By Patience Chat Moses
The skies over Nigeria’s oil and gas-rich regions are thick with controversy. A controversy that has persisted since a $300 helicopter landing fee was imposed. A move by the Federal Government to generate revenue, which has ignited a fierce backlash, with industry veterans like Capt. Ado Sanusi, the astute CEO of Aero Contractors, leading the charge against what he deems an unjustified burden. The saga highlights deeper issues within Nigeria’s aviation sector, raising critical questions about transparency, service provision, and adherence to international best practices.
At the centre of the aviation dispute is a directive imposing a $300 fee for each helicopter landing at all Nigerian aerodromes, helipads, airstrips, and offshore oil facilities, including Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) units and other platforms. The Federal Government, under the former Aviation Minister, Hadi Sirika, granted exclusive rights to NAEBI Dynamic Concept Limited, a private firm, to collect this levy. While initially targeting helicopter operators, the directive’s focus shifted to oil and gas companies due to resistance across the industry.
Capt. Sanusi, the former Managing Director of the Nigerian Airspace Management Agency (NAMA), has been notably vocal in his opposition. His primary argument is aligned with international best practices: the fee has no real value. “My stand has always been clear on this,” Sanusi stated. “That $300 fee is not part of ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organisation) charges for cost recovery because you must invest, and then you can recover the cost. And the investment you are going to make must provide some value to the customer.”
He emphasised that NAEBI Dynamic Concept Limited provides no discernible service or infrastructure, whether in communication, surveillance, or navigation (CNS), to justify the fee. Sanusi, drawing on his extensive regulatory experience at NAMA, highlighted that by law, NAMA is the sole provider of CNS services in Nigeria. He questioned how a private company could provide any of these vital services without legal authority, asserting that “you cannot charge for landing on property that does not belong to you.”
Sanusi warns that such an arbitrary charge sets a dangerous precedent. “If the government allows it, charging $300 on helicopters per landing today,” he cautioned, “tomorrow, another will come and say that it is $500. And maybe next year somebody will come and say, okay, it’s $1000 per landing.”
He emphasised that helicopter operators already pay statutory navigational and landing charges to relevant agencies, such as NAMA and FAAN, when using their facilities. Imposing an additional, unsubstantiated fee on private or offshore facilities, where the operators themselves maintain the landing infrastructure, is seen by Sanusi as a redundant and unjustified imposition on private property. For an oil and gas sector already contending with high operating costs, this fee, which will inevitably be passed on to consumers, risks further increasing production costs and potentially dampening investment interest.
The Government, through the Ministry of Aviation and Aerospace Development and NAMA, maintains that the fee is intended to generate revenue for strengthening Nigeria’s aviation infrastructure, including the modernisation of radar and safety systems. They also claim that it aligns with “global best practice,” arguing that such levies are common in countries such as the United States of America (USA), the United Kingdom (UK), and India.
While it is true that other countries and airport operators worldwide do charge helicopter landing fees, Nigeria’s case stands out due to several critical discrepancies sighted by Captain Sanusi.
As the debate continues to unfold, aviation stakeholders are saying that Captain Sanusi’s opposition is a call for aviation authorities to act swiftly and restore regulatory sanity in the sector.