In a fresh development that has sparked controversy among retailers of petroleum products in Nigeria, the Federal Government’s decision to selectively reopen filling stations in border communities has drawn sharp criticism. Marketers argue that the move will lead to monopolistic practices and fuel profiteering, leaving border residents vulnerable to exploitation.
In 2019, under the administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari, the Federal Government imposed a ban on the supply of fuel to filling stations within 20 kilometers of Nigeria’s borders. The ban was aimed at curbing smuggling activities, especially the illegal movement of subsidized fuel across Nigeria’s porous borders. However, this decision rendered over 400 independent filling stations in border towns and communities obsolete, resulting in significant financial losses for the owners, despite substantial investments in infrastructure.
The government’s recent move to lift the restrictions in select areas has sparked mixed reactions. A few filling stations located in specific local government areas, including Imeko, Ilara, Oja Odan, and Ihunbe, have been granted waivers to resume fuel sales.
Gboyega Isiaka, a federal lawmaker representing Yewa North and Imeko/Afon Constituency in Ogun State, expressed his approval of the policy change. He lauded President Bola Tinubu for lifting the ban on fuel sales within 20 kilometers of the border with the Republic of Benin. According to Isiaka, this decision will bring much-needed relief to residents of border towns who had been economically marginalized by the fuel restrictions.
Despite this positive development, Isiaka acknowledged that the lifting of the ban would only apply to a limited number of stations—five filling stations in four border towns. He urged fuel station operators and residents to act within the confines of the law and urged the government to consider a more comprehensive reopening of border stations.
The Independent Petroleum Marketers Association of Nigeria (IPMAN) has expressed strong objections to the selective reopening. IPMAN’s spokesperson, Chinedu Ukadike, condemned the policy, calling it “illegal” and an infringement on the rights of Nigerians in border communities. Ukadike argued that the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) mandates the supply of petroleum products to all Nigerians, regardless of their location. According to him, the government’s decision to restrict fuel access to these border communities undermines the PIA’s provisions and violates the rights of Nigerian citizens.
“It is an aberration to our licenses given by the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA). The marketers have spent billions of naira establishing these stations in border areas, where Nigerians reside. Denying them fuel access is discriminatory,” Ukadike emphasized.
One of the most pressing concerns raised by IPMAN is the potential for profiteering in the affected border communities. With the government lifting the ban for only a select few filling stations, these stations now have a monopoly over fuel sales in their areas. The supply of fuel will be limited, and with limited competition, prices are expected to rise.
“Only a few filling stations are allowed to sell fuel, and this will force residents to purchase from these stations at inflated prices. The demand will be high, but the supply will be low, leading to exploitation and unfair price hikes,” Ukadike stated. He warned that this situation would worsen economic hardship for border communities, where residents are already grappling with high transportation costs and other economic challenges.
While IPMAN calls for broader policy changes, lawmakers like Isiaka have argued that the policy change should be balanced with national security interests. The lifting of the fuel ban comes after extensive engagement between the Nigerian government and security agencies, including the Nigeria Customs Service. It aims to alleviate the economic struggles of border communities without compromising national security.
However, the federal government’s position remains firm. The government has emphasized that it will continue to take necessary measures to protect the country’s borders, ensuring that the sale of petroleum products is done in line with national security priorities.
The selective reopening of filling stations in border areas is a policy move that highlights the delicate balance between national security, economic welfare, and legal rights. While some, like Isiaka, celebrate the decision as a victory for border communities, others, especially industry stakeholders like IPMAN, view it as a flawed approach that could foster monopolistic practices and escalate inflationary pressures.
As the debate continues, all eyes are on the federal government to implement a more inclusive and transparent policy that ensures fair access to petroleum products for all Nigerians, irrespective of their geographical location. The situation also underscores the need for a robust legal and regulatory framework that supports both security concerns and the economic well-being of citizens living in border regions.