-chain systems, limited processing and storage capacity, and gaps in market access as the major constraints holding back the sector, framing each as an opening for targeted investment rather than a dead end.
The Turkish team, which included CRD Impex founder Hanefi Cardak and Tetra Underwater Services founder Ersun Buyukgoze, toured key fisheries and aquaculture points around the country to size up the terrain first-hand. Stops included the Kirikiri Lighter Terminal in Lagos, the Ozumba Mbadiwe Fish Market in Lekki, and the Esuk Nsidung Beach Market, a major waterfront seafood hub in Calabar, Cross River State.
The Ministry described the visit as part of a broader push to attract serious investment into Nigeria’s blue economy while keeping the welfare of artisanal fishers central to that growth.
Nigeria Watch
The Turkish courtesy call lands squarely in the pattern this desk has tracked all year: big-ticket investment pledges for Nigeria’s waterways, paired with familiar assurances that the small operator won’t be crowded out. The test, as always, is what happens after the photo-op.
Nigeria’s artisanal fishing communities occupy the same economic space as the informal boat operators represented by WABOTAN and ATBOWATON, river- and creek-dependent Nigerians whose livelihoods rise or fall on decisions made far from the waterfront. The infrastructure gaps Oyetola cited which include, weak cold-chain systems, poor storage and limited market access, all mirror the exact complaints this desk has documented from inland waterway operators for years but modernisation announced from Abuja rarely reache the jetties.
Turkish capital chasing Nigerian fisheries and aquaculture is a genuinely new thread, distinct from the Strait of Hormuz shipping story or the CVFF disbursement saga this desk has followed closely. But the underlying question is the same one that has defined Oyetola’s tenure at the Ministry of Marine and Blue Economy: will “inclusive investment” translate into contracts, cooperative partnerships and cold-chain infrastructure that artisanal operators can actually use or will it, like so many blue-economy pledges before it, stall at the courtesy-visit stage?
Waterways News will be watching for the first concrete CRD Impex commitment — site, timeline, or local partnership — as the marker of whether this one is different.
NPERA, NPA Open Technical Talks on Handover of Inland Dry Port Functions
By Ighoyota Onaibre | Waterways News
The Nigerian Ports Economic Regulatory Agency (NPERA) and the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) have begun formal engagement on transferring inland dry port oversight to NPERA, marking the start of what both agencies describe as a critical phase in operationalising Nigeria’s new port regulatory framework.
At a management-level meeting between the two agencies, officials focused on the technical groundwork for the handover, chiefly how to draw clear lines of responsibility and avoid duplication among the government bodies with a stake in inland dry port administration.
NPERA’s Director-General/CEO, Dr Akutah Pius, framed the transition as flowing directly from the Minister of Marine and Blue Economy, Dr Adegboyega Oyetola, whom he credited with steering the process toward the sector’s broader development. Akutah was emphatic that NPERA could not carry out the transfer alone, and said the buy-in of every relevant stakeholder agency would be needed to see it through.
He indicated that the Ministry would stay central to coordinating the process even as specific mandates move to the agencies best placed to execute them. Akutah also pointed to the Minister’s earlier interventions during the NPERA Bill’s passage through the National Assembly, which he said had defused inter-agency friction and set the stage for the cooperation now underway.
Describing the purpose of the meeting, Akutah said it was meant to formally kick off the transfer of inland dry port responsibilities to NPERA in fulfilment of its statutory role as economic regulator of the ports sector. He singled out Section 51 of the NPERA Act as a provision that now needs to be put into practical effect to keep the transition orderly and ensure stakeholder roles are properly aligned.
To manage the process going forward, the NPERA boss proposed setting up a joint committee drawing in NPERA, NPA, the National Inland Waterways Authority (NIWA), and the Federal Ministry of Marine and Blue Economy. He argued that inland dry ports matter well beyond the coastline. They extend maritime sector benefits into Nigeria’s hinterland and reinforce the country’s trade and logistics chain.
Responding on behalf of NPA, Managing Director Dr Abubakar Dantsoho welcomed the move and pledged his agency’s full operational and technical backing throughout the transition. He said the process had started on the right footing, and that NPA would furnish updated data on the current state of inland dry ports to inform further discussions, expressing confidence that continued engagement would help the agencies meet their shared objectives.
NPA’s Executive Director, Engr. Lekan Badmus, also commended NPERA for setting the collaboration in motion, calling the meeting a solid first step toward a smooth integration. He noted the two agencies have now moved into the technical phase of the exercise, with close attention being paid to eliminating overlapping functions.
Closing the meeting, Akutah said the proposed joint committee would reconvene with the Minister to seek further guidance and agree on next steps to keep the transition on track.
Nigeria Watch
This meeting is the first visible test of whether the NPERA Act’s promise of a rationalised port regulatory architecture can survive contact with Nigeria’s crowded agency landscape. Section 51’s transfer of inland dry port functions to NPERA looks straightforward on paper; in practice, it touches NPA’s traditional port administration turf, NIWA’s inland waterways mandate, and the Ministry’s coordinating role all at once, precisely the kind of overlapping jurisdiction that has bedevilled reform efforts elsewhere in the sector, most visibly in the long-running NIWA-LASWA tussle that only the Supreme Court could settle.
The proposed joint committee of NPERA, NPA, NIWA, and the Ministry, is a sensible mechanism, but Waterways News readers who have followed the CVFF disbursement saga know that Nigerian maritime governance has no shortage of well-designed committees whose outputs never quite reach implementation. What will matter is whether Akutah’s “technical phase” produces a binding timeline, not another round of goodwill statements.
For inland dry port operators and the hinterland trade corridors that depend on them, the stakes are practical: unclear jurisdiction between NPA and NPERA has historically meant slower cargo evacuation, duplicated levies, and uncertainty for freight forwarders planning routes away from the congested Lagos ports. If this transition is handled well, it strengthens the case for dry ports as genuine pressure valves for Apapa and Tin Can. If it stalls in inter-agency turf negotiation, it becomes one more entry in the gap between policy pronouncement and delivery that this desk continues to track.
Worth watching: whether Minister Oyetola’s office sets an explicit deadline when the committee reconvenes, and whether NIWA, whose inland waterways mandate intersects with dry port hinterland connectivity, gets more than a seat at the table.
Two More Tankers Struck in Strait of Hormuz as Attack Count Hits Five in a Week
By Okeoghene Onoriobe | Waterways News
Two more tankers have been hit while transiting the Strait of Hormuz, leaving two seafarers with minor injuries and pushing the number of reported attacks or security incidents against commercial vessels in the waterway to at least five since 16 September.
The UK Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) centre said an inbound tanker was struck by an unidentified projectile on Monday. Two crew members sustained minor injuries, but the vessel stayed under its own power and continued to its next port, with no environmental impact reported.
Hours later, UKMTO issued a second alert after an outbound LPG tanker reported being struck by debris from unknown projectiles. All crew were reported safe and the vessel also continued its voyage. Authorities are investigating both incidents, and UKMTO has not attributed either attack to a specific actor.
The two strikes build on a Joint Maritime Information Center (JMIC) advisory covering three earlier attacks between 16 and 18 September, one of which saw a tanker’s hull breached by a projectile, sparking a fire. JMIC continues to rate the threat level in the strait as “severe,” citing a high likelihood of deliberate hostile action and pointing to a pattern of harassment by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps — drone overflights, surveillance of merchant vessels and VHF hailing, alongside the direct attacks.
Traffic through the chokepoint remains sharply depressed. Only 17 commodity vessels were visibly transiting over the weekend, down from 37 the week before and against a pre-war daily average of roughly 125. That figure excludes vessels sailing with their AIS transponders switched off, and JMIC notes a persistent gap between visible and actual traffic.
Nigeria Watch
For Nigerian maritime stakeholders, the Hormuz crisis is no longer a distant Gulf story. It is a cost line. Every fresh escalation feeds directly into the war-risk insurance premiums and freight rates that Nigerian importers, refiners and shipping agents ultimately absorb, since global tanker and container capacity pulled off the Hormuz route tightens supply elsewhere and pushes rates up across long-haul trades, including those serving West African ports.
The renewed attacks also sharpen the stakes around Nigeria’s push for a stronger voice at the IMO Council table and its broader blue-economy diplomacy under Minister Adegboyega Oyetola. A sustained Gulf disruption is exactly the kind of systemic shock that tests whether Nigeria’s seat translates into influence over how global shipping risk, insurance and rerouting decisions are made, rather than Nigeria simply absorbing the downstream cost.
Locally, the episode is a reminder of the layered nature of “maritime security” as a policy word: the Deep Blue Project and Gulf of Guinea security architecture address piracy and armed robbery close to home, but Nigeria’s ports and shippers remain exposed to security failures thousands of kilometres away in the Gulf.
Waterways News will continue tracking how the Hormuz situation feeds into freight cost pressure at Nigerian ports and NIMASA’s public messaging on the issue.
Oil and Gas7 months agoTantita’s Pipeline Deal: $144m Contract, Rising Output, and the Questions that Deserve Answers
- MARITIME TRADE & SHIPPING7 months ago
World’s Largest Container Ship Sets New Maritime Record with 22,233 TEUs on Single Voyage
- Blue Economy7 months ago
Nigeria’s Coast Guard Bill: A Solution in Search of a Problem?
