By Uzor Odigbo
The plans by the National Assembly and board members of the controversial Council for Regulations of Freight Forwarding in Nigeria (CRFFN) to amend the Council Act to pave way for a second tenure for this present members from two years to four years, which has been largely condemned by maritime industry stakeholders is raising more dust.
The latest comment is coming from the immediate past Chairman of the Governing Board of the Council, Aare Hakeem Olanrewaju.
Olanrewaju has condemned the incumbent board chairman and his members for seeking to elongate their tenure from two years to four years without due process.
Olanrewaju in a signed press statement issued today noted that the tenure of the current CRFFN board has expired since July 2020 and that notice of fresh elections into the Council ought to have been rolled out by now.
He lamented that the Council has been hijacked by the government and that it is pitiable its major focus now is how to collect the controversial Practitioners Operating Fee (POF) from helpless and struggling freight forwarding practitioners, instead of regulating and paying attention to freight forwarders plight.
Olanrenwaju who is also an ANLCA chieftain condemned the CRFFN flyers in circulation, compelling practitioners to register themselves properly by possessing the mandatory qualifications. Which according to him, this ought to have been done since 2018, and not at a time the tenure of the board members has expired.
He said in the statement “You recalled that it was reported in the news , where the Governing Council were accused of plotting to extend their tenure by two additional years. To this moment, there is no official refuttal to this report.
One obvious fact, that must be stated and put straight, is that the Council Act 16 of 2007 is an extant laws of the Federation, as such pending the conclusion of the amendment process presently ongoing at the National Assembly, the relevant provisions are extant.
“Most importantly, the Council remains a professional council with a clear legislative intents and purposes.
Therefore, the governing council members are hereby encouraged not to truncate, nor make mockery of the two years statutory democratic elective succession as provided in the act, for mere parochialism” he warned.
The CRFFN former chairman noted that practitioners were astonished and helpless when in 2018, the Minister of Transportation, Rotimi Amaechi hijacked the process of electing the Chairman and Vice of the Council, which was the provisional obligations and professional standards set by the first and second Governing Council.
According to him, the enabling provisions was sacked for government core interests, as the Minister solely decided on who will be the Governing Council Chairman, he further claimed.
Stressing more further, he said “I must state clearly, that, the present Council placed more emphasis on POF collection as an only options to reciprocate and correspondingly account for its yearly budgetary allocations, thereby closing its eyes from exploring other sources of professional revenue available in the industry.
“If the roles and interests of the
government will derail or defeat the intenments of the Act 16, 2007, then for professional sustainability and posterity sake, on behalf of the Nigerian Freight Forwarders, I wish to beg the government to please grant the freight forwarders their professional independence and let the freight forwarders alone.
“So far, It is obvious that your administrative programs of action toward us are not professionally and developmentally driven”.
Olanrenwaju pleaded with the management of the Council to follow
with due diligence in its duty to evolve a purposeful mandatory qualifications training in earnest.
“Withdraw the present noticed issued, rather issue a notice in relation seeking compliance to training and retraining programs in this regards. Take adequate care not to throw the industry into undue
confusion. Do strategic consultation and communicate adequately, you are dealing with professionals and not Civil Servants. Stay away from any form of political permutations”, he advised.
He urged them to “Advise the Minister alright and set up mercenaries for immediate conduct of elections. Avoid a repeat of what transpired in 2012 of the last Council” he said, as he submitted during a professional discourse on how to chat a new order for the survival of the freight forwarders in Nigeria, it was noted that.
“From the period the Act 16, 2007 came into the industry limelight to date, the practitioners mouths remains widely open on one side, pondering to
the sudden realisation that, by deeds or body language, their Regulatory Council is merely “a quasi non-governmental council created and funded by the government and therefore solely in-charge for its yearly budgetary income and expenditures, and on the other side grappling with the emerging developments in the profession.
One of such development being the dubbed clandestine moves ( lobbying) for a legislative amendment through the National Assembly to the effect that, “the government shall appoint the Registrar and Chairman of the Council”, as experimented and witnessed in the 2018 Governing Council constituting process”.
The discourse further noted that, “the most funny aspects of this emerging developments, being the push by the incumbent governing council members for a tenure elongation beginning with them. This move triggered an ill feelings amongst the practitioners, especially the unaccredited freight forwarding associations who now accuses the accredited associations as represented in the governing council of “Social Darwinism” ( suggesting the tactical eliminating process of the weak
associations by the privilege stronger associations) an act which is inconsistent with the provisions of the enabling Act 16, 2007. To them as taunted, this is not just a deliberate professional exclusion, but a denial of their constitutional rights”.
It is against this background, that I was further compelled on the above posited caption, then the second question to the caption; “the CRFFN: A PRODUCT OF LEGISLATIVE BAD TASTE?”. This is
because when and where there are fundamental administrative defects in an organisation, then abuses is eminent. Under such settings, the case scenario of the late Chinua Achebe’s “things fall
apart, when the center can not hold” comes to the mind. For instance, it has been said that,.
“When an accredited professional associations and practitioners suddenly takes a “Status of Westminster” under a regulatory body, then not only will regulatory essence be defeated, but the profession will suffers effective administrative stagnation, and professionalism objectives tilts to fly into the limbo”.
One may not be wrong to adduce that, presently the Regulatory Council is seemingly grappling and thriving in a mix atmosphere of ” Spoil System” with no sorry to the captioned question QUANGOS IN ITS ADMINISTRATIONS. As it stands, four issues are at the front burner ranging from:
The noticeable inadequate administrative cohesion between the Governing Council and the Management Team. A true reflection of this is pronounced where standing & ad-hoc committees are created as enshrined in the enabling regulation but were not funded due to a general paucity of
funds. But internal misgivings arose where and when some of the Governing Council members now lately raises an eyebrow or queries the performance and just administration of the yearly budgetary allocations?.
The too much ado’s about the commencement and collection of the Professionals Operating Fees POF. With a close eye on the ball and an ear on the ground within the industry comes the industry; murmuring, heightened discordant voices by extension subtle resistance by the practitioners, whose mouths are full with several unanswered questions. Many have stratgize themselves into subgroups elements, waiting, monitoring the effective collection of the POF with a sole aim to be in possession of an evidence to the effect, to fast track and support their intents to challenge its application before a court of competent jurisdiction, this in another phrase is called “spoiling for a fight”.
Following the endless operational abuses, high-handedness and bottlenecks bedevilling the port industry presently, with the practitioners helplessly running from pillars to posts seeking for regulatory interventions which appears too far from their yearnings and reach, better still, that
invariably narrowing their professional leadership and regulatory expectations and trust.
As this scenario snowball into unbearable and ugly dimensions, the leadership of the accredited freight
forwarding associations afraid of imminent or possible reprisal attacks or direct assaults and insults on them, without further notice or consultations with the regulatory council resorts to self help as a remedial to the ailing operational challenges, hence, the present multiple setting up of tasks forces / compliance teams.
The unwillingness and non payment of the annual subscription fees and other professional related fees by the freight forwarders. This is a big administrative challenge, because as what it takes to
keep both the professionals and profession promptly afloat in the industry and relevant amongst the comity of global freight forwarding nations is a prompt administrative funding in all ramifications.
The big question posed by some regulatory authority officials, ” When an acclaimed professionals fails to pay yearly professional practicing fees, etc is such an individual worthy to ascribe to as being a professional or practitioners? it means we have too many non professional amongst the freight
forwarding sub-sector of the maritime industry. That’s too bad”.
Since the creation of the CRFFN in 2007, it has been one crisis to another, with several cases in courts
