Chinedu Eze
Last week’s picketing of airlines at the Murtala Muhammed International Airport (MMIA), Lagos, and the Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport, Abuja, by aviation unions, has continued to generate reactions from both the local and global communities.
THISDAY learnt that the picketing, which was targeted at Air Peace, generally disrupted domestic flight operations on August 11, 2026, a development that prompted lessors and international financial institutions, in negotiations with some Nigerian carriers, to appraise the operating environment of the airlines’ safety standards and policy implementation in the sector.
Experts described aviation as global because airlines do not stand alone. They abide by international standards regulated by the Intentional Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO). Countries domesticate ICAO regulations to suit their economic and political realties but the standards remain the same.
Therefore, infractions in any ICAO member country will always affect the disposition of the international aviation community.
Industry analyst and stakeholder, who is into business aviation logistics and also former General Manager, Business Development, Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN), Nuhu Adam, spoke exclusively to THISDAY on the implication of the industrial action on Nigeria’s aviation industry.
According to Adam, the picketing represents more than an industrial dispute, leading to a breakdown of the safety, security and regulatory chain.
“For investors, insurers, and lessors, the incident signals regulatory risk, security risk, and operational risk in Nigeria’s aviation sector. The damage to confidence is immediate and potentially irreparable,” he said.
In his analysis, Adam identified applicable ICAO policies violated or breached by the disruption to include Safety of Operations: Annex 14 Vol I – Aerodromes, which states that movement area of the airport must be free of obstruction. So, such picketing ought not have gone as far as disrupting operations of airlines, he said.
On security, which is Annex 17 that has to do with safeguarding civil aviation, protection of aircraft, passengers, crew, ground personnel and the public against acts of unlawful interference; he explained that obstruction of aircraft movement and unauthorised access to critical infrastructure were classified as “unlawful interference”. This means that the unionists shouldn’t have forcefully gained access to the facility to disrupt passenger processing and flight operation. In terms of regulatory oversight (Annex 19) that has to do with safety management, Adam alleged that concerned authorities had prior warning but failed to prevent disruption, which, according to him, is a failure of state safety oversight.
He noted that in the Civil Aviation Act 2022, NCAA remained the only safety and security regulator and also the economic regulator. So, failure to prevent foreseeable inference was a regulatory failure. In other words: “It is the responsibility of NCAA to protect civil aviation against acts of unlawful interference, which can be argued as regulatory failure.”
Adam insisted that the regulation required protection of civil aviation against acts of unlawful interference, noting that airport access was compromised.
He said there was no question about the obligation of the airlines to the NCAA on Ticket and Cargo Sales Charge because it is enshrined in the Civil Aviation Act 2022, Section 23. So, the airlines are obliged to pay the charges but it should be the regulatory authority that should enforce it; however, by using it to picket airlines, the unions usurped regulatory function, he explained.
Adam also said that the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) was responsible for airside security, access control, and protection of airport facilities, adding that the unauthorised vehicle/personnel movement to the restricted area is a failure of the agency.
“Perimeter control and escort procedures failed because the agency allowed such access. I learnt that when the report of the incident went viral, they were asking questions like, how porous are Nigerian airports. Aviation Security, the Nigerian police and airport security command are expected to secure the security at the airside. The violation of the rule enabled picketing to extend to airport entrances and movement areas. Sec 43(1B) Trade Unions Act prohibits preventing aircraft from flying. There should be no visible intervention to stop it,” he said.
Looking at the implication of what happened and its implication on investment in the industry, he said the incident and similar incidents in the past, eroded market confidence.
“In terms of regulatory risk, If the regulator cannot protect operations from third-party interference, then bilateral agreements, Air Operator Certificate (AOC) conditions, and enforcement are not credible. When the picketing happened, Aviation Security and police could not secure the movement area during civil action. That means hull war risk premiums go up. Insurers will re-price Nigeria.
“The operational risk is that if a single union can ground multiple airlines, then schedule reliability and revenue projections are unreliable. Lessors will demand higher security deposits. There are also reputational risks. International partners, ICAO, IATA (International Air Transport Association), and financiers watch this. Nigeria’s USOAP (the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme)
score and safety rating come under review. Then you talk about insider threat risk. If airside access can be compromised during a strike, what stops deliberate sabotage? This creates a new risk category for investors,” Adam said.
He also said: “My take on all that happened is that capital goes where rules are predictable and assets are protected. This incident proves the opposite.”
Adam said labour exercised its rights outside legal limits. It moved from persuasion to obstruction. The regulator knew beforehand, but failed to coordinate with FAAN, AVSEC, Police to prevent it. AVSEC failed the primary duty of access control and order. So, FAAN failed to keep the sterile area sterile, he further said.
He therefore recommended that NCAA publish investigation report and sanctions, and reaffirm exclusive mandate on TSC enforcement. He also recommended that FAAN AVSEC and Police Joint protocol for “No-Go Zones” during industrial action must be protected by law.
“The National Assembly should be urged to amend/enforce penalties for obstruction of airport operations. On investors assurance, the Federal Government should issue statement guaranteeing protection of aviation assets and operations from non-regulatory interference. The setting up of committee to investigate is good but not always the best option,” Adam said.
The industry analyst said that what happened was not just about Air Peace or five per cent TSC; that it was a test of whether Nigeria can protect critical aviation infrastructure, enforce its own laws, and provide a safe environment for investment.
“We failed that test on Tuesday. If we do not act decisively now, insurers will price us out, lessors will avoid us, and investors will take their capital elsewhere,” he noted.
He added that hull war risk and lessor deposits are likely to increase, noting that although the damage is hard to quantify but this is the “irreparable” part investors flagged.
Also, passenger suffered economic loss, as thousands of them were stranded both in Lagos, Abuja and other airports, where passengers waited for arriving flights and none came. Many of them, Adam noted, missed businesses, connecting flights to international destinations and others.
“The bigger risk is recurring: if one union action can trigger this, then revenue projections and schedule reliability for Nigerian carriers cannot be banked at 100 per cent. Lessors and insurers will price that in,” he added.