The Legality and Environmental Implication of the Burning of Oil-Laden Vessels in Nigeria
Illegal bunkering has been a persistent challenge in Nigeria’s oil-rich Niger Delta region. Citing data from the Nigeria Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (NEITI), a national body established and mandated by law to promote transparency and accountability in the management of Nigeria’s oil, gas and mining Industry, Mr. Tajudeen Abbas, speaker of the House of Representatives in Nigeria, revealed that Nigeria had lost about $46 billion to crude oil theft in 11 years, as of 2023. This staggering figure highlights the magnitude of the problem and the urgent need for effective measures to combat it.
Nigeria has grappled with the menace of crude oil theft for years, which has adversely impacted the country’s revenue and economic growth. In a bid to curb this illegal activity, the Nigerian government established a joint task force comprising security agents and private contractors, mandated with combating crude oil theft and vandalism of oil pipelines.
However, the tactics employed by these security operatives in tackling the issue have sparked widespread condemnation and raised legal and environmental concerns. Specifically, the growing culture of setting ablaze oil-carrying vessels suspected of transporting stolen crude oil has drawn criticism from various stakeholders, including environmental activists, legal experts, and human rights organizations.
The Modus Operandi: Burning Vessels as a Deterrent
In recent years, Nigeria has witnessed a surge in the destruction of vessels laden with stolen crude oil by security agencies. For instance, in July 2023, Security Operatives of the Joint Task Force, Operation Delta Safe, in collaboration with Tantita Security Services Nigeria Limited, set ablaze an intercepted vessel with a capacity of 800 metric tonnes, “MT Tura 11,” allegedly carrying about 150 metric tonnes of stolen crude oil in the Escravos area of Delta State. Similarly, in October 2022, another vessel, “MT DEIMA,” allegedly laden with 1500 metric tonnes of stolen crude oil, was also arrested and set ablaze in the Warri Escravos River by security operatives. In total, four oil vessels, suspected of carrying proceeds of stolen crude oil, were intercepted between October 2022 and August 2023 by the Nigerian Navy, Tantitta Security Services Limited, and personnel of the Joint Task Force of Operation Delta Safe – all of which were subsequently blown off hours after their detection.
Captain Warredi Enisuoh, the Director of Operations and Technical Unit at Tantitta Security, defended this approach, citing adherence to the rules of engagement, the extended duration of court proceedings (which can span up to a decade before a final verdict is reached), and the potential for ship leaks into the waters as justifications. However, this assertion contradicts the fact that the case concerning the hijack of the FV Hai Lu Feng II vessel was concluded in 2021, just a year after the suspects were arraigned in 2020.
Legal Implications: Violation of Existing Laws
The burning of crude oil-carrying vessels by Nigerian security agencies constitutes a flagrant violation of several domestic and international laws to which Nigeria is a party. These actions not only undermine the rule of law but also expose the country to potential legal liabilities and sanctions.
Firstly, the Armed Forces Act (AFA) explicitly criminalizes the willful or malicious setting fire to a vessel by any person subject to the Act. Section 111 of the AFA is unambiguous in its stipulation, stating that a person subject to service law under this Act who willfully or maliciously sets fire to a vessel, ship, aircraft, railway track or wagon, or vehicle or thing is guilty of arson and liable, on conviction by a court-martial, to imprisonment for life.
This provision directly implicates any member of the Nigerian Armed Forces involved in the burning of oil vessels, as their actions constitute arson under the AFA. By engaging in such acts, these security personnel are committing a grave criminal offense that could potentially result in life imprisonment upon conviction by a court-martial.
Secondly, Nigeria’s obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) are being violated by the burning of oil vessels. As a party to UNCLOS, Nigeria is mandated to “take all measures consistent with this Convention that are necessary to prevent, reduce, and control pollution of the marine environment from any source. However, the deliberate burning of crude oil-carrying vessels directly contradicts this obligation, as it contributes to the contamination and degradation of the marine environment through the release of toxic substances and greenhouse gases.
Furthermore, the Suppression of Piracy and Other Maritime Offences Act 2019 (“SPOMO Act”) and the Oil in Navigable Waters Act, Cap. O6, LFN 2010, are domestic laws enacted specifically to combat maritime offenses such as oil theft and reduce pollution of Nigerian territorial waters. The destruction of oil vessels by security agencies undermines the very purpose of these laws, which aim to protect the country’s marine resources and ecosystems.
Renowned lawyer and rights activist, Femi Falana, has categorically stated that “there is no provision in the rules of engagement that authorises military personnel or security operatives to set fire to or destroy vessels loaded with stolen crude. This assertion directly contradicts the claims made by security agencies that their actions are guided by the rules of engagement. Falana further opined that the burning of oil vessels is “a deliberate attempt to cover up the involvement of military personnel in the serious crime of oil theft. This allegation raises grave concerns about the potential complicity of security forces in the very criminal activities they are tasked with combating, further compounding the legal implications of their actions. More so, the destruction of oil vessels could potentially undermine the ability to effectively investigate and prosecute cases of oil theft. As Captain Warredi Enisuoh acknowledged, court proceedings related to such cases can span up to a decade before a final verdict is reached. By destroying the very vessels and evidence central to these cases, the security agencies are impeding due process and obstructing the course of justice.
It is noteworthy that in a similar case concerning the hijack of the FV Hai Lu Feng II vessel, the suspects were prosecuted, and the case was concluded within a year of their arraignment in 2020. This precedent highlights the ability of the judicial system to handle such cases efficiently when proper legal procedures are followed, undermining the justification provided by security agencies for their extrajudicial actions.
Flowing from the above, it is the writer’s contention that the burning of oil vessels laden with stolen crude oil by Nigerian security agencies constitutes a blatant violation of domestic and international laws. It contravenes the Armed Forces Act, undermines Nigeria’s obligations under UNCLOS, and contradicts the spirit and intent of maritime laws such as the SPOMO Act and the Oil in Navigable Waters Act. Furthermore, these actions raises concerns about potential cover-ups, obstruction of justice, and the erosion of due process, compounding the legal implications and exposing Nigeria to potential liabilities and sanctions.
Environmental Consequences: A Threat to Marine Ecosystems
Apart from the legal implications, the burning of oil vessels laden with stolen crude oil poses grave environmental risks, exacerbating the already dire conditions in the Niger Delta region due to gas flaring, oil spills, and other forms of pollution. Crude oil consists of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), which are highly toxic and may be associated with cancer development when inhaled. The release of oil into the environment poses a significant threat to human health due to the harmful and toxic nature of its chemical components. When burned, fossil fuels release greenhouse gases (carbon, methane, and nitrous oxide) into the atmosphere, contributing to global warming and its associated effects. A rough estimate suggests that the burning of the four oil vessels intercepted between October 2022 and August 2023 could have released 7,819 metric tonnes of carbon, capable of causing extreme damage to the environment and the people. Furthermore, a study by the National Library of Medicine highlighted the consequences of oil exposure on communities residing near oil exploration areas. It found that, in the case of animals, the impact of exposure to crude oil on their immune systems varies depending on the intensity of the contact, which sometimes increases their susceptibility to infectious diseases.
Additionally, Mr. Nnimmo Bassey, the Executive Director of The Health of Mother Earth Foundation (HOMEF), an ecological research institute established in 2011 that advocates for environmental justice and food sovereignty across Africa, has strongly criticized the burning of oil vessels. In a statement released in 2023, he highlighted the severe environmental impact, stating, “a single drop of crude oil can contaminate 25 liters of water.” The organization further emphasized the detrimental consequences of such actions on the environment and human health.
Conclusion: Striking a Balance
The practice of burning crude oil-carrying vessels by Nigerian security agencies in their efforts to combat oil theft presents a complex challenge that requires a delicate balance between addressing security concerns and upholding environmental protection responsibilities. While the government’s objective of deterring illegal oil bunkering activities is understandable, the current approach of vessel destruction raises significant legal and ecological risks that cannot be overlooked.
From a legal standpoint, the burning of oil vessels contravenes multiple domestic and international laws to which Nigeria is a signatory. Failure to adhere to these legal frameworks exposes Nigeria to potential liabilities, sanctions, and reputational damage on the global stage. Moreover, the destruction of vessels laden with stolen crude oil poses grave threats to the already fragile marine ecosystems in the Niger Delta region. The release of toxic substances and greenhouse gases from burning crude oil can have devastating and long-lasting impacts on marine life, air quality, and the health of local communities. This exacerbates the existing environmental degradation caused by gas flaring, oil spills, and other forms of pollution that have plagued the region for decades.
It is imperative for Nigeria to recognize that the burning of oil vessels is not a sustainable or effective solution to the oil theft menace. Instead, it creates additional problems by contributing to environmental degradation and undermining the country’s commitment to upholding the rule of law and promoting environmental sustainability. To strike the necessary balance between security imperatives, legal practices, and environmental protection, Nigeria must explore and implement alternative approaches that align with existing legal frameworks and prioritize ecological preservation.
Ultimately, Nigeria’s approach to combating crude oil theft must be grounded in a comprehensive strategy that harmonizes security objectives with environmental sustainability and adherence to the rule of law. This requires a collaborative effort involving security agencies, policymakers, legal experts, and environmental advocates to develop and implement holistic solutions that address the root causes of oil theft while upholding the country’s legal and ecological responsibilities.
Recommendations
Given the legal and environmental implications of burning oil vessels laden with stolen crude oil, various stakeholders have advocated for alternative approaches that aligns with existing laws and prioritize environmental sustainability.
One recommended solution is to leverage the provisions of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission Act (“EFCC Act”), which allows for the prosecution of offenders involved in illegal oil bunkering and the forfeiture of all assets and properties used for and obtained from the commission of the offence. Under the EFCC Act, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) can obtain an interim order of forfeiture against the vessel and the crude oil pending trial. If the offender is convicted, the court can issue a final order of forfeiture, and the property can be disposed of by sale or otherwise, with the proceeds paid into the Consolidated Revenue Account of the Federation. This approach ensures that the government can tackle crude oil theft without breaching the offenders’ right to a fair hearing or contributing to marine pollution, which could expose Nigeria to domestic and international liabilities.
Furthermore, environmental experts and civil society organizations (CSOs) have called for the evacuation of the crude oil from intercepted vessels before their eventual destruction, if necessary. This measure would mitigate the risks of oil spillage and environmental degradation.
Abasiama Umohatah boasts extensive expertise in Government, Community and Security relations, garnered over years within the oil and gas industry. Currently pursuing a doctoral degree in Petroleum and Energy Law at Nnamdi Azikiwe University in Awka, Nigeria, he stands as a seasoned professional in his field. To connect with him, you can reach out via email at semaumoh@yahoo.com.
