The Nigerian Coast Guard: History is not a licence for stagation

The Provisional Committee for the establishment of Nigerian Coast Guard (PC-NCG) believes that there are moments in the history of a nation when looking backward should provide wisdom, and not an excuse for refusing to move forward. Nigeria has reached such a moment in the debate over the establishment of the Nigerian Coast Guard, whose duty and funding existed under binding codified arrangements before colonial rule. The duty of the coast guard existed before its name.

The colonial era formalized it under the institutional name of the Marine Department in 1887 as a quasi-military organization, providing security for ports, harbours and coastal approaches. The crucial period from 1945 to 1956 saw the gradual division of the responsibilities of the Marine Department, which served as a broad maritime institution, as its naval/military component was progressively separated from its civilian maritime functions, leading to the disbandment of the Department.

Advertisements

Without tracing the entire history backward, documented legislative history traces the modern parliamentary consideration of a dedicated Coast Guard or related coastal-enforcement institution back to at least 2008, when Nigerian Coast Guard Bill SB. 107 of 2008, sponsored by Senator Gbemisola Ruqayyah Saraki, introduced it as part of the effort to provide dedicated enforcement and protection of Nigeria’s coastal and maritime interests. The question did not disappear, and it is not one that will ever go away. It returned in increasingly explicit Coast Guard formulations.

In the 8th National Assembly, when the issue assumed a particularly clear legislative form, Senator Yele Omogunwa of Ondo South sponsored the Nigerian Coast Guard Establishment Bill SB 579 in 2017. The Senate record indicates that the Bill went through 1st Reading on 20/12/2017, 2nd Reading on 14/03/2018 and was referred to Senate Committee on Marine Committee, and after 3rd Reading was considered and passed, it was consolidated with Maritime Piracy Bill No: SB. 364 of 2017; Deep Offshore & Inland Basin Production Sharing Contract Bill (Act) No: SB.119 of 2015 and Anti-Piracy Bill No: SB. 254 of 2016. At last, the other three Bills came alive while nothing was heard of the Nigerian Coast Guard of 2017. In another development, the Nigerian Merchant Navy Coast Guard Security and Safety Corps Bill SB 591 of 2020 and HB. 1331 in the House of Representatives were considered and referred to appropriate Committees for further legislative action. Lo and behold, both ended up at the Committee stage. In 2021, Senator Akon Etim Eyakenyi sponsored the Nigerian Coast Guard (Establishment) Bill, 2021 — SB. 844. The Bill passed Second Reading and was referred to the appropriate Senate Committees for further consideration. Again, the matter did not culminate in legislation establishing the Coast Guard.

Advertisements

The 9th National Assembly came and went. That was how the opportunity to resolve the institutional gap was botched and the question remained. The significance is undeniable. Persistent push saw the 10th National Assembly inheriting the unresolved question. On Thursday 3rd and 15th October 2024 witnessed the First and Second Reading of the present Nigerian Coast Guard Bill SB. 575, sponsored by Distinguished Senator Sanni Wasiu Eshilokun, and was referred to the Senate Committee on Marine Transport same 15th October 2024. A public hearing followed, during which maritime stakeholders expressed substantial support for the Coast Guard proposal, while also making recommendations concerning the delineation and coordination of functions. The Coast Guard question did not begin with the current Nigerian Coast Guard Establishment Bill SB 575.

There is a tendency in the current debate to treat the Nigerian Coast Guard proposal as though it were a new idea suddenly presented to the National Assembly. The Coast Guard question has travelled through successive legislative periods, different National Assemblies, different sponsors and different political administrations of the 90s till date, and the country is still finding itself debating whether the institutional response should proceed.

The present national conversation must rise above institutional rivalry, political convenience and the protection of established arrangements and confront the fundamental question before the country: After decades of legislative effort, Nigeria must not allow institutional inertia, entrenched interests, resistance to reform and political expediency to once again defeat maritime reform the nation has repeatedly recognized as necessary. Recall, on 22 July 2026, the Senate stepped down further consideration of the Coast Guard Bill amid concerns about possible duplication of responsibilities and potential conflict with the Nigerian Navy and other maritime-security institutions.

The concerns deserve to be heard. But they should not become an excuse for paralysis. If there are overlapping functions, define them. If there are jurisdictional uncertainties, settle them. If the relationship between the Nigerian Coast Guard and the Nigerian Navy requires clarification, write that clarity into the law. If the Bill needs amendment, amend it. If institutional responsibilities need harmonization, harmonize them. If the funding architecture requires improvement, improve it.

That is precisely why legislation goes through committee scrutiny, public hearings, amendments and multiple readings. The existence of questions is not evidence that there is no answer. How long can a nation recognize an institutional need, legislate around it repeatedly, debate it across successive National Assemblies, and still refuse to bring the matter to a meaningful conclusion?

The answer cannot be: indefinitely. History is a record of what Nigeria has done. It is not a license to prevent Nigeria from doing what the present day or the future requires. History must inform reform, not defeat it. The Distinguished Senate is respectfully implored to give Nigeria the Coast Guard framework that decades of legislative effort have demanded. Capt. Noah Ichaba, Chief Executive and Accounting Officer of the PC-NCG.

The Provisional Committee for the establishment of Nigerian Coast Guard (PC-NCG) believes that there are moments in the history of a nation when looking backward should provide wisdom, and not an excuse for refusing to move forward. Nigeria has reached such a moment in the debate over the establishment of the Nigerian Coast Guard, whose duty and funding existed under kingdom based arrangements before colonial rule. The duty of coast guard existed before its name.

The colonial era formalized it under institutional name of the Marine Department in 1887 as a quasi-military organization, providing security for ports, harbours and coastal approaches. The crucial period of 1945 to 1956 saw the gradual division of the responsibilities of the Marine Department which served as a Broad Maritime Institution had its naval/military component progressively separated from its civilian maritime functions, leading to the disbandment of the Department. Without tracing the entire history backward, documented legislative history traces the modern parliamentary consideration of a dedicated Coast Guard or related coastal-enforcement institution back to at least 2008 when Nigerian Coast Guard Bill SB. 107 of 2008 sponsored by Senator Gbemisola Ruqayyah Saraki introduced it as part of the effort to provide dedicated enforcement and protection of Nigeria’s coastal and maritime interests. The question did not disappear.

It returned in increasingly explicit Coast Guard formulations. In the 8th National Assembly, when the issue assumed a particularly clear legislative form. Senator Yele Omogunwa of Ondo South sponsored the Nigerian Coast Guards Establishment Bill SB 579 in 2017. The Senate record indicates that the Bill went through 1st Reading on 20/12/2017, 2nd Reading on 14/03/2018 and was referred to Senate Committee on Marine Committee, and after 3rd Reading was considered and passed, it was consolidated with Maritime Piracy Bill No: SB.364 of 2017; Deep Offshore & Inland Basin Production Sharing Contract Bill (Act) No: SB.119 of 2015 and Anti-Piracy Bill No: SB. 254 of 2016. At last, the other three Bills came alive while nothing was heard of the Nigerian Coast Guard of 2017. In another development, the Nigerian Merchant Navy Coast Guard Security and Safety Corps Bill SB 591 of 2020 and HB. 1331 in the House of Representatives were considered and referred to appropriate Committees for further legislative action. Low and behold both ended up at the Committee stage.

In 2021, Senator Akon Etim Eyakenyi sponsored the Nigerian Coast Guard (Establishment) Bill, 2021 — SB. 844. The Bill passed Second Reading and was referred to the appropriate Senate Committees for further consideration. Again, the matter did not culminate in legislation establishing the Coast Guard. The 9th National Assembly came and went. That was how the opportunity to resolve the institutional gap was botched and the question remained. The significance is undeniable. Persistent push saw the 10th National Assembly inheriting the unresolved question. On Thursday 3rd and 15th October 2024 witnessed the First and second Reading of the present Nigerian Coast Guard Bill SB. 575, sponsored by Distinguished Senator Sanni Wasiu Eshilokun, and was referred to the Senate Committee on Marine Transport same 15th October 2024.

A public hearing followed, during which maritime stakeholders expressed substantial support for the Coast Guard proposal, while also making recommendations concerning the delineation and coordination of functions.

The Coast Guard question did not begin with the current Nigerian Coast Guard Establishment Bill SB 575. There is a tendency in the current debate to treat the Nigerian Coast Guard proposal as though it were a new idea suddenly presented to the National Assembly. The Coast Guard question has travelled through successive legislative periods, different National Assemblies, different sponsors and different political administrations of the 90s till date, and the country is still finding itself debating whether the institutional response should proceed.

The present national conversation must rise above institutional rivalry, political convenience and the protection of established arrangements and confront the fundamental question before the country: After Decades of Legislative Effort, Nigeria Must Not Allow Institutional Inertia, entrenched interests, resistance to reform and political expediency to once again Defeat Maritime reform the nation has repeatedly recognized as necessary. Recall, on 22 July 2026, the Senate stepped down further consideration of the Coast Guard Bill amid concerns about possible duplication of responsibilities and potential conflict with the Nigerian Navy and other maritime-security institutions.

The concerns deserve to be heard. But they should not become an excuse for paralysis. If there are overlapping functions, define them. If there are jurisdictional uncertainties, settle them. If the relationship between the Nigerian Coast Guard and the Nigerian Navy requires clarification, write that clarity into the law. If the Bill needs amendment, amend it. If institutional responsibilities need harmonization, harmonize them.

If the funding architecture requires improvement, improve it. That is precisely why legislation goes through committee scrutiny, public hearings, amendments and multiple readings. The existence of questions is not evidence that there is no answer. How long can a nation recognize an institutional need, legislate around it repeatedly, debate it across successive National Assemblies, and still refuse to bring the matter to a meaningful conclusion? The answer cannot be: indefinitely. History is a record of what Nigeria has done.

It is not a license to prevent Nigeria from doing what her present day or the future requires. History must inform reform, not defeat

Advertisements

Advertisements