The Nation Newspaper

Tag: OGFZA

  • OGFZA gets 35,000-hectare from Bayelsa for free zone project

    OGFZA gets 35,000-hectare from Bayelsa for free zone project

    The Oil and Gas Free Zone Authority’s (OGFZA) efforts to fulfil its  core mandate and play a key role in the Federal Government’s drive for Foreign Direct Investments (FDI) received a major boost last week.

    Bayelsa State handed over to OGFZA state land measuring 35,000 hectares for the development of the Brass Oil and Gas City.

    Land to locate factories and offices is a key attraction to FDI in the free zones.

    The state’s Surveyor-General, Gede Moses, said a portion of the 35,000-hectare land had been surveyed and was ready for deployment.

    Bayelsa State Governor Seriake Dickson declared that OGFZA can deploy the land resources the way it deems fit to accelerate the growth of free zones.

    Dickson was responding to a request for support from the Managing Director of OGFZA, Mr. Umana Okon Umana, who visited the governor at Yenegoa.

    Umana asked Dickson to support “OGFZA to execute its mandate of attracting investments to the free zones with allocation of land to the authority, backed with a certificate of occupancy” as a way of giving the investment agency “the capacity to effectively partner with investors”.

    The OGFZA’s boss hailed the government for its support to OGFZA over the years and described their relationship  as that of “natural partners in the development of the Southsouth region and our dear country”.

    Umana lauded the governor’s commitment to Bayelsa State’s growth.

    He said the Brass Oil and Gas City, to which $3.5 billion has been committed, was a major effort to improve the quality of lives of Nigerians and accelerate Southsouth region’s growth.

    Noting that the world has recognised free zones as engines of growth that have generated more than 42 million jobs in about 4,000 free zones globally, Umana called for “the abiding support of the Bayelsa State for OGFZA in its mandate as free zones regulator to inspire and sustain continuing confidence of the investment community”.

    The governor pledged his administration’s support for the projects but expressed concern that important aspects of the projects such as access road to Brass Oil and Gas City is beyond the capacity of the state and needs  federal’s intervention.

    Dickson congratulated Umana on his “well-deserved appointment” and lauded President Muhammadu Buhari for “making the right choice for the job of chief executive of OGFZA”.

    He described Umana’s visit to the Government House, as “highly symbolic because Bayelsa is the cradle of the oil and gas economy in Nigeria”.

  • OGFZA to enforce rules on free zone operations

    OGFZA to enforce rules on free zone operations

    Leadership of the Oil and Gas Free Zones Authority (OGFZA) has said it will enforce the laws and regulations guiding operations in the oil and gas free zones.

    Its Managing Director, Mr. Umana Okon Umana, who spoke while addressing the authority’s management in Onne, said the agency had issued circulars to free zone investors on the policy position.

    Umana said one of the key concerns addressed in the circulars is pre-release facility by which companies post bonds to effect release of their cargoes ahead of payment of the required fees.

    He explained that OGFZA found out from reports by the Customs authority in the free zones that many of such investors failed to redeem their bonds, which is a violation of the condition precedent to the pre-release facility as contained in “Section 1(b) of the memorandum of understanding between OGFZA and the clients”.

    The OGFZA boss said the section “provides that all Customs formalities, including payment of duty and perfection of the single goods declaration will be completed within 14 days from the date the application is approved”.

    He warned that those who fail to redeem their bonds within the stipulated period will not be allowed to benefit from the pre-release facility in subsequent shipments as provided for in Section (5) of the MOU.

    Umana promised that in upholding the rules of engagement in the free zones, OGFZA will work in line with global best practices to ensure the Federal Government is not shortchanged in terms of revenue, and all parties in the free zones get a level-playing field.

    “We promise a charter of equity and fairness to all,” the managing director said.

    He added that a circular has been issued to modify and realign procedures with regard to enforcement of applicable tariffs as well as approvals for Customs, immigration and local content requirements in accordance with extant laws.

    Umana enjoined workers of the agency to ensure that the key performance indicators laid down in the OGFZA Roadmap launched last February were diligently pursued and achieved to usher in a new era of revenue growth and job creation.

  • Reduced piracy in Onne: Investors praise Fed Govt, OGFZA

    Investors have commended the Federal Government and the leadership of the Oil and Gas Free Zones Authority (OGFZA) on the decline in pirate attacks around the Onne Oil and Gas Free Zones.

    They said the huge scale back in the incidence of piracy followed representations to the federal authorities by OGFZA on security concerns in the area.

    In February, the Managing Director of OGFZA, Umana Okon Umana,   had written  to the National Security Adviser, Maj.-Gen.Babagana Monguno (rtd), to draw attention to deteriorating security around the seaport, marked by increase in the incidence of piracy and its consequential impact on investments in the area, particularly in the oil and gas free zones.

    The initiative by Umana led to a security meeting with the Flag Officer Commanding (FOC) Eastern Naval Command, Rear Admiral James Oluwole, and a subsequent deployment of several warships and patrol boats to secure the region and provide safe passage for commercial shipping.

    The better protection for shipping in the region’s waterways has helped to significantly bring down the rate of pirate attacks on shipping, as well as sabotage of oil and gas facilities in the area, Oluwole said at an interaction with the management of OGFZA.

    Also, the Terminal Operator of Indorama/Eleme Petrochemicals Limited at Onne Free Zone, Manjunath Gowdara said: “Security has improved since the Umana administration came into office. For about three months now, there’s zero incidence of attacks both on land and at sea.”

    Port security report states that Indorama security alert level has been lowered from level two to level one in the wake of the significant improvement in security around the free zone.

    The Operations Manager of Brawal Oil Services Limited, Michael Agha and the Commercial Manager of the company, Ifeanyi Odili-Nwamana, made similar remarks, stating that the new management of OGFZA, has helped to improve security in the zone.

    “There has been improved security and reduced militancy in the port,” Agha said, adding that the management of Brawal is pleased with OGFZA chief for his efforts at addressing security challenges in the port,, especially the issue of abandoned vessels at the quayside.

    Both managers said Brawal has complemented the efforts of government by putting many measures in place to improve security in the free zone.

    The General Officer Commanding (GOC) 6 Division of the Nigerian Army, Maj.-General Enobong Udoh,  also assured Umana  of adequate security when the OGFZA chief visited the GOC  in his office at Bori Camp in Port Harcourt.

    “We have made specific security arrangements to protect lives and property, as well as oil and gas assets in the region. I want to assure you that the 6 Division of the Nigerian Army will always support OGFZA,” Gen. Udoh said, adding that the 6 Division was established and headquartered in Port Harcourt to regularise and perfect all the previous ad hoc security arrangements set up to address security challenges in the Niger Delta.

  • Exporters praise OGFZA on tariff review

    Exporters praise OGFZA on tariff review

    The Association of Nigerian Exporters has commended the leadership of the Oil and Gas Free Zones Authority (OGFZA) for demanding a downward review of tariffs payable in the free zones.

    The Director-General of the association, Prince Joseph Idiong,  in a statement, said that the call for a downward tariff review by OGFZA at once reflects the sensitivity of the agency to the challenges facing free zone businesses and the need for the free zones to live out their essence as a special business-friendly hub.

    Idiong said by the initiative on the tariff cut, the  Managing Director, OGFZA,  Umana Okon Umana, has shown that he is working to bring back life into the free zones and deliver badly needed succour to struggling free zone businesses.

    Prince Idiong, frowned at the manner in which the contentious tariffs were fixed by NAPIMS, which is not the regulator of the free zones, adding that the ruling tariff regime is inconsistent with the Buhari administration’s change agenda that should ensure that the rule of law and due process apply universally in all aspects of public life.

    He argued that the current tariff regime in the free zones is illegal because it was not arrived at in accordance with section 25 of the OGFZA Act as well as sections 11 and 39 (4) of the Oil & Gas Export Free Zone Regulations 2003.

    Section 11 of the Oil & Gas Export Free Zone Regulations 2003 states that “The Authority (meaning OGFZA) shall issue schedule of tariffs which shall apply in the Free Zone and which shall be reviewed from time to time and copies made available to the licensees or operators,” while section 32 (4) of the same regulation gives OGFZA the “right to review tariffs for operations in the Free Zone from time to time.”

    Prince Idiong warned that the arbitrarily high tariffs in the free zones could lead to court action against the federal government, and advised that the agency of government charged with the regulation and management of the free zones, rather than an outside body, should be the authority that runs the free zones in all aspects, including the matter of tariffs.

    He said for the rule of law to be seen to have taken hold the regulator of the free zones should be allowed to drive all the processes in the free zones. He explained that the Association of Nigerian Exporters is not comfortable with the meddlesomeness by outsiders in the administration of the free zones because those outsiders lack the sensitivity needed to correctly address issues that affect free zone businesses.

    Recently representatives of investors in the oil and gas free zones protested the high tariffs to the free zone regulator, OGFZA, and called for a review in which the inputs of all stakeholders would be taken into account to arrive at charges that would be fair and equitable to all.

  • OGFZA plans tariff cut for free zone investors

    Investors in the oil and gas free zones will soon enjoy payment of lower tariffs, it was learnt yesterday.

    This followed the beginning of a process of downward review of tariffs by the Oil and Gas Free Zones Authority (OGFZA).

    Its Managing Director Mr. Umana Okon Umana spoke on the downward review during an interaction with investors in Onne, Rivers State, following complaints by licensed investors about high tariffs in the free zones.

    The licensees protested that the Industry Wide Standard Tariffs (IWST) being enforced in the free zones were negotiated and signed only by NAPIMS, Exxonmobil, Shell, Intels, Adax, NOAC, Total and Chevron without the input or involvement of other investors in the free zones.

    The investors argued that it was unfair to impose such tariff regime on everyone when the process that produced it was not inclusive.

    They called for all parties — including NAPIMS, OGFZA, the IOCs and other licensees — to go back to the drawing board and agree on a new tariff structure that will take care of the interest of the IOCs and other licensed investors in the free zones.

    Umana, who told the investors that their case deserved consideration, said the downward review of the statutory levies was necessary to justify the very of a free zone as an enclave where investors enjoy low cost and ease of doing business.

    He added that the difficult economic times also calls for a second look at the tariff regime in the free zones.

    He informed the investors of a meeting with the National Petroleum Investment Management Services (NAPIMS), Intels and other relevant stakeholders on a regime of tariffs that is fair to parties involved.

    Umana explained that the schedule of tariffs being implemented was approved by NAPIMS “without the input of the Oil and Gas Free Zone Authority,” contrary to Section 25 of the Oil & Gas Free Zone Act Cap 05, LFN 2010 and section 11 and 39 (4) of the Oil & Gas Export Free Zone Regulations 2003.

    Section 11 of the Oil & Gas Export Free Zone Regulations 2003 states that “The Authority shall issue schedule of tariffs which shall apply in the Free Zone and which shall be reviewed from time to time and copies made available to the licensees or operators,” while section 32 (4) of the same regulation gives OGFZA the “right to review tariffs for operations in the Free Zone from time to time”.

    The proposed reduction in tariffs is one of the measures being taken by OGFZA to boost economic activities in the oil and gas free zones.

    Last month, OGFZA presented its strategic roadmap to transform its operations and a marketing brochure that unveiled a bouquet of incentives to free zone investors.

  • OGFZA, NEPZA Bills: Matters arising

    The ongoing efforts by the Na tional Assembly (NASS) to amend the princi-pal Acts that established both the Oil & Gas Free Zones Authority (OGFZA) and the Nigerian Export Processing Authority (NEPZA) have expectedly attracted a lot of public debate. Sadly though, a good deal of the commentary is based on fantasy, deliberate distortion, half-truths and downright falsehood.

    There is therefore a crying need to separate facts from fiction in the matters of the NEPZA and OGFZA amendment bills as well as the broader issue of the existence of the two agencies of government, OGFZA and NEPZA, with responsibilities for regulating oil-related and non-oil-related free zones.

    As pointed out earlier, the trajectory and tenor of public discourse on the issue, particularly since public hearings were held on the amendment bills, have pointed to so much ignorance and deliberate mischief. We think the facts should be outlined.

     

    Need for amendment

    The two laws, NEPZA Act of 1992 and OGFZA Act of 1996 are both creations of the NASS. Both laws have been in existence for 25 and 21 years respectively, during which they have been found to be overdue for review in order to get rid of areas of imperfections with regard to ambiguity, overlap, and inadequacy in the face of new realities not anticipated at the time the laws were drafted. These are some of the reasons these two laws are put up for amendment.

    There is nothing peculiar that these two laws stand in need of review. No law is perfect. That is why national constitutions that are centuries old are still subjected to amendments to bring them in line with new realities.

    Besides, the NASS ought to be commended, not vilified, for proposing the amendments to strengthen the two agencies, OGFZA and NEPZA, for better performance in the overall interest of the nation. We see the move by the NASS to amend the laws as a step in good faith that is consistent with government policy of diversification and drive for foreign direct investment, additional windows for foreign exchange and job creation. That is why it is hard to understand why an investor like Nigerdock would go to court to stop the NASS from exercising its powers of lawmaking under the Constitution. Whose interest are Nigerdock and their ilk serving?  No investor of any hue should be allowed to dictate to Nigeria on the regulation of businesses within its borders.

     

    Naysayers

    What is remarkable about the public debate, as indicated earlier, is the paucity of argument intended to improve the legislative process on the way to the desired amendment. Rather, what is noticed is blind opposition to the OGFZA bill, with the most unfortunate argument that amending the OGFZA law would create a monopoly, drive away foreign investors, undo NEPZA (the zero sum game argument, that your gain is my loss). There is also a related but equally puerile argument that the OGFZA law should not be amended “because OGFZA resorted to self help by adding ‘s’ to the ‘zone’ in its name to read Oil and Gas Free Zones Authority, and that OGFZA was created to regulate the Onne Oil and Gas Free Zone only.

    It is important to address these contrarian positions. The change from singular ‘zone’ to the plural ‘zones’ in OGFZA’s name was a gazetted proclamation of government. In any case, taking the law in its entirety, it becomes clear that the obsession with its title is obviously indulging in air splitting, given the provision of section 5(2) of the Act which states: “The Authority shall have the power to take over and perform such other functions being hitherto performed by the Nigeria Export Processing Zones Authority as they relate to the export of oil and gas from any of the Nigeria Export Processing Zones established by the Nigeria Export Processing Zone Authority Act.” It is clear from section 5(2) of the Act that the intention of the drafters of the law was not to limit OGFZA to one free zone.

    There is a problem too in NEPZA’s name. In the NEPZA Act, the ‘zone’ in the title of the agency is in the singular, yet NEPZA regulates more than one free zone. Besides, NEPZA is not involved in regulating export business, yet it is supposed to be a regulator of an export processing zone.

    The untidiness in the letter of the two laws is one of the imperfections that the amendments intend to correct. So it is mischievous to oppose such a move; and much more so when the opposition is only to the OGFZA bill, without any reasonable ground.

    The position of those opposed to the amendment of the OGFZA Act and the very existence of the agency is actually absurd. They insist that OGFZA and what it does are not tenable because its principal Act has flaws. Then the NASS takes steps to amend the law and remove the flaws, but they oppose that too. So what do they want? In whose interest are they posturing?

    The monopoly argument is actually an egregious insult to the intelligence of Nigerians. Those who push it have not explained how amendment that strengthens a regulatory agency would create a monopoly.

    As said earlier, both OGFZA and NEPZA are creations of the law. None is superior to the other, yet the NEPZA amendment bill seeks to abolish OGFZA. It is curious that the naysayers are not raising the red flag there. Why would one agency of government seek to abolish another, especially when there is a Government White Paper that affirms the autonomy of OGFZA against the recommendation of the Orasanye Commission to merge OGFZA and NEPZA?

    The argument that allowing the amendment of the OGFZA Act would turn away foreign investors who are negotiating entry into the Nigerian market through NEPZA or who have been licensed by NEPZA is at best sophomoric. The structures of government change all the time without impairing existing contractual obligations or those under negotiation. The argument about threat to FDI is akin to saying that contracts that were entered into by the former ministry of mines and power have been invalidated because the ministry has been reconfigured and is now under the Federal Ministry of Power, Works and Housing. Some freshman thesis!

    Without doubt, there were legitimate concerns with some provisions in the bill. Specifying in the bill the terminals where cargoes could be loaded and discharged and the listing of oil and gas free zones in the Act were wrong-headed. Such provisions, if allowed, could lead to restriction of trade and run counter to the policy on the ease of doing business. With credit to OGFZA, its memo to the NASS, presented by its managing director, Mr Umana Okon Umana, at the public hearing on the bill on 26 January 2017, is that the issue of the location of terminals and number of free zones should be left open to be dealt with administratively. The sponsor of the bill, Sen. Abubakar Gobir, agreed. So no one is in support of those restrictive provisions and they cannot become part of the new law.

    Opposition to the OGFZA bill also worries that it is not clear what constitutes oil and gas activity. In response to that question of ambiguity, a technical committee is already at work to address the matter.

     

    Specificity

    OGFZA was created to address specific needs of the oil and gas sector, which an omnibus agency was ill-suited to tackle. Those who want OGFZA scrapped elect to live in denial of this reality. All over the world special vehicles are designed to address specific problems. That is why there are specialised free zones in the UAE, Ireland, China, etc. And as Dr Chris Asoluka, former chair of OGFZA board said in a recent TV interview, even in Nigeria the EFCC had to be created to replace the E-Branch of the Nigeria Police to meet the specific need of fighting financial and economic crimes which the Police Force as a whole wasn’t well adapted enough to tackle.

     

    Unfounded fear

    If anything, the imperative for a specialised agency to address the specific needs of the oil sector is truly, truly urgent now that NEPZA is going to be saddled with the management of six Special Economic Zones soon to be established as provided for in the 2017 budget. That is a huge responsibility, and NEPZA would be wise to gird its loins for the herculean task ahead, instead of dissipating energy on unfounded fears.

    In deed the fear that if OGFZA is allowed to exercise its mandate according to law investors in other free zones would be subjected to the dictates of Intels, which is just another investor, is fallacious. Intels, like other free zone businesses, is subject to the regulatory control of OGFZA, not otherwise.

    Thus all things considered, the campaign of disinformation and calumny by paid agents of vested interests against the NASS for doing its work, and against OGFZA for seeking to achieve its mandate within the law is misplaced and unpatriotic. It should stop. NASS should not be intimidated. Agents of inertia that have paralysed the Calabar and Kano Free Zones should not be allowed to halt the nation’s match to economic prosperity.

    …Adebiyi is a Lagos-based public commentator

  • OGFZA to license new oil & gas free zone in Delta

    The Oil and Gas Free Zones Authority (OGFZA) is set to break new grounds with plans to license another Oil and Gas Free Zone in Delta State. After an inspection visit on Thursday to the proposed free zone, which is located in Okitigbo in Warri North of Delta State, the Managing Director of OGFZA, Mr Umana Okon Umana, announced that he was impressed with the level of physical development of the proposed free trade hub and the readiness of its promoters, Awaritse Nigeria Limited (ANL), to acquire an oil and gas free zone status for it.

    Umana informed the promoters of the proposed free zone that they would have to comply with a set of requirements from the OGFZA, after which a recommendation would be forwarded to the President to grant the facility a licence to operate as an oil and gas free trade zone.

    Noting that the proposed free zone is into both upstream and downstream activities in the oil and gas sector, the OGFZA Managing Director commended the management of ANL for keying into the drive by the federal government for foreign direct investments.

    He said he was pleased that the project was a 100 per cent Nigerian initiative and expressed the hope that the Koko Port, which is near the project site, would be integrated into it in the future.

    In a presentation to the OGFZA team, Secretary and Legal Adviser to the board of ANL, Barrister Desmond Dudu, said the proposed free zone sits on a land area of 87, 044 hectares with a plan to increase it by another 80, 000 hectares.

    Dudu also said that based on discussions with prospective foreign investors who are only waiting for the zone to be licensed before they come in, the project would attract more than $100 million in foreign direct investments in the first instance, adding that when it is completed the free zone is expected to generate 2,170 direct and indirect jobs.

    Umana and his team were taken on a facility tour of the proposed free trade zone by the acting Managing Director of ANL, Mr Emmanuel Ebosa.  Among facilities inspected during the tour were a jetty, a tank farm, a fabrication yard where a barge was under construction, a site for a modular refinery and security infrastructure. 

     

  • OGFZA vs NEPZA

    •It’s impunity to restrict OGFZA to Onne

    The disagreement over the statutory powers of the Oil and Gas Free Zones Authority (OGFZA) and the Nigeria Export Processing Zones Authority (NEPZA) should end, as the provisions of the respective acts establishing the agencies are clear. While the NEPZA is empowered to issue licences and regulate general export processing zones, the OGFZA is specifically given powers with respect to only oil and gas export processing zones. To argue otherwise is specious and we urge relevant agencies and practitioners to abide by the extant laws and regulations.

    Specifically, section 5(2) of the OGFZA Act states that “The Authority shall have power to take over and perform such other functions being hitherto performed by NEPZA as they relate to export of oil and gas from any of the Export Processing Zones established by Nigeria Processing Zones Act.” So, if the report that NEPZA is contesting the clear provisions of the law, or that the agency is siding with some other oil and gas free zones to disobey the law is correct, then we urge relevant agencies of government to hold them to account.

    We agree with the view of the Managing Director of OGFZA, who in a communication sent to stakeholders in the oil and gas free zones demanded that they submit to the regulation of the agency, in accordance with the act. That directive is in tandem with the Federal Government’s directive as contained in the Extraordinary Government Gazette No. 12 (vol. 101) of February 2014, entitled “Free Zones (Monitoring & Regulations) Order 2014.” The provisions of the gazette are clear on the powers of OGFZA and it would be strange if government officials prevaricate on enforcing the provisions of its laws and regulations.

    Section 1(a) and (b) of the gazetted order, states as follows: “As from the commencement of this Order, the Authority (OGFZA), in addition to its functions under the Act, shall be responsible for the: (a) Licensing of all Oil and Gas Free Zones located within the Customs territory; and (b) Publication of all operating standards to be observed in the Free Zone from time to time.” Unless the government is encouraging a neglect of its own regulation, the oil and gas companies yet to come under the purview of the above provision should be called to order.

    It is untenable to want to restrict OGFZA to one place, that is Onne, because of the meaningless absence of ‘s’ in the word ‘Zone’ in its name. Its forte is not Onne but oil and gas. It is not set up for restricted geography but restricted product: oil. Wherever there is oil and gas, it has legitimacy in the country.

    Again, there is the uncontroverted report that ‘the Government White Paper on the Presidential Committee on Restructuring and Rationalisation of Federal Government Parastatals, Commissions and Agencies of March 2014 upheld the autonomy of OGFZA and confirmed the mandate of OGFZA “to regulate Oil and Gas Free Zones in Nigeria.”’ Furthermore, that the Federal attorney general in 2008 also gave his interpretation thus: “Consequently, the Nigeria Export Processing Zones Authority is expected to concentrate on its functions as provided for in section 4 of the Act while Oil and Gas Free Zones Authority should have jurisdiction over Oil and Gas Free Zones in Nigeria”.

    Unless other stakeholders are able to countermand the information in the public domain, the directive of the Managing Director of OGFZA, Mr Umana Okon Umana, by his letter of November 17, 2016, to the Managing Director of Lagos Deep Offshore & Logistics Services Limited (LADOL) and the Managing Director of Snake Island Integrated Free Zone (SIIFZ), that OGFZA has “decided to carry out the full implementation of the law and (Federal Government) directives” which vest control of the oil and gas free zones within the country in OGFZA, should be obeyed.

    The alleged effort to differentiate LADOL and SIIFZA as an engineering concern, instead of an oil and gas free zones, amounts to a mere hair splitting argument.

  • OGFZA begins regulatory control of oil and gas free zones

    The Oil and Gas Free Zones Authority (OGFZA) has begun the process of implementing the provisions of its enabling law and Federal Government directives ceding regulatory control of all oil and gas free zones in the country to OGFZA.

    In a letter dated 17 November 2016 and addressed to the Managing Director of Lagos Deep Offshore & Logistics Services Limited (LADOL) and the Managing Director of Snake Island Integrated Free Zone (SIIFZ), the chief executive officer of OGFZA, Mr Umana Okon Umana, said the Oil and Gas Free Zones Authority had “decided to carry out the full implementation of the law and (federal government) directives” which vest control of the oil and gas free zones in the country in OGFZA.

    Umana informed the managements of both LADOL and SIIFZ that “henceforth, their free zones will be licensed and regulated by OGFZA by virtue of the statutory provisions in section 5(2) of the OGFZA Act and other relevant laws as well as other directives of the Government on the take-over of all Oil and Gas Free Zones in Nigeria.”

    He said the take-over process would take 30 days from 17 November.

    The take-over process is to give effect to section 5(2) of the OGFZA Act which states that “The Authority shall have power to take over and perform such other functions being hitherto performed by NEPZA as they relate to export of oil and gas from any of the Export Processing Zones established by Nigeria Processing Zone Act.”

    Secondly, he said, the takeover is in part an implementation of Federal Government directive as contained in the Extraordinary Government Gazette No. 12 (vol. 101) of February 2014 entitled “Free Zones (Monitoring & Regulations) Order 2014.” Section 1(a)(b) of the gazetted Order states as follows:

    “As from the commencement of this Order, the Authority (OGFZA), in addition to its functions under the Act, shall be responsible for the:

    (a)        Lincensing of all oil and gas free zones located within the Customs territory; and

    (b)        Publication of all operating standards to be observed in the Free Zone from time to time.

     “It should also be noted that the Government White Paper on the Presidential Committee on Restructuring and Rationalisation of Federal Government Parastatals, Commissions and Agencies of March 2014 upheld the autonomy of OGFZA and confirmed the mandate of OGFZA ‘to regulate Oil and Gas Free Zones in Nigeria.’

    “In spite of the extant provisions of the law and government directives, compliance with respect to a number of Oil and Gas Free Zones was not forthcoming.

    “Because of the non-compliance by a few Oil and Gas Free Zones, OGFZA on 7 February 2008 sought the interpretation of the provisions of NEPZA Act and OGFZA Act from the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice as to which of the two agencies was vested with the responsibility for regulating the Oil and Gas Free Zones in Nigeria.

    “On 25 March 2008 the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation gave his interpretation of the laws as follows:

    Para 6: Consequently, the Nigeria Export Processing Zones Authority is expected to concentrate on its functions as provided for in section 4 of the Act while Oil and Gas Free Zones Authority should have jurisdiction over Oil and Gas Free Zones in Nigeria.

    Para 7: In line with the contemplation of the 1996 Act, the Nigeria Export Processing Zones Authority, in accordance with section 5(2) of the Oil & Gas Export Free Zones Authority Act 1996, is expected to handover to the Oil & Gas Free Zones Authority, all functions being hitherto performed by it as they relate to the Export of Oil and Gas from any of the Nigeria Export Processing Zones and Free Zones in Nigeria.

     “It is for the above reasons that OGFZA has taken the step mentioned earlier to implement the law and the various directives of the Federal Government with regard to regulatory control of the Oil and Gas Free Zones in the country.

    “The respective managements of the Oil and Gas Free Zones concerned have been duly informed of the commencement of the implementation process.

    “We expect full cooperation and compliance in the interest of the nation.”