CSOs advise Tinubu, NASS to reject Coastal Guards Bill over Nigeria’s limited financial resources 

The CSOs, which include the Centre for Social Justice, Equity and Transparency (CESJET), the Nigerian Unemployed Youth Association, the Security Analysts and Researchers Forum in Africa, the Coalition of Civil Society Organizations on Economic Watch, and the Centre for Human Rights and Advocacy in Africa Network (CHRAAN), made the recommendation during a press conference on Thursday, led by Okwa Dan (Convener) and Ilal Abdulahi (Coalition Secretary).

The bill in question, titled “Bill for an Act to Provide for the Establishment of the Nigerian Coast Guard”, has passed its second reading in the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and has been referred to the Senate Committee on Marine Transport for further legislative action.

The bill, which is scheduled for a public hearing at NASS, proposes the establishment of a Nigerian Coast Guard responsible for protecting Nigeria’s maritime zones.

Reacting to the development, the CSOs argued that the creation of a new, independent Coast Guard “may not only duplicate existing responsibilities but would also jeopardize Nigeria’s national security, reduce administrative effectiveness, and place a great strain on the country’s limited financial resources.”

“Furthermore, we discovered that the costly burden of building a Coast Guard is exacerbated by Nigeria’s economic constraints. To put it into perspective, the U.S. Coast Guard spends more than $13 billion annually,” it added.

The CSOs suggested that a more effective and long-term solution would be to use these funds to bolster the Nigerian Navy, noting that human rights issues could also arise from a militarized Coast Guard, as it might unintentionally lead to a larger military presence in civilian maritime operations.

“Integrating various maritime personnel without conducting sufficient due diligence evidently poses a risk to national security. Clearly, bringing in people from different backgrounds could make it easier for individuals with malicious intentions to infiltrate, potentially threatening illegal activities such as piracy, bunkering, and smuggling,” the group warned.

The group also pointed out that military personnel who might fear losing their independence or job security could object to the Coast Guard’s creation.

In place of the Coastal Guards Bill, the CSOs have called on President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the National Assembly to consider the following:

The CSO argues that increased support for the Navy is a practical way to improve maritime security. The group believes that the Nigerian Navy has proven itself capable of handling various security tasks, such as environmental preservation, anti-smuggling, and counter-piracy operations.

“Instead of establishing a military Coast Guard, Nigeria could set up a civilian-run organization to manage tasks like environmental protection, customs enforcement, and search and rescue. This would avoid duplication of Navy operations and align with global best practices,” the group stated.

“Although the Army, Navy, and Air Force are the only three branches of the armed forces recognized by the Constitution, the proposed Coast Guard would legally be an additional department under the Ministry of Marine and Blue Economy, classified as a military service,” the group noted.

They added that creating a new branch without a constitutional amendment could lead to serious legal challenges and undermine the rule of law.

Advocacy from CSOs and public hearings are part of the legislative process leading to the enactment of a bill.

Once a bill passes through the necessary legislative steps, the President is best expected to sign it for it to become law.

Once a bill passes through the necessary legislative steps, the President is best expected to sign it for it to become law.

If the president declines to sign the bill, it loses the force of law.