Corporate Accountability and Public Participation Africa (CAPPA) has raised serious concerns over a recently signed Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the Lagos State Government and the Belstar/ENKA consortium for the rehabilitation and expansion of the state’s water infrastructure, describing the process as opaque and lacking public accountability.
In a statement issued on Thursday, CAPPA expressed dismay at the lack of transparency surrounding the agreement, which the Lagos government claims is aimed at improving water supply in the state.
The organisation questioned the secrecy surrounding the deal, which was announced without public consultation or legislative oversight.
“As an organisation committed to promoting public participation and ensuring citizens’ rights to access safe and affordable water, CAPPA finds the current approach deeply troubling and symptomatic of a broader pattern of opacity in public water governance in Lagos State,” said Akinbode Oluwafemi, Executive Director of CAPPA.
“That this agreement was conceived and finalised behind closed doors, then simply announced to the public, is an affront to the very notion of a democratically accountable government,” he added.
Oluwafemi stressed that water provision is a fundamental public service, and any contracts affecting its delivery, affordability, and quality must meet the highest standards of transparency and accountability.
He noted that the deal, which will shape the future of water access for millions of Lagosians, was signed without the involvement of the public or scrutiny by the State House of Assembly.
The group highlighted several unanswered questions about the MoU and called on the Lagos government to clarify key aspects of the agreement.
These include the identities and track records of Belstar Capital and ENKA and the process through which they were selected; the scope of the project, including the specific waterworks and distribution networks involved and the communities that will benefit; the total financial cost of the deal, which remains undisclosed, and the precise terms under the Engineering, Procurement, Construction, and Finance (EPC+F) model cited; the role of the Lagos Water Corporation (LWC) in the agreement, and whether control of public water infrastructure will be ceded to private hands; and the repayment plan for any loans involved and whether such repayments will result in increased water tariffs or user fees for residents.
CAPPA also questioned the involvement of the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), noting that U.S. government-linked agencies have shown a pattern of supporting corporate-friendly approaches to public services globally.
The lack of clarity on ownership, repayment, and operational control raises fears of creeping privatisation. The group asked whether these entities are building and handing over to the public or if they—or other multinational interests—will own and operate the completed infrastructure for years to come.
The NGO warned that previous attempts to privatise water in Lagos have faced overwhelming public resistance due to concerns about higher tariffs, unequal access, and poor service delivery.
It argued that any attempt to hand over control of water infrastructure to private interests would be detrimental to public welfare. “We reiterate that the path to water resilience for Lagos State cannot and must not be dictated by corporate interests,” the statement said.
To address these concerns, CAPPA called on the Lagos State Government to immediately publish the full text of the MoU, including annexes, financial arrangements, and timelines.
The group urged the government to convene a stakeholder forum involving civil society, labour unions, community representatives, and the media to explain the scope and implications of the agreement.
CAPPA also urged the suspension of any moves toward water privatisation and reaffirmation of a commitment to publicly owned and democratically controlled water systems.
CAPPA concluded that the long-term solution to Lagos’s water crisis lies not in profit-driven models but in reinvesting in public infrastructure, strengthening public institutions, and embracing participatory governance.
