NPA Challenged to Address Allegations with Facts, Not Superficial Denials

• A civic group, Movement for Democracy (MFD), has challenged the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) to provide clearer details on its financial and procurement processes
• The group criticized the NPA’s recent rebuttal of corruption allegations as evasive and demanded public access to budget approvals, contract details, and payment records
• MFD urged transparency in the use of emergency procurement and called for documentation to rebuild public trust in the agency’s operations

A civil society organization, the Movement for Democracy (MFD), has urged the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) to provide deeper and more detailed explanations surrounding recent concerns about its financial and procurement procedures.

This demand comes in response to the NPA’s rebuttal of media reports alleging multi-billion-naira irregularities within its operations.

NPA's rebuttal statement not enough - group

While the agency dismissed the allegations as “spurious” and “lacking in credibility,” the MFD believes that the statement failed to sufficiently address pressing issues of public interest.

In a statement signed by its National Coordinator, Osaze Samuel, the MFD acknowledged the NPA’s decision to publicly respond but expressed concern over what it described as a dismissive tone and insufficient disclosure.

The group is now calling on the authority to release specific information regarding project financing, including whether supplementary budgets were created for capital projects such as the dredging of the Warri Escravos Channel and marine equipment procurement, and if such budgets were lawfully approved by the appropriate federal agencies.

“While the MFD welcomes the NPA’s willingness to respond to public concerns, we find its rebuttal to be evasive, lacking in transparency, and disturbingly dismissive of serious allegations that touch on public accountability, fiscal discipline, and institutional integrity,” Samuel stated.

NPA challenged over dubious procurement route

The group also questioned the use of emergency procurement for the dredging project, urging the NPA to explain why it chose that route over a competitive open bidding process.

Referencing the Public Procurement Act (PPA) of 2007, the MFD insisted that public institutions must not only comply with the law but must also adopt a culture of openness—especially in response to serious allegations.

“Why did the NPA opt for a restricted emergency procurement process, instead of a competitive open tender, which is a clear violation of Sections 24–27 of the Public Procurement Act?” the group asked.

It was noted that verbal assurances are not enough and that the NPA should publicly share contractor payment schedules and project documentation.

MFD further demanded clarity on whether the Federal Executive Council (FEC) reviewed and approved the dredging project, and if any technical survey was carried out to justify the urgency of the work.

While recognizing the importance of infrastructure development in the maritime sector, the MFD emphasized that sustained public confidence in institutions like the NPA can only be achieved through transparent, independently verifiable processes.

The group called on the NPA to lead by example and make available relevant documents such as contract awards, budget approvals, and payment records to enhance credibility and rebuild public trust.

NPA clears air on contract awards

Earlier, Legit.ng reported that the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) had issued a firm denial of recent reports circulating online that accuse the organization of large-scale financial misconduct and procedural irregularities.

The Authority described the accusations claiming misappropriation of billions of naira as baseless, misleading, and devoid of substance.

Source: Legit.ng