Lawmakers, Navy, NIMASA, Police Unite in Opposition Against Proposed 'Marine Corps Bill'

A proposed bill to establish the Nigerian Marine Corps, known as HB 225, has faced massive opposition during a public hearing conducted by the House Committee on Navy.

The bill, sponsored by Hon. Alex Egbona, aimed to enhance maritime security and bolster the blue economy by creating a new federal body for maritime law enforcement and defense. However, it was met with fierce resistance from lawmakers, security agencies, and civil society organizations.

Deputy spokesperson of the House of Representatives, Hon. Philip Agbese, along with 66 other lawmakers, rejected the proposal, arguing that it would lead to "significant overlap, redundancy, and logistical strain," thereby creating operational inefficiencies and imposing unnecessary financial burdens on the government. Agbese emphasized that existing agencies like the Nigerian Navy and NIMASA are already well-equipped to handle maritime security.

The Nigeria Police Force also criticized the bill, highlighting potential risks of operational conflicts and bureaucratic inefficiencies. SP Nandom Vongjen, representing the Police at the hearing, suggested that "a more prudent approach would be to strengthen existing agencies and optimize their capabilities."

Representatives from the Nigerian Navy, including Rear Admiral Olusegun Ferreira, and officials from NIMASA echoed these sentiments, advocating for enhancing the capacity of current agencies rather than establishing a new entity that could pose security and jurisdictional challenges.

Civil society organizations, such as the Security Analysts & Research Forum in Africa, also voiced their disapproval, with Abdullahi Bilal describing the bill as "unnecessary." Other groups, including the Centre for Social Justice and the Nigerian Unemployed Youth Association, called for the bill's rejection due to concerns over inefficiency and potential resource wastage.

Hon. Yusuf Gadgi, Chairman of the House Committee on Navy, assured Nigerians that legislative due diligence would guide the committee's decision, underlining its impartiality in evaluating the bill. As debates continue, stakeholders argue for focusing on strengthening existing maritime frameworks rather than creating parallel institutions.