Maritime Security and Safety
Hormuz Toll Battle: Iran’s Transit Fee Gambit Threatens To Rewrite The Rules of Global Shipping
Hormuz Toll Battle: Iran’s Transit Fee Gambit Threatens To Rewrite The Rules of Global Shipping
As Tehran imposes informal charges of up to $2 million per voyage on select vessels and drafts legislation to formalise control of the world’s most critical oil corridor, the maritime order underpinning Nigeria’s crude exports and energy imports faces an existential stress test
By Ighoyota Onaibre | Waterways News, Lagos
What began as a wartime blockade has mutated into something potentially more enduring and more dangerous: an attempt to permanently redraw the legal and commercial architecture of international shipping at the Strait of Hormuz.
Iran, which has effectively shut down one of the world’s most vital maritime corridors since the United States and Israel launched coordinated strikes on its territory in late February 2026, is now demanding payment from commercial vessels seeking to pass through the narrow 34-kilometre waterway that connects the Arabian Gulf to the Indian Ocean. Payments of as much as $2 million per voyage are being sought on an ad hoc basis, effectively creating an informal toll on the waterway. Some vessels have reportedly complied, paying fees in Chinese currency or cryptocurrency before being escorted through the strait by Iranian naval vessels.
The stakes could hardly be higher. Until the US–Israeli war against Iran, roughly 25 percent of the world’s seaborne oil trade and 20 percent of its liquefied natural gas passed through the strait. Since the conflict erupted, ship tracking data shows traffic remains more than 90 percent below normal levels, with only select vessels — often after advance coordination and payment — permitted to pass.
The Legal Fault Line
At the heart of the dispute is a fundamental principle of international maritime law that has governed global trade for decades. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea guarantees vessels the right of “transit passage” through international straits — a right that cannot be suspended, obstructed, or priced. UNCLOS says states bordering straits cannot demand payment simply for permission to pass through. However, they can impose limited fees for specific services such as piloting, tugging, or port services.
The IMO Secretary-General Arsenio Dominguez has been unequivocal: “Countries do not have the right to introduce tools or payments or charges on these straits.” The global shipping regulator has called on the international community to reject Iran’s bid outright.
The legal distinction that makes this so consequential is the difference between a natural strait and a man-made canal. A canal is an artificial waterway built and maintained by a country; because canals require continuous investment, dredging, and operational management, states are allowed to charge tolls for their use. Natural straits, however, are treated as shared global corridors. The Suez Canal charges vessels billions in annual fees to fund Egypt’s infrastructure maintenance. The Strait of Hormuz, under established international law, is categorically different — it is nobody’s toll road.
Tehran, however, is pushing to change this. Iran is drafting legislation to impose transit fees, to be paid in Iranian rials, with a senior parliamentarian stating that once approved, the strait would come under “full control” of Iran’s armed forces. US President Donald Trump warned Tehran in blunt terms against the move, while the International Chamber of Shipping and tanker owners’ group Intertanko have urged members not to pay, arguing the practice violates long-standing maritime custom.
Selective Passage and the IRGC Toll Booth
What is emerging in the strait is not a conventional blockade but something more politically calculated. Iran has demanded international recognition of its right to exercise authority over the Strait of Hormuz as one of its five conditions for ending the war. In the interim, it has operated what analysts are describing as a geopolitical screening system. On 26 March, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi announced that ships owned by five nations — China, Russia, India, Iraq, and Pakistan — would be allowed to transit the strait. (Wikipedia) Malaysian and Thai vessels later gained access following diplomatic talks.
At least two vessels that have transited the strait so far paid fees in yuan, with one transit brokered by a Chinese maritime services company acting as intermediary. Nearly 2,000 vessels remain stranded on both sides of the strait, while the IMO’s Dominguez has warned that some 20,000 seafarers remain stranded in the Gulf due to the effective blockade, with the situation growing more detrimental the longer it persists.
A fragile ceasefire announced in early April has done little to restore normal traffic. Only 22 ships with their automatic identification systems switched on exited the strait between the start of the truce and the following Friday, compared with approximately 135 daily transits before the war.
The Precedent That Terrifies Shipping Markets
Beyond the immediate disruption lies a question that maritime lawyers and trade economists regard as potentially generational in its consequences. If countries were allowed to charge tolls in natural straits, it could set a precedent for others to follow. Strategic chokepoints could become tools of economic and political pressure, increasing shipping costs and disrupting supply chains. Oil prices have already risen by around 50 percent due to the conflict, with analysts raising their forecast for Brent crude to $82.85 per barrel — up roughly 30 percent on earlier projections. The International Energy Agency estimated that the conflict reduced global crude oil supplies by around 11 million barrels per day through the end of March.
Major powers remain cautious about further escalation, acutely aware of the risks of military confrontation in a narrow and heavily trafficked corridor. The US military has said it sailed two warships through the strait in an effort to clear the waterway of Iranian mines, an announcement Iran denied.
Meanwhile, China — the largest importer of energy routed through Hormuz — has refrained from confrontation, preferring to use its diplomatic leverage with Tehran to secure passage for its own vessels.
As tensions persist, the Strait of Hormuz continues to test the balance between national interest and international law, with potentially far-reaching consequences for global trade and energy security.
Nigeria Watch
Why Abuja cannot afford to treat this as a distant crisis
For Nigeria, the Hormuz crisis is not a spectator sport. As Africa’s largest oil producer and a nation whose import bill — from refined petroleum to fertilisers — is denominated overwhelmingly in dollar freight costs shaped by global energy prices, the protracted closure of the world’s most critical oil corridor lands directly on the desks of policymakers in Abuja and operators at Apapa.
On the export side, Nigeria’s crude competes in a market where Asian buyers — who absorb the bulk of Gulf oil — are now scrambling to reconfigure supply chains. That scramble has kept Brent elevated, a short-term windfall for Nigeria’s federation account. But the Dangote Refinery’s ambitions to position Nigeria as a petroleum export hub for Africa depend on competitively priced crude feedstock and stable freight routes; sustained market volatility complicates that calculus.
On the import side, the shock is more acute. Nigeria still imports the majority of its cooking gas and industrial chemicals, significant volumes of which move through supply chains directly disrupted by the Hormuz closure. Fertiliser supply chains — of which up to 30 percent of internationally traded volumes normally transit the Strait of Hormuz (Wikipedia) — are already under strain, with downstream consequences for Nigeria’s agricultural input costs.
For NIMASA and the Federal Ministry of Marine and Blue Economy, the legal dimensions of the crisis deserve close study. If Iran succeeds in normalising transit fees on a natural international strait — even under the pressure of a peace deal brokered between Washington and Tehran — the precedent will not be lost on other coastal states bordering strategic waterways. Nigeria’s own positioning in the Gulf of Guinea, and its advocacy for regional maritime sovereignty within IMO frameworks, will eventually require a clear Nigerian position on whether geography confers the right to monetise global shipping corridors. The time to begin formulating that position is now.
Maritime Security and Safety
IMO Council Mourns Slain Seafarers, Demands Stronger Protection as Maritime Conflicts Deepen
IMO Council Mourns Slain Seafarers, Demands Stronger Protection as Maritime Conflicts Deepen
Dominguez warns merchant ships remain exposed from Hormuz to the Black Sea as 138th Council session ends in London
By Okeoghene Onoriobe | Waterways News
Member states at the International Maritime Organization (IMO) used the opening of the Council’s 138th session to mourn seafarers killed in recent attacks and to demand firmer protection for civilian mariners.
Council met in London from 2 to 6 November, with Russia and Iran putting security in the Black Sea and the Strait of Hormuz at the centre of discussions. On 2 November, Secretary-General Arsenio Dominguez said commercial shipping remained exposed to attack in the Strait of Hormuz, the Red Sea, Bab el-Mandeb, the Eastern Mediterranean, the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov.
The mourning was driven by a run of deaths this year. Five seafarers reportedly died on 29 September during the rescue of the hijacked HONOUR 25 in Somali waters, and several others were seriously injured. In all, 44 seafarers were freed from three vessels. Dominguez noted that 22 seafarers remain captive aboard the ASANA, which was seized earlier this year, and urged continued effort to secure their release.
The Strait of Hormuz remains the deadliest flashpoint. The IMO had verified at least 70 attacks on international shipping there, with 19 seafarers killed, by its late-August assessment. A tally reported by gCaptain put the seafarer death toll at 24 as of 5 November.
Dominguez has repeatedly insisted that seafarers are civilians doing their jobs. He has said they should never become casualties of conflicts to which they are not a party.
Member states echoed the call. Liberia renewed its appeal for seafarer protection and freedom of navigation, and Indonesia said seafarer protection and safety of navigation must be a shared priority.
The session also dealt with leadership. Council backed a second four-year term for Dominguez, subject to approval by the IMO Assembly in 2027. The term would run from 1 January 2028 to 31 December 2031.
Nigeria Watch
Nigeria has more at stake than a distant diplomatic debate. Hormuz disruption has fed through to freight rates, war-risk insurance and port costs for Nigerian importers and shippers. Piracy off Somalia and the Gulf of Aden is a reminder that the Gulf of Guinea’s own security gains, including the Deep Blue Project, cannot be taken for granted.
The Council session also bears on Nigeria’s IMO seat. Abuja has pushed seafarer welfare and maritime security as part of its diplomacy, and the Council’s message gives that agenda more weight. The test is whether Nigeria backs its advocacy abroad with welfare protections, training and safety enforcement for its own mariners and for the informal waterway operators represented by WABOTAN and ATBOWATON.
For those operators, the lesson from London is that protection is a shared responsibility, and it has to reach the people who work on the inland water, not just those on ocean-going ships.
Nigeria Unveils Home-Built ADX-Barra 200 Autonomous Vessel at AFRIDEX 2026
Arridex, DICON joint venture Helagon delivers country’s first indigenously developed unmanned surface vessels%
By Ighoyota Onaibre | Waterways News
Nigeria has unveiled its first indigenously developed autonomous surface vessel, the ADX-Barra 200. Arridex Group, formerly RusselSmith Group, built it through Helagon, its defence joint venture with the Defence Industries Corporation of Nigeria (DICON).
The vessel was unveiled on 26 October at the inaugural Africa International Defence Exhibition (AFRIDEX 2026) at Eko Atlantic, Lagos. The exhibition ran from 26 to 29 October.
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu was represented by Senate President Godswill Akpabio. He said the administration prioritises defence industry growth because a nation is more secure when it can build and maintain its own capability. He described the vessel as that capability taking shape, designed and built by local engineers in partnership with DICON, and said it deserves government support and the confidence of the armed forces.
ADX-Barra 200
Arridex Group CEO Kayode Adeleke presented the vessel. He said Helagon was set up to design autonomous systems and that the ADX-Barra 200 is the result. For the forces that will use it, he called it a force multiplier.
The ADX-Barra 200 is one of two platforms in the ADX-Barra series launched at the exhibition. The other is the ADX-Barra 100. Arridex says both were designed, built and integrated in Nigeria by its engineers.
Adeleke tied the platforms to Gulf of Guinea security. He said the region’s waters carry its trade, support its coastal communities and hold much of its energy wealth, and that protecting them calls for capability the region can build, sustain and improve itself. He invited the armed services and other stakeholders to arrange demonstrations and to help shape later generations of the vessels.
Others at the unveiling included Lagos State Deputy Governor Dr Obafemi Hamzat and the Minister of State for Defence, Dr Bello Matawalle. DICON Director-General Major General Babatunde Ibrahim Alaya, Helagon Chief Operating Officer Engr. Precious Omo-Agege and Arridex senior management were also present.
Arridex has not published the vessel’s technical specifications, including its length, endurance, payload and sensors. Both vessels remained on display at the exhibition.
NIGERIA WATCH
A home-built answer to a long-standing maritime problem: Nigeria’s waters have long needed more patrol capacity than its platforms and budgets can supply. A locally designed vessel that “can be supported, adapted and improved by the team that made it,” as Arridex puts it, addresses one persistent weakness. Imported hulls and systems often sit idle for want of spares, support and trained hands.
The questions that matter next: Unveilings are not deployments. The Navy, NIMASA’s Deep Blue Project and other agencies will want to know the vessel’s range, endurance, sensors and sea-state limits. They will also want to know whether it can work in the Gulf of Guinea. Until Arridex publishes specifications and arranges trials, the “game-changing” claim remains the company’s own.
Beyond defence: Waterways News readers should watch whether this technology filters into civil uses such as inland waterway surveillance, anti-vandalism patrols and search and rescue. The country’s inland operators, including those represented by WABOTAN and ATBOWATON, face insecurity and safety gaps that policy announcements have not closed. Local manufacturing capacity matters to them only if it eventually reaches the waterways where they work.
The accountability test: The industrial-policy argument is sound. It is build locally and maintain locally. It will be judged by procurement, deployment and sustained operation, not by launch-day speeches.
Editor's Choice
Australia Bars Repeat-Offender Bulk Carrier for 90 Days Over Falsified Crew Rest Records
Australia Bars Repeat-Offender Bulk Carrier for 90 Days Over Falsified Crew Rest Records
By Okeoghene Onoriobe | Waterways News
Australian maritime authorities have banned the Marshall Islands-flagged bulk carrier Wooyang Venus from its ports and waters for 90 days. Inspectors found that the ship’s crew work and rest-hour records had been deliberately falsified to hide excessive working hours.
The Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) boarded the vessel at the Port of Newcastle on 29 October after a complaint under the Maritime Labour Convention (MLC). Its port state control inspection found that the records did not match the hours the crew actually worked. The ship left Newcastle on 31 October for Korea, and the ban took effect afterwards.
This is the vessel’s third brush with Australian enforcement in under three years. AMSA detained it in August 2026 when crew hours were neither properly recorded nor monitored. It was first detained in December 2023, after a complaint from the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF).
That inspection found falsified hours records, poor food provisions and an allegation that the master had assaulted a crew member. AMSA’s annual MLC report says the operator then submitted a corrective action plan covering repatriation, better provisions and training on rest-hour compliance. The latest findings suggest those measures did not take hold.
AMSA Executive Director for Maritime Safety and Environmental Compliance, Greg Witherall, said falsifying records meant to protect seafarers undermines both crew welfare and ship safety. He warned that fatigue dulls judgement and slows reaction times, raising the risk of collisions, groundings and injuries, particularly during navigation and watchkeeping.
The ban was imposed under Section 246 of Australia’s Navigation Act 2012. AMSA cited the deliberate falsification, the repeated breaches and doubts over the effectiveness of the owner’s and operator’s safety management systems.
Nigeria Watch
The case matters for Nigeria for three reasons:
Records are the enforcement tool. Fatigue rules only work if rest-hour logs can be trusted. Australia treated falsification as a safety-system failure, not a paperwork lapse, and banned the ship rather than detaining it again.
Repeat offenders need escalating penalties. Two detentions and a corrective plan did not change this operator’s behaviour. Nigerian port state control should ask whether its own follow-up on repeat deficiencies has real consequences.
Seafarer welfare is a Nigerian issue. Nigerian seafarers serve on foreign-flagged ships, and those working boats and ferries on domestic waters face fatigue and welfare gaps too, often with no records at all.
The MLC regime Australia is enforcing shows what accountability looks like. It is the benchmark NIMASA and the inland regulators should be measured against, and one this publication will keep pressing.
-
Oil and Gas8 months agoTantita’s Pipeline Deal: $144m Contract, Rising Output, and the Questions that Deserve Answers
-
MARITIME TRADE & SHIPPING8 months agoWorld’s Largest Container Ship Sets New Maritime Record with 22,233 TEUs on Single Voyage
-
Blue Economy9 months agoNigeria’s Coast Guard Bill: A Solution in Search of a Problem?