To ensure that the management of Nigeria’s major airports are not left in the hands of foreign concerns, some aviation industry stakeholders have called on the federal to concession the designated facilities to competent indigenous companies.
The federal government had announced that it was set to concession the Murtala Muhammed Airport, Lagos, Nnamdi Azikiwe Airport, Abuja, Aminu Kano International Airport, Kano, and the Port Harcourt International Airport in Rivers State.
Stating that such critical assets should be handled by nationals who have the interest of the country at heart, a retired engineer with the defunct Nigeria Airways, Mustapha Bello, said security and national interest should be of utmost priority.
He called on the authorities to be reminded of the experience of Uganda during the reign of the late Gen. Idi Amin when the Entebbe raid was successfully carried out because the Israelis had the architectural plan of the Uganda Entebbe International Airport in their possession.
“Since there are some Nigerian companies who have successfully operated airports terminals, like Bi-Courtney Aviation Services, who are currently running Murtala Muhammed Airport Terminal 2, MMA2, Lagos, they should be considered first.
“There is another successful Nigerian whose company is operating at the Gatwick Airport in United Kingdom, UK. Such companies owned by Nigerians should be considered first,” Bello stated.
A head of an aviation company, who preferred to remain anonymous, in his reaction, stressed that the indigenisation of national assets remains very important in order to create jobs for the teeming population and prevent capital flight.
He added that it was necessary to be concession the airports to local firms with track records, merit and competence, rather than foreign companies that the federal government cannot vouch for.
He added: “Some of the foreign companies being touted don’t even have the required records.
“Bi-Courtney Aviation Services, for example, has proved to be the best private terminal manager in the last 14 years and so should be supported by government because of its antecedent in terminal management. Luckily, I was informed that they also bid for the terminals to be for concession”.
He posited that all the issues between the government and the company concerning MMA2 had been resolved in favour of BASL, saying that as it stands, the government has nothing against the firm.
According to him, the late President Musa Yar ‘Adua set up a reconciliation committee that resolved most of the disputed sections of the concession agreement.
He noted: “On MMA2 terminal, as a stakeholder in the aviation sector, I learnt that from the outset, both parties, BASL and the federal government set up a coordinating committee comprising BASL, FAAN and an independent body to address any challenge that may arise from the agreement on MMA2.
“On each occasion that the committee was called to address some of the challenges emanating from the concession and judgments have been in favour of BASL”.
Recently, the Minister of Aviation, Hadi Sirika, announced that at the end of the submission of interest to bid for the four international airports in Lagos, Abuja, Port Harcourt and Kano, some foreign companies also submitted bid.
But renowned lawyer, Femi Falana had also written the federal government alleging that three of the foreign bidders for the four airports for concession violated the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (Est.) Act 2005 and the National Policy on Public-Private Partnership.
Falana’s Chambers therefore called for the disqualification of the three firms from the bidding process to avoid litigation which might derail the exercise.
He urged the federal government to disqualify the foreign firms, namely TAV Consortium, GMR Consortium, and ADP, alleging that two consortia owned by ADP submitted an expression of interest.
Part of the letter read: “The first consortium was led by TAV Airport Holding (where ADP owns 49 per cent) and the second submission was done by GMR Airports Limited (where ADP owns 46 per cent).
“It is pertinent to note that it is expressly stated in Section 2.2 of the Requests for Qualification that no applicant single or a consortium can be part of more than one bid. Section 2.2.3 is further clarifying that the eligibility shall apply to an applicant and/or to the parties consisting of the applicant i.e. shareholders.
“Contrary to the misleading impression that both TAV and GMR are separate entities, a search on the internet has revealed that ADP owns 46 per cent of GMR and 49 per cent of TAV.
“Having contravened the RFQ without any legal basis whatsoever, the TAV-led consortium and the GMR submission as well as ADP as a stand alone party should be disqualified from participation in the tender.
“It is hoped that you will accede to our request to avoid any litigation over the proposed concession of the four airports terminals,” he stated.
THISDAY
