Airport freight forwarders on Tuesday raised the alarm over what they described as an arbitrary and unilateral increase in charges by the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) without stakeholders’ consultation.

They warned that the decision, if not reviewed through dialogue, could disrupt cargo operations across airports nationwide and further depress government revenue.

The position of the freight forwarders was made known at a joint press conference in Lagos by leaders of major associations operating at the nation’s airports, including the National Association of Government Approved Freight Forwarders (NAGAFF) and the Association of Nigerian Licensed Customs Agents (ANLCA), African Professionals Freight Forwarders and Logistics of Nigeria (APFFLON), and National Association of Freight Forwarders and Consolidators (NAFFAC).

The joint address by the Deputy National President of NAGAFF in charge of Air and Logistics, Dr Segun Musa, and Chairman of ANLCA Airport Chapter, Tope Akindele

Speaking on behalf of the groups, Dr Musa traced the controversy to an agreement reached with FAAN in 2010 over the collection of a seven-naira-per-kilogram levy on cargo, which, according to him, was tied to the allocation of land for the development of a cargo village at the airport.

He explained that prior to that agreement, FAAN had been collecting two naira per kilogram, a charge the freight forwarders had challenged on the grounds that FAAN, having concessioned cargo operations to companies such as NAHCO and SAHCOL, was not directly providing cargo handling services.

He stressed the associations had formally written to FAAN at the time, arguing that the two-naira charge was illegal, a move that led to prolonged negotiations that reportedly lasted for about two weeks and disrupted activities at the airport.

According to him, the eventual compromise was the introduction of the seven-naira charge in exchange for the allocation of land to build a cargo village, a deal he said formed the basis of the current arrangement.

He said, “The seven naira we are talking about is attached to this land. It is like rent on this land,” Musa said, insisting that FAAN had no right to impose fresh charges without first engaging stakeholders.

He argued that, just as the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) relates with terminal operators after concessioning the seaports, FAAN should deal with its concessionaires rather than directly imposing charges on operators.

The freight forwarders also raised financial concerns, claiming that FAAN had already made substantial sums from the seven-naira levy over the years. Musa said that in 2010 alone, FAAN collected over one billion naira from the charge and that from 2010 to date, the cumulative amount would be far higher than the value of the land allocated for the cargo village.

The immediate trigger for the latest dispute, according to the associations, is FAAN’s decision to increase the existing charges without consultation, a move they said was followed by a threat letter warning of possible demolition of their secretariats.

The groups described this as coercive and counterproductive, stressing that they were not opposed to a review of charges but insisted it must be done through dialogue.

They argued that rather than imposing higher fees, FAAN should work with operators to create an enabling environment that would increase cargo throughput, which in turn would raise revenue.

“The more cargo we have, the more revenue they generate,” Musa said, adding that the present approach would only hurt all parties involved.

Akindele said that the ongoing standoff had already begun to affect revenue generation. He noted that cargo activities had slowed in recent days because many operators were staying away from work in protest.

According to him, if a concessionaire that used to make about one billion naira weekly is now making roughly half of that, continued disruption could lead to even worse outcomes for government revenue.

He stressed that the associations were not trying to sabotage government earnings, noting that any revenue yet to be paid due to the slowdown would still be collected once normal operations resume.

He added, “We want government daily revenue to continue. We are not frustrating government revenue. We are ready to continue paying, but let us dialogue within the shortest time so our job can commence.”

Akindele also argued that globally, increments in charges are usually benchmarked around 25 per cent, adding that this was the standard the associations were willing to consider. Beyond that, he said, stakeholders should jointly explore ways to increase cargo volume rather than rely solely on higher levies.

Other speakers at the briefing raised concerns about what they described as multiple layers of charges on the same cargo. They pointed out that cargo handlers and airlines already collect various fees per kilogramme, which are ultimately linked to FAAN, and argued that imposing additional charges on freight forwarders amounts to double or even triple taxation within the same cargo chain.

Also, Musa claimed that, aside from payments to cargo handlers and airlines, some charges could reach as high as 30 naira per kilogramme in certain instances, warning that piling more levies on operators would further increase the cost of doing business and weaken the competitiveness of Nigeria’s air cargo sector.

He recalled that the original dispute over the legality of the levy had not been fully resolved in court, but was set aside in favour of a mutual understanding aimed at keeping the industry running.

He warned that if FAAN proceeds unilaterally or attempts to formalise the new charges without broad stakeholder agreement, the matter could return to the courts.

In a joint appeal, the freight forwarders called on the Minister of Aviation to intervene and prevail on FAAN to open talks with stakeholders.

They stressed that they were not protesting, not carrying placards, and not seeking confrontation, but were instead asking for engagement that would lead to a mutually beneficial resolution.

They warned that if cargo operations at airports across the country were to grind to a halt, the wider economy would suffer, describing such a scenario as a “lose-lose” situation for operators and government alike.

Despite the tension, they said they had advised members nationwide to continue working and avoid actions that could escalate the situation.

The associations assured the Federal Government that once negotiations begin, normal operations would resume immediately, with the existing status quo maintained pending the outcome of discussions.

They also reiterated their willingness to work with FAAN and other government agencies to grow cargo volumes and, by extension, government revenue.

Musa added, “We are here to appeal. We are not here to threaten or to protest or to cause a breakdown of law and order. Most operators depend on daily airport activities to feed their families and sustain their businesses.”