The Dangote Petroleum Refinery, Africa’s largest single-train oil refining complex, has come under scrutiny for sidelining Nigerian-owned vessels in favour of foreign-operated fleets—particularly Angolan ships—for the transportation of crude oil and refined products.
This development has ignited a wave of criticism from stakeholders in the Nigerian maritime and oil logistics sector, who argue that the move undermines national interests and hampers the growth of the indigenous shipping industry.
According to the President of the African Shipowners Association (ASA), Mr. Ladi Olubowale, the decision to engage Angola’s fleet stems from the simple fact that Nigerian shipowners lack the deep-sea vessel capacity required for large-scale operations like those carried out by the Dangote Refinery.
“Dangote chartered most of the Angolan fleet because they have vessels like Supermax, Suezmax, and Aframax tankers available. We don’t. And this isn’t just about Dangote—this is a national failure to develop local capacity,” Olubowale stated in an interview with our correspondent.
He noted that the Nigerian maritime industry has continuously lost billions of naira in potential earnings due to its inability to field competitive vessels. “We’re not just losing money; we’re losing relevance. And more importantly, we’re not building capacity for the future,” he added.
The fallout over Dangote’s shipping decisions comes amid broader complaints about regulatory and logistics bottlenecks that continue to hamper operations at the $20bn Lekki-based refinery. Aliko Dangote himself recently voiced concerns about excessive port charges, which make lifting petroleum products domestically more expensive than importing from offshore depots like the Lomé Floating Storage Terminal in Togo.
The refinery, touted as a game-changer for Nigeria’s energy independence, is ironically being cited as a missed opportunity for strengthening the country’s shipping and logistics ecosystem.
For Mr. Edward Sowho, a member of the Nigerian Indigenous Shipowners Association (NISA), Dangote’s decision, though disappointing, is reversible if the will exists.
“Those vessels in Angola aren’t necessarily owned by Angolans. Global shipping works on partnerships. If Dangote wanted to work with Nigerian shipping firms, arrangements could be made—joint ventures, leasing agreements, shared ownership structures—there are models available,” Sowho said.
He urged the Dangote Group to partner with local shipping operators through frameworks that encourage indigenous participation, such as Nigeria’s Cabotage Vessel Financing Fund (CVFF). The CVFF, if properly utilized, could enable local operators to acquire larger vessels and close the gap in logistics capacity.
When contacted for comments, Dangote Group spokesperson Mr. Anthony Chiejine reaffirmed that the company prioritizes capacity above all else.
“Dangote works with shipowners who meet our capacity and logistical requirements. If Nigerian operators feel left out, the real question is why they haven’t been able to attract the kind of investment needed to compete,” Chiejine said.
He further implied that the onus lies not on Dangote to “babysit” local industry players but on the Nigerian maritime sector to innovate, evolve, and position itself competitively.
Industry experts agree that unless there’s deliberate investment in deep-sea maritime assets, Nigeria will continue to miss out on opportunities in oil logistics, offshore construction, and regional trade. This incident with Dangote should serve as a wake-up call for both public and private stakeholders.
The Dangote Refinery controversy underscores a critical paradox: while Nigeria is investing billions to secure energy independence, its supporting sectors—like maritime logistics—remain ill-equipped to handle the scale and sophistication of modern operations. For true economic transformation, capacity development must be holistic. Indigenous shipowners must be empowered, not just through policy but through proactive partnerships and targeted investments.