Can NIMASA Stop the Issuance of Cabotage Waivers ?

Kindly Share This Story:

 

The Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) has announced a five-year strategic plan for the cessation of grant of Cabotage waivers. Cabotage Waivers are a creation of Nigeria’s Coastal and Inland Shipping (Cabotage) Act which reserves commercial transport of goods and passengers within Nigerian coastal and inland waters for vessels wholly owned and manned by Nigerian citizens as well as built and registered in Nigeria. Specifically, Part III of the Act establishes a legal regime whereby waivers of any of the above stated requirements of the law may be granted to otherwise unqualified applicants. The procedure for obtaining such waivers is laid down in Guidelines for Implementation of the Cabotage Act published in 2007. Paragraph 5.3 thereof requires applicants to route their applications to the Federal Minister of Transport through NIMASA. NIMASA on its part is required to process all waiver applications and, upon satisfying itself that each aplicant has met all requirements and paid all prescribed fees, make recommendations on such applications to the Minister. Against the backdrop of these provisions, NIMASA’s announcement appears to be tacit admission that the waivers regime – intended as a stop-gap measure pending development of indigenous capacity – was in fact derailing the country’s lofty cabotage goals. Nonetheless, cessation in grant of cabotage waivers portends a significant shift in policy because the majority of cabotage operations in Nigeria are undertaken on the basis of one form waiver or the other.


From a purely legal stand point however, NIMASA’s plan appears to have very little bite. The Agency simply has not shown from whence it derived the power implicated by its ambitious plan. Sections 9 – 11 of the Cabotage Act clearly vests the power of granting cabotage waivers (and consequently suspension of issuance of same) on the Federal Minister of Transport. Section 9 for example provides thus;

The Minister may on the receipt of an application grant a waiver to a duly registered vessel on the requirement for a vessel under this Act to be wholly owned by Nigerian citizens where he is satisfied that there is no wholly Nigerian owned vessel that is suitable and available to provide the services or perform the activity described in the application.

Again, Section 14 (1) of the Act provides to the effect that the Minister shall immediately after the commencement of the Act, establish and publish the criteria and guidelines for the issuance of waivers under the Act. The relevant guidelines, as mentioned earlier, were issued by the Federal Ministry of Transport in 2007. The guidelines simply required NIMASA to receive applications for waivers, to process same and then to forward them to the Minister of Transport (with it’s recommendations) for ultimate grant or denial. By no stretch of interpretation can one infer from these provisions that the power to grant waivers under the Cabotage Act has been delegated to NIMASA. Even if that was the case, Nigeria’s Supreme Court has also affirmed the position that delegation of power does not imply a denudation or erosion of the power. Thus, unless such delegation is controlled by statute, the delegating power can at any time resume its authority1. This point illustrates the precariousness of the planned cessation in grant of cabotage waivers by NIMASA. At best, the plan exists and may only succeed at the pleasure of the sitting Minister of transport; a situation which would have been drastically different had the plan been put forward via an amendment of the Cabotage Act or even the published guidelines2.

In the bulletin containing an outline of the strategic plan for cessation of grant of Cabotage waivers, NIMASA clearly stated the objective of the plan to be the development of indigenous cabotage capacity. With this in mind, one is forced to posit that being so susceptible to overturn by the Minister of transport and especially being open to legal challenge from potential applicants for cabotage waivers, the plan in its present state may not be very effective whenever it takes off. Perhaps the pertinent point that illustrates why is that NIMASA cannot validly refuse to process applications for grant of Cabotage Waivers (as required by Paragraph 5.3(4) of the Guidelines for Implementation of the Cabotage Act) solely on the basis of its stated policy on cessation of cabotage waivers. Conversely, applicants for Cabotage waivers will be able to compel the the agency (by amandamus order for instance) to process their applications in spite of the policy on cessation of cabotage wavers.


The good intention behind NIMASA’s plan to stop the grant of cabotage waivers is unquestionable. The subtle conflict between the plan and the extant law is however real; and it is easy to see why this is so. The Cabotage Act intended the cessation of grant of cabotage waivers to be the result of development of indigenous capacity while NIMASA is attempting to use it as a means to that end. One however opines that in addition to fostering an environment conducive for Nigerian cabotage entrepreneurs, the methodical documentation and continuous publication of existing indigenous cabotage capacity by NIMASA is required for the attainment of the goals of Nigeria’s Cabotage policy in general and the waiver’s regime in particular. Such a publication will not only provide the information needed for grant or suspension of cabotage waivers but will also be an invaluable advocacy tool for prevention of abuse of the waivers regime.


Kindly Share This Story:

Related Post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

amehnews greetings

x
%d bloggers like this: