Blue Economy
Forgotten at Sea: Why Ex-NNSL Seafarers Cannot Wait Any Longer
Forgotten at Sea: Why Ex-NNSL Seafarers Cannot Wait Any Longer
Nearly three decades after the Nigerian National Shipping Line (NNSL) was liquidated, thousands of former seafarers remain trapped in a cycle of broken promises, poverty, and preventable deaths—a national scandal that demands immediate government intervention.
These men and women once crewed Nigeria’s merchant fleet, navigating the world’s oceans under harsh conditions and carrying the nation’s flag to distant ports. Today, they have been abandoned by the very institutions meant to protect them: the government agencies responsible for their welfare and the unions that once represented them at the bargaining table.
The demise of NNSL was no sudden accident. It was the inevitable result of decades of mismanagement, political interference, aging vessels, mounting debts, and the absence of strategic investment in fleet renewal.
By the mid-1990s, under General Abdulsalami Abubakar’s military administration, the once-proud shipping line had become commercially unsustainable.
When liquidation came in 1995, it was swift and brutal. Assets were sold off, and thousands of workers were abruptly disengaged. For the seafarers, this was not retirement—it was abandonment. Many were still in their prime working years, ready and willing to continue their careers. Instead, they were cast aside without the pensions, gratuities, or terminal benefits they had been promised.
The cost of this neglect has been catastrophic. More than 600 former NNSL workers have died since the liquidation. According to Shipping Position Report, at least 13 ex-seafarers died in 2024 alone while waiting for their entitlements, with eight more deaths recorded so far in 2025. Many survivors are bedridden, blind, or battling chronic illnesses—victims not of old age alone, but of years of financial hardship and institutional neglect.
These are not abstract statistics. They are fathers, mothers, and breadwinners whose final years have been consumed by poverty and despair rather than the dignity they earned through decades of service.
Government response has been characterized by insincerity and half-measures. Verification exercises have been conducted repeatedly—most recently in 2024, when the Federal Government and the Maritime Workers Union of Nigeria (MWUN) invited beneficiaries and next of kin for screening. While verification may be necessary, these endless cycles have become a cruel ritual. Files are reviewed, hope is raised, promises are made—but nothing reaches the pockets of those who need it most. Perhaps most insulting was the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency’s (NIMASA) offer of N100 million as settlement for all entitlements. MWUN rightly rejected the proposal, which would have amounted to roughly N50,000 per person when divided among thousands of claimants—a tokenistic gesture that revealed either breathtaking ignorance or callous disregard for the scale of suffering involved.
Yet MWUN itself cannot escape accountability. For nearly 30 years, under successive leaderships, the union has failed to secure a lasting resolution for its members. Despite being the primary representative body for these forgotten seafarers, it has not been able to translate decades of advocacy into tangible results.Whether due to internal politics, strategic failures, or other factors, the outcome remains the same: MWUN has left its members feeling betrayed. In this prolonged silence and inaction lies a form of complicity.
What makes this neglect even more unconscionable is the stark contrast with how ex-workers of Nigeria Airways have been treated. The defunct airline, liquidated in the early 2000s, saw over N22 billion released for severance payments in 2018, with additional approvals following. Recently, the Federal Government approved pensions for retired aviation workers, including Nigeria Airways staff. While those payments may not have been complete, they represent substantial and visible commitment. For ex-NNSL seafarers, there has been nothing remotely comparable—exposing a troubling double standard in how the government prioritizes workers’ welfare across sectors.
This failure extends beyond unpaid benefits. It strikes at the heart of public trust and the social contract between workers and the state. When governments disengage employees, terminal benefits are part of the agreement. When those promises are dishonored for three decades, the message is clear: service means nothing, promises are worthless, and institutions cannot be trusted. This breeds cynicism, undermines faith in both government and unions, and erodes the moral authority of the state itself.
Urgent action is now required on multiple fronts: The Federal Government must: Move beyond performative verification exercises and establish clear, publicly announced timelines for payment. Allocate funds that reflect the true scale of what is owed—not symbolic gestures. Ensure full transparency by publishing lists of verified beneficiaries, amounts due, and disbursements made.
MWUN must: Abandon its
passive posture and mobilize aggressively on behalf of its members. If necessary, pursue litigation to compel action. The union exists to fight for workers—this is the fight that matters most.
The plight of ex-NNSL seafarers is ultimately about justice, dignity, and national credibility. These men and women represented Nigeria on the world’s oceans, keeping the nation’s flag flying on the high seas. That they are now dying while waiting for entitlements rightfully theirs is an indictment of successive governments and union leaderships alike. If Nigeria could mobilize billions for ex-workers of other defunct state corporations, it can certainly do the same for its forgotten seafarers. To continue ignoring them is to betray not only a legal obligation but a fundamental human one. The true measure of a nation is not the size of its fleet, but how it treats those who once sailed it. On that measure, Nigeria is failing catastrophically—and the time to change course is now.
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?
