Captain Enisuoh Advances Fresh Narratives About Ports Capabilities

…Says Nigeria’s Ports Face Security, Competitiveness Test, Advocates Urgent Overhaul

BY EGUONO ODJEGBA

Nigeria’s maritime economy is facing a convergence of security, infrastructure and competitiveness challenges that could undermine the country’s capacity to protect its offshore energy assets, facilitate international trade and maximize the economic potential of its waterways.

From vulnerabilities in port access control and cargo monitoring to shallow channels restricting larger vessels from eastern ports, the challenges point to a maritime system under pressure to modernize its security architecture and rethink the infrastructure supporting its commercial operations.

Captain Warredi Enisuoh, Executive Director, Operations and Technical Services at Tantita Security Services Nigeria Limited, who raised above concerns recently at a public summit, advocated stronger maritime surveillance, smart-port technology, coordinated transport planning and a more deliberate approach to port development.

His interventions at the Second Nigeria Transport Summit 2026, alongside subsequent comments on the limitations confronting South-South ports and the fight against oil theft, present a compelling case for treating maritime security as an integral component of Nigeria’s economic competitiveness rather than an isolated law-enforcement responsibility.

For a country whose trade, petroleum industry and emerging blue economy depend substantially on secure and efficient waterways, the implications of these fresh concerns extend beyond the protection of ports and offshore installations. They touch on shipping costs, cargo clearance, investment decisions, energy revenue and the ability of Nigerian ports to remain relevant as global shipping technology advances.

Security Gaps and Commercial Efficiency Threats

Enisuoh’s foremost concern is that Nigeria’s maritime security arrangements have not kept pace with the sophistication of modern transport and logistics systems. He argues that many port facilities still require improvements in surveillance, access management, operational design and coordination among the agencies and businesses responsible for their security.

Unlike airports, where restricted areas, perimeter protection and access authorization are integral to security management, maritime facilities can present more complicated monitoring challenges when cargo-handling areas, vehicle movements and restricted operational zones are inadequately controlled.

Enisuoh believes the aviation sector offers useful lessons for maritime authorities, particularly in the application of security audits, perimeter fencing, identity verification and continuous monitoring.

His thrust of argument is that security must begin with the design and management of a facility, not merely with the deployment of personnel after a vulnerability has emerged. A port with poorly controlled access points, inadequate cargo identification systems and limited visibility across operational areas creates opportunities for unauthorized movements, cargo irregularities and other criminal activities.

According to the retired ship and flight captain, these has broader implications, noting that such weaknesses can also impose commercial costs. Security incidents may disrupt cargo operations, delay shipments, increase insurance and compliance burdens, and undermine confidence among shipping companies, terminal operators and investors.

Enisuoh therefore advocates an integrated security framework that brings together port operators, terminal concessionaires, government agencies and security services through coordinated intelligence and monitoring systems.

His argument is that effective surveillance can deter wrongdoing while making it easier to identify suspicious movements before they develop into serious incidents.

Smart Ports: Where Security Meets Business

A major feature of Enisuoh’s prescription is the deployment of technology to reduce unnecessary human intervention and improve visibility across port operations. He points to automated cargo-handling systems, container identification, facial recognition and integrated surveillance as technologies Nigeria should consider adopting more extensively.

Using the Port of Los Angeles as an example, he describes a model in which technology assists with container positioning, cargo movement and the identification of drivers entering port facilities.

Under such an arrangement, identity verification at the gate can be linked to monitoring systems, while container numbers and associated records can be checked to establish whether cargo information is consistent with the documentation presented.

These systems, when properly integrated, could strengthen accountability, improve the detection of irregularities and support more efficient cargo processing.

For Nigerian ports, the commercial opportunity lies in achieving two objectives simultaneously: improving security and reducing avoidable delays.

He reasoned that automation alone should not be mistaken for a complete security solution. Its effectiveness depends on reliable infrastructure, accurate data, trained personnel, effective supervision and cooperation among agencies that may currently operate separate systems.

The investment question is therefore not simply whether Nigerian ports can acquire advanced equipment, but whether port authorities and operators can build an integrated technological and institutional framework capable of delivering measurable improvements.

That would require attention to implementation costs, maintenance, staff training, cybersecurity, data protection and clear accountability for the systems deployed.

Oil Theft and The Expanding Surveillance Challenge

Beyond the seaports, Enisuoh warns that Nigeria must strengthen surveillance across its territorial waters to protect offshore energy installations and combat evolving criminal activities.

Also in his interview with BusinessInsiderNG, he disclosed that two ships had been arrested within 48 hours over suspected oil theft. He indicated that developments in the international environment, including tensions around the Strait of Hormuz, were putting additional pressure on Nigeria’s oil sector.

The arrests, as described by Enisuoh, underscore the need for sustained monitoring of maritime movements. However, details of the vessels, the circumstances of their interception and the outcome of any investigation were not provided in the interview.

The disclosure nevertheless places the spotlight on a persistent national concern: the vulnerability of petroleum resources to illegal extraction, unauthorized transportation and other forms of maritime economic crime.

Oil theft has implications beyond the immediate value of any stolen consignment. It can affect public revenue, undermine confidence in the petroleum supply chain and expose offshore infrastructure to operational and security risks.

Enisuoh says Tantita has introduced long-range drones capable of covering distances between Warri and Ghana to strengthen maritime surveillance. He also confirms that the company is working with Nigerian security forces, although he declined to discuss specific operational arrangements.

Such capabilities could contribute to wider maritime-domain awareness by helping operators monitor large areas and identify movements requiring further investigation.

While it must also be noted that drones alone cannot substitute for a coordinated national surveillance system, their effectiveness depends on the quality of intelligence, the capacity to verify alerts, communication between monitoring centres and operational teams, and the ability of authorized agencies to respond promptly.

The wider objective should be a system in which surveillance information can support timely, lawful and coordinated action across the maritime domain.

 South-South Ports Trapped By Infrastructure Constraints

While security remains a central concern, Enisuoh’s assessment of South-South ports exposes another problem: the growing mismatch between existing port infrastructure and the requirements of contemporary shipping.

He identifies shallow draft levels and the concentration of underwater pipelines and cables as major constraints on the development of ports in the region.

According to him, some eastern ports cannot accommodate the larger vessels increasingly favoured by international shipping operators. He cited vessels carrying approximately 4,500 twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs) as requiring a draft of about 10 metres, arguing that the Warri port cannot practically provide the required depth.

He further warned that extensive dredging would entail substantial costs and could require embankments to protect surrounding communities.

The problem is compounded by underwater pipelines and cables belonging to international oil companies, including Shell and Chevron, which could require complex negotiations and relocation arrangements if dredging or major channel redevelopment are to be pursued.

These constraints, he argued, have complicated proposed deep-sea port projects in the region, including the Ibaka port project, which he said had to be relocated to Ibom because of similar difficulties.

His assessment raises important questions for policymakers and investors considering new port infrastructure in the Niger Delta and adjoining coastal areas.

A deep-sea port is not simply a matter of excavating a channel and constructing berths. Its feasibility depends on navigational safety, seabed conditions, existing infrastructure, environmental impact, community protection, road and rail connections, cargo demand and long-term operating costs.

Consequently, port planning must begin with rigorous technical and commercial assessments capable of identifying the most suitable locations before substantial public or private capital is committed.

Bigger Ships, Lower Costs And The Competitiveness Question

Enisuoh also highlights the commercial pressure created by the continuing growth in vessel capacity. He cited research indicating that the difference in operational costs between a vessel carrying 24,000 TEUs and one carrying 4,500 TEUs could be approximately $1,000.

Although that figure was presented as his assessment at the summit, which may require further verifications, including clarification of the voyage, operating-cost assumptions and other variables involved; nevertheless, the underlying economic issue is significant.

Larger vessels can offer economies of scale when cargo volumes, port facilities, shipping routes and onward distribution arrangements support their efficient use.

Ports unable to accommodate such vessels may face limitations in the services they can attract, while shipping companies must consider whether to use alternative ports or transfer cargo through feeder services.

For Nigeria, this raises a strategic question about how port infrastructure should evolve to meet changing vessel requirements without committing public funds to projects that lack sufficient commercial justification.

The answer is unlikely to be that every port must accommodate the largest ships in operation. Different ports can serve different markets and vessel classes, provided their roles are supported by credible demand forecasts, efficient connections and commercially sustainable operating models.

What matters is a national port strategy that identifies where deep-sea capacity is economically justified, where existing facilities can be upgraded and how cargo can move efficiently between ports and inland markets.

Integrated Transport Infrastructure And The Missing Link

Enisuoh’s criticism extends to the fragmented development of Nigeria’s transport infrastructure. He argues that airports, seaports and cargo distribution facilities have often been planned independently, limiting opportunities for efficient movement between transport modes.

In a properly integrated logistics system, maritime and air cargo facilities, road networks, railways, inland terminals and distribution centres function as connected components rather than isolated projects.

For businesses, this integration can reduce cargo dwell time, improve delivery predictability, lower transport costs and expand access to domestic and international markets.

The absence of efficient connections, by contrast, can undermine investments in otherwise modern port facilities. Cargo discharged quickly from a vessel may still face delays if road congestion, inadequate rail capacity or poor inland distribution arrangements prevent its movement to final destinations.

Enisuoh argues that Nigeria should stop operating in transport silos and ensure that new infrastructure projects reflect the changing requirements of trade. His position also recognizes that transport facilities have operational lifecycles. Ports and airports that once met prevailing requirements can become inadequate as shipping patterns, cargo volumes and technology change.

He argues that modernization should be treated as a continuing responsibility rather than an occasional intervention after infrastructure has become obsolete.

Rail Development And The Regional Logistics Opportunity

On rail transportation, Enisuoh supports a model under which state governments develop rail lines and interconnect them to strengthen regional logistics. He argues that increased revenue allocations have created opportunities for states to invest more actively in transport infrastructure.

The proposal reflects the need to diversify cargo movement beyond roads, particularly where heavy freight, industrial production and port distribution place sustained pressure on existing road networks.

However, state-led rail development would require coordination to avoid disconnected lines, incompatible technical standards, duplicated investments and projects that lack sufficient cargo demand.

Railways are capital-intensive assets whose economic value depends on reliable freight volumes, effective connections with ports and industrial centres, appropriate operating arrangements and long-term maintenance.

A practical approach would therefore combine state participation with national planning, common technical standards, clearly defined financing arrangements and commercially grounded assessments of prospective routes.

For the Niger Delta or South-South states, the opportunity would be to connect industrial locations, agricultural production zones, energy facilities and port infrastructure through a coherent logistics network rather than developing isolated transport projects.

Protecting The Wider Blue Economy

Enisuoh’s security concerns were not limited to crude oil and offshore energy assets as he drew attention to the importance of Nigeria’s fisheries and the wider blue economy.

He argues that illegal activities in Nigerian waters could affect fishing resources and the livelihoods of legitimate operators, while weakening the country’s ability to derive economic value from its maritime domain.

Secure waterways are essential to fishing, coastal commerce, marine transportation and other legitimate economic activities. This makes maritime surveillance a matter of economic protection as much as law enforcement. A system that detects and discourages illegal activities can help protect public revenue, support legitimate businesses and improve confidence in maritime operations.

Taking together, effective protection of the blue economy requires more than patrols. It also calls for fisheries monitoring, reliable vessel identification, intelligence-sharing, enforcement of applicable laws and coordination among agencies with responsibilities for maritime security and resource management.

From Recommendations To Measurable Reforms

The central challenge arising from Enisuoh’s interventions is how to translate the call for modernisation into practical reforms.

Nigeria needs a coordinated approach that treats port security, infrastructure development, technology adoption and transport integration as mutually reinforcing priorities.

First, port authorities and terminal operators should assess vulnerabilities in access control, perimeter protection, cargo monitoring and surveillance coverage, with clear responsibilities for correcting identified weaknesses.

Second, technology investments should be tied to measurable operational outcomes, including improved cargo visibility, reduced processing delays, better detection of irregularities and stronger coordination among relevant agencies.

Third, decisions on dredging, deep-sea ports and the relocation of underwater infrastructure should be based on independent technical studies, environmental safeguards and credible commercial projections.

Fourth, rail and road investments should be planned around actual cargo flows and integrated with seaports, inland terminals and industrial centres.

Finally, maritime surveillance should continue to evolve through lawful intelligence-sharing and operational cooperation, with sufficient capacity to investigate and respond to suspicious activity.

The economic case for reform is straightforward: secure and efficient ports help reduce avoidable costs, protect trade and energy assets, and create a more dependable environment for investment.

The security case is equally compelling. Weak access controls, fragmented monitoring and inadequate infrastructure can create vulnerabilities that criminals may exploit.

Nigeria’s maritime challenge, therefore, is not simply to acquire more sophisticated security equipment or construct new ports. It is to build a coherent system in which infrastructure, technology, regulation and operational coordination reinforces one another.

The maritime security expert’s warnings provide a useful starting point for this conversation. And whether we can turn these warnings into a sustained programme of reform will depend on the quality of our planning, the discipline of implementation and the willingness of public institutions and private operators to work towards shared security and commercial objectives.