Editor's Choice
IMO Sets Global Rules for Autonomous Ships — What It Means for Nigeria’s Waterways
IMO Sets Global Rules for Autonomous Ships — What It Means for Nigeria’s Waterways
By Ighoyota Onaibre | Waterways News Reporter
The global shipping community reached a significant milestone last week as the International Maritime Organization (IMO) formally adopted the world’s first international regulatory framework for autonomous commercial vessels — a development that carries direct implications for Nigeria’s growing interest in technology-driven waterway transportation.
The new instrument, known as the International Code of Safety for Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS Code), was approved during the 111th session of the IMO’s Maritime Safety Committee, held in London from May 13 to 22. The committee adopted a global code for autonomous ships and advanced guidelines for ships operating on alternative fuels.. This represents the clearest signal yet that self-navigating and remotely operated vessels are no longer a distant concept but an emerging reality that global regulators must now govern.
For Nigeria — a country with approximately 10,000 kilometres of navigable inland waterways and a Federal Government increasingly focused on the Blue Economy — the development is one to watch closely.
A Framework for the Future
The MASS Code defines four distinct levels of vessel automation, beginning with ships fitted with computerised decision-support tools and extending all the way to fully autonomous vessels capable of making operational choices without any direct human control. Each level carries its own set of safety, accountability and communications obligations.
The code addresses a wide range of technical concerns, including cybersecurity vulnerabilities, remote communications infrastructure, navigation systems, fire safety, cargo handling, machinery management, watchkeeping standards and search-and-rescue responsibilities during autonomous operations.
Among the more complex questions the IMO grappled with in developing the framework were who legally qualifies as the “master” of a vessel during autonomous operations, the duties of remote operators stationed onshore, and how liability would be apportioned in the event of incidents involving machine-driven decision-making — issues that no existing international maritime law had adequately resolved.
Nigeria and the Technology Conversation
As Nigerian authorities continue to modernise the country’s waterway sector, the emergence of an internationally recognised autonomous vessel framework creates both opportunities and responsibilities. Nigeria has previously received unmanned vessel technology through international partnerships, and there is growing discussion about digitalisation across the country’s ports and ferry services. The MASS Code now provides a formal global reference point against which any domestic deployment of autonomous or remotely operated vessels would need to be assessed.
Phased Implementation
The code will not immediately become binding. The IMO has structured a phased approach, beginning with a voluntary experience-building phase later in 2026 to collect operational data from real-world deployments around the world. Work on a mandatory version of the code is expected to commence in 2028, with adoption targeted for 2030 and the regulations set to enter into force in January 2032.
This timeline offers Nigerian regulators and stakeholders a window to study the framework, participate in international consultations, and begin aligning domestic policy where necessary — particularly given Nigeria’s ambition to develop its inland waterway corridors as commercial and passenger transport routes.
Broader Safety Agenda
Beyond autonomous shipping, the Maritime Safety Committee’s 111th session also addressed growing security concerns in the Strait of Hormuz, greenhouse gas safety standards linked to alternative marine fuels, and updated technical regulations for vessels powered by hydrogen and ammonia. The meeting signals that the IMO’s regulatory agenda is accelerating across multiple fronts, and Nigeria’s maritime and waterways agencies will need to stay engaged at the international level to ensure the country’s interests are reflected as these frameworks continue to evolve.
🇳🇬 NIGERIA WATCH Tracking the story across Ministries, Departments and Agencies
Federal Ministry of Marine and Blue Economy As the supervising ministry for Nigeria’s entire maritime and waterways sector, the FMMBE carries the primary responsibility for interpreting the MASS Code and determining how it aligns with Nigeria’s Blue Economy roadmap. The ministry will need to initiate a policy review that positions Nigeria to participate actively in the IMO’s experience-building phase beginning later in 2026, and to begin preparing a domestic regulatory position ahead of the mandatory code expected by 2030. Nigeria’s ongoing campaign for a seat on the IMO Council makes early and visible engagement with this framework a matter of both policy and diplomatic credibility.
Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) As Nigeria’s flag state administration and the body directly interfacing with the IMO, NIMASA is the agency most immediately affected by the MASS Code. The agency will be expected to review Nigeria’s Ship Safety framework to determine how existing regulations governing vessel certification, inspection and crew standards apply — or fail to apply — to autonomous and remotely operated vessels. NIMASA will also need to develop a clear stance on the liability and manning questions the MASS Code raises, particularly around the definition of “master” in autonomous operations and the regulatory status of remote operators.
National Inland Waterways Authority (NIWA) NIWA governs Nigeria’s vast inland waterway network — the very environment where autonomous and remotely operated vessels are most likely to be used domestically, given the shorter route distances involved. The authority must begin assessing its existing licensing and inspection frameworks to determine whether they are adequate for vessels operating with reduced or no crew. NIWA’s ongoing digitalisation efforts and its Nigeria Water Transportation Code provide a useful foundation, but autonomous vessel operations will require new thinking around remote monitoring, jetty infrastructure compatibility and waterway traffic management.
Lagos State Waterways Authority (LASWA) As the busiest waterway state agency in Nigeria, managing one of Africa’s most active urban ferry networks, LASWA has a direct interest in how autonomous vessel technology could eventually be applied to Lagos’s water transportation system. The authority should be tracking the MASS Code closely, given ongoing conversations around modernising the Lagos ferry fleet and reducing accident rates. Any future introduction of remotely operated ferries on Lagos waterways would fall within the regulatory scope that the MASS Code is now beginning to define globally.
Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) Port operations are explicitly addressed within the MASS Code, raising questions about how autonomous vessels arriving at or departing from Nigerian ports would be handled in terms of berthing, pilotage, and port state control inspections. The NPA will need to consider whether its port infrastructure, communications systems and operational protocols are compatible with vessels that may have no crew aboard or may be operated remotely from a distant control centre.
Nigeria Customs Service (NCS) The arrival of autonomous cargo vessels at Nigerian ports raises important questions for customs operations — specifically around vessel boarding, documentation verification, and the chain of responsibility for goods carried on crewless ships. The NCS will need to engage with NIMASA and the NPA to develop a joint position on how existing customs boarding and inspection procedures would be adapted for autonomous vessel operations.
Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA) / Nigerian Navy The MASS Code’s attention to cybersecurity is particularly significant from a national security perspective. Autonomous vessels operating in Nigerian waters — whether coastal or inland — represent a potential vulnerability if their remote control systems are compromised. The Nigerian Navy and ONSA should be part of any inter-agency working group established to develop Nigeria’s domestic response to the MASS Code, with specific attention to the cybersecurity and sovereignty dimensions of remotely operated vessels in Nigeria’s territorial waters and exclusive economic zone.
Federal Ministry of Communications, Innovation and Digital Economy Autonomous vessels are entirely dependent on robust, low-latency communications infrastructure for remote operation and real-time monitoring. The ministry’s work on expanding broadband connectivity — including to coastal and riverine communities — is therefore directly relevant to whether autonomous vessel technology can practically function in Nigerian waters. A policy conversation between this ministry and the FMMBE has yet to happen publicly; the MASS Code makes it necessary.
National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA) As the agency responsible for regulating and developing Nigeria’s digital ecosystem, NITDA has a role to play in establishing cybersecurity standards for maritime technology systems. The MASS Code’s strong emphasis on cybersecurity for autonomous vessels means that NITDA’s frameworks will need to be extended explicitly to cover maritime digital infrastructure, particularly remote vessel control systems.
Waterways News | waterwaysnews.ng
Blue Economy
Water Transport Operators Push For Recognition At The Table As FTAN Demands Tourism Policy Reforms
Water Transport Operators Push For Recognition At The Table As FTAN Demands Tourism Policy Reforms
By Okeoghene Onoriobe | Waterways News
Nigeria’s tourism sector needs urgent policy reform, stronger collaboration and fresh investment to compete globally and water transport operators who are members of the Federation of Tourism Associations of Nigeria (FTAN) want that conversation to include the boats, ferries and waterway routes that move millions of Nigerians and could move even more tourists.
That was the underlying idea raised by Comrade Babatope Fajemirokun National President of Waterfront Boat Owners and Transporters Association of Nigeria (WABOTAN) represented by Chief Raymond Gold, National PRO of WABOTAN, at the ninth Nigeria Tourism Investors Forum and Exhibition (NTIFE), held over two days in Abuja under the theme “Tourism Transformation Through Collaboration, Policy Alignment and Investment.” The events took place between Thursday 30 to Friday 31 of July 2026. Waterfront Boat Owners and Transporters Association of Nigeria (WABOTAN), is a corporate member of FTAN
The forum drew policymakers, investors, tourism operators and development partners.
FTAN President Dr Aliyu Badaki used his welcome remarks to press the Federal Government to overhaul tourism-related laws and regulatory frameworks that he said breed duplication, institutional conflict and legal uncertainty for operators. He said the federation’s newly developed Tourism Transformation Mandate (TTM) is meant to unify every segment of the tourism value chain.
Babatope Fajemirokun, through Chief Gold emphasizes the fact that this value chain for Nigeria’s coastal cities, riverine communities and inland waterway corridors, runs directly through water transport.
Badaki argued that fragmented efforts and weak coordination have held back the sector for years, and called for regulation that enables rather than inhibits growth.
Minister of Art, Culture, Tourism and Creative Economy, Hannatu Musawa, who declared the forum open, described tourism as a strategic pillar for economic diversification. She said government cannot finance tourism transformation alone and that private capital must lead, with government’s role limited to creating an enabling environment for investors.
In his keynote address, Sen. Ibrahim Ida called for stronger collaboration among government, the private sector and host communities, saying tourism can generate jobs, foreign exchange and diversification if properly harnessed.
Panel sessions, moderated by Justina Ovat of Calabar Hospitality House Limited, featured Nigeria Tourism Development Authority (NTDA) Director-General Dr Ola Awakan, who called for policy consistency and investor-friendly incentives, and Dr Philip Maga of the National Institute for Hospitality and Tourism (NIHOTOUR), who flagged the need for stronger workforce training to close skills gaps across the hospitality industry.
Hospitality entrepreneur Lanre Balogun urged investors to prioritise disciplined, long-term planning.
Nigeria Watch
For Nigeria’s water transport sector, NTIFE’s reform push is not a side conversation. Rather, it is a direct stakeholder issue. FTAN’s corporate membership includes Waterfront Boat Owners and Transporters Association of Nigeria (WABOTAN) and the Association of Tourist Boat Operators and Water Transporters of Nigeria (ATBOWATON), both drawn from the ranks of operators who run the boats, ferries and water taxis that already serve Lagos’s creeks, the Niger Delta’s riverine towns and coastal leisure routes. Their presence inside FTAN means the federation’s demand for regulatory clarity and coordinated policy carries an inland-waterways and blue-economy dimension that goes beyond hotels and heritage sites.
That matters because water tourism sits at an awkward regulatory junction in Nigeria. A tourist boat operator answers not only to tourism authorities but potentially to NIWA, LASWA (in Lagos) and NIMASA on safety standards, and state government tourism boards, precisely the kind of overlapping jurisdiction Badaki described as breeding “duplication, institutional conflicts… and operational uncertainty.”
The 2026 Supreme Court ruling affirming NIWA’s regulatory authority over inland waterways nationwide, following the NIWA-LASWA jurisdictional dispute, is a live example of the kind of institutional friction FTAN’s Tourism Transformation Mandate is meant to resolve, at least on the tourism side.
Musawa’s call for private capital to lead tourism investment also lands squarely on water transport operators’ desks. Vessel acquisition, safety retrofitting, jetty infrastructure and life-jacket compliance all require capital that small-scale operators, including WABOTAN’s member-cooperative structure, have struggled to access, a gap that echoes the long-running CVFF disbursement failure in the cabotage shipping sector and underscores why financing bottlenecks are not unique to cargo and passenger shipping alone.
If FTAN’s push for policy alignment succeeds in drawing water transport formally into Nigeria’s tourism investment architecture, operators like WABOTAN and ATBOWATON could gain a stronger claim to inclusion in infrastructure programmes such as the Omi-Eko electric ferry project and LASWA’s ferry safety development initiatives, turning routine commuter water transport into a recognised leisure and tourism asset, not just a transportation afterthought.
For a sector accustomed to being regulated but rarely consulted, this call by Babatope Fajemirokun is a modest but meaningful call.
Editor's Choice
RUSSIA’S ARCTIC OIL GAMBLE: WHAT AN ICEBREAKER FLEET TEACHES A REGION THAT STILL FIGHTS PIRATES WITH GUNBOATS
RUSSIA’S ARCTIC OIL GAMBLE: WHAT AN ICEBREAKER FLEET TEACHES A REGION THAT STILL FIGHTS PIRATES WITH GUNBOATS
By Oghenewoke Osaweren | Waterways News
Russia has just done something no country bordering the Gulf of Guinea could attempt: it built an entire alternative shipping corridor, armed it with nuclear icebreakers, and is now using it to route around the world’s most contested waters. For West African maritime observers, the story is not really about oil. It is about what state capacity buys a country when global shipping lanes turn hostile and what its absence costs one.
A CONVOY BUILT TO DODGE THE WORLD’S HOTSPOTS
More than a dozen Suezmax, Aframax and Medium Range tankers are currently transiting or staged along Russia’s Northern Sea Route, carrying crude that analysts estimate at roughly 8 million barrels, already more than half the total volume Russia moved during the entirety of last year’s four-month Arctic navigation season. The largest cluster has formed in the Kara Sea, where the Suezmax Dinasty and five Aframax tankers are holding position, likely awaiting nuclear icebreaker escort or better ice conditions before pushing east toward Asian buyers.
Independent tracking data corroborates the scale of the buildup. Vessel-tracking figures show at least seven tankers involved in Russia’s eastbound Arctic crude campaign, with five Aframax tankers and another vessel holding position while one tanker had already begun its eastbound transit, together capable of carrying roughly 5 million barrels of crude. Russia shipped 4.16 million barrels a day of crude in the four weeks to July 26, with tankers beginning to use the Northern Sea Route to China as Arctic ice retreats, part of a broader pattern of Russian crude sidestepping Red Sea risk.
THREE NUCLEAR ICEBREAKERS, ONE STRATEGIC CALCULATION
Moscow has deployed three nuclear-powered icebreakers, Sibir, Yakutiya and Ural, along the route this season, with Ural stationed near Wrangel Island, a choke point that has slowed convoys for two consecutive summers. The route shaves thousands of nautical miles off the journey between northwest Russia and Asia compared with the Suez Canal, but it is navigable to conventional tankers only for a few summer months, and even then only with heavy icebreaker support.
Russia is leaning on that seasonal window precisely because its conventional options have narrowed. The push helps Moscow sustain historically high export rates while avoiding the pitfalls of sailing through Houthi-threatened Red Sea waters, on top of continuing tension around the Strait of Hormuz and Ukraine’s demonstrated reach against Russian energy infrastructure and tankers.
It is worth noting, however, that the Arctic route has not been Russia’s unqualified success story. An analysis published earlier this year found that cargo volumes on the Northern Sea Route actually fell for the first time since 2022, dropping to 37 million tons in 2025 against an official target of 80 million tons, a reminder that ambition and icebreakers alone do not guarantee results, even for a state willing to spend billions building Arctic infrastructure.
THE GULF OF GUINEA COMPARISON NO ONE IS MAKING
Here is the part of the story West African readers should sit with. Russia’s answer to shipping-lane insecurity was to engineer an entirely new corridor, pouring state capital into a fleet of nuclear icebreakers so that geography itself becomes a strategic asset. Nigeria and its Gulf of Guinea neighbours face a comparable insecurity problem, but with none of that infrastructure to fall back on.
Piracy in the Gulf of Guinea has fallen from its mid-2010s peak, credited in part to Nigeria’s Deep Blue Project, NIMASA’s expanded intelligence and patrol capacity, and coordination among regional navies. Yet the region accounted for 92 percent of all crew kidnappings recorded globally in 2025, with 23 seafarers taken hostage, up from 12 the year before, and analysts still point to limited naval patrols and porous coastal borders as unresolved weaknesses.
Nigeria has responded this year by deepening security partnerships, including a new naval cooperation arrangement with the United Arab Emirates covering intelligence sharing, technology transfer and indigenous shipbuilding, while regional navies have moved to activate a Combined Maritime Task Force for the Gulf of Guinea.
Those are real steps. But they remain fundamentally reactive, protecting an existing corridor rather than building an alternative one. Russia’s Arctic convoy shows what the other end of that spectrum looks like, a state treating maritime routing itself as a lever of economic survival, at a cost of tens of billions of dollars and a fleet of icebreakers most nations could never justify.
THE TAKEAWAY FOR NIGERIAN MARITIME POLICY
The lesson is not that Nigeria should chase Arctic-scale infrastructure as geography and economics make that irrelevant here. The lesson is narrower and more urgent. Global shipping is entering an era where major exporters are actively re-routing around instability rather than simply insuring against it. If the Gulf of Guinea’s own security gaps persist while global shippers have more alternative corridors than ever to choose from, the region risks losing traffic not because vessels were attacked, but because they were rerouted before they ever arrived.
For a corridor that already competes with Russian, Gulf and North African crude for the same Asian buyers, that is not an abstract risk. It is a market-share question with a naval-capacity answer.
Blue Economy
NIMASA Deepens Seafarer Welfare Push, Signs Off Renewed Mission to Seafarers Collaboration
NIMASA Deepens Seafarer Welfare Push, Signs Off Renewed Mission to Seafarers Collaboration
By Ighoyota Onaibre | Waterways News
The Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) has restated its commitment to improving the welfare of Nigerian seafarers, pledging deeper collaboration with the Mission to Seafarers (MtS) as part of ongoing reforms in the sector.
The commitment came as the Director-General, Dr Dayo Mobereola, received a delegation from the Mission to Seafarers at the agency’s Lagos headquarters, led by the Chairman of MtS Lagos, Chief Adebayo Sarumi, alongside the Regional Director for Africa, Reverend Cedric Rautenbach.
Speaking on behalf of the DG, NIMASA’s Executive Director for Operations, Engr. Fatai Taiye Adeyemi, said the agency would continue tightening certification processes, expanding capacity development programmes, and strengthening welfare policies for seafarers both at sea and in port, in partnership with stakeholders such as the Mission to Seafarers.
Chief Sarumi commended NIMASA’s ongoing reforms and expressed confidence that closer collaboration would translate into tangible welfare gains for Nigerian maritime professionals. Reverend Rautenbach, for his part, clarified that while the Mission to Seafarers and Nigeria’s Port Welfare Committees pursue a shared objective which is the the wellbeing of seafarers. The two bodies operate on distinct, complementary mandates, making coordination between them essential to strengthening on-ground support at Nigerian ports.
The meeting covered decent working conditions, welfare service gaps, and areas of mutual collaboration. NIMASA said the engagement aligns with its obligations under the Maritime Labour Convention (MLC) 2006, and forms part of a broader push toward stronger regulatory oversight and stakeholder engagement on seafarer rights.
Nigeria Watch
Beyond the courtesy-visit optics, this meeting lands on a fault line that has dogged Nigerian seafarer welfare for years: fragmented institutional responsibility. NIMASA regulates and certifies; Port Welfare Committees are meant to deliver frontline services at berths; the Mission to Seafarers, a faith-based international NGO, fills gaps neither statutory body always reaches. These gaps are chaplaincy, shore leave support, emergency assistance, and advocacy for stranded or abandoned crew.
Rautenbach’s point about “distinct but complementary mandates” is worth pressing on, because in practice that distinction has often meant duplication in some areas and total absence in others.
Nigerian seafarers have long reported patchy access to welfare facilities at ports like Apapa, Tin Can Island, and Onne. Such reports include inconsistent internet access, poor rest facilities, and slow response to cases of wage default or abandonment by errant shipowners, issues MWUN has repeatedly raised in past CBA compliance disputes.
NIMASA’s MLC 2006 framing is the right one, but enforcement, not policy language, remains the industry’s persistent complaint. If this renewed MtS partnership is to mean more than another photo-op at headquarters, it should translate into a documented, port-by-port welfare service map: which ports have functioning seafarer centres, which Port Welfare Committees are actually active, and where the Mission to Seafarers’ Flying Angel network is present versus where seafarers are effectively on their own.
Nigerian crews calling at their own national ports deserve better than welfare support that depends on which NGO happens to be in town.
Oil and Gas5 months agoTantita’s Pipeline Deal: $144m Contract, Rising Output, and the Questions that Deserve Answers
- MARITIME TRADE & SHIPPING5 months ago
World’s Largest Container Ship Sets New Maritime Record with 22,233 TEUs on Single Voyage
- Blue Economy6 months ago
Nigeria’s Coast Guard Bill: A Solution in Search of a Problem?
