Aviation industry experts have criticised the Federal Government’s plan to reimburse the Yobe State Government N100.5bn for the construction of the Muhammadu Buhari International Cargo Airport in Damaturu, describing the proposed payment as unnecessary.

The experts, in separate interviews with our correspondent, raised concerns about the economic viability, cost and management of state-owned airports.

The experts argued that although state governments can construct airports within their territories, such projects should be backed by clear economic objectives, realistic traffic projections and sustainable operational plans rather than expectations of eventual reimbursement by the Federal Government.

President Bola Tinubu had, on Tuesday, asked the Senate to approve a N100.5bn promissory note programme to reimburse Yobe State for the construction of the airport.

In a letter addressed to the President of the Senate, Godswill Akpabio, Tinubu sought legislative approval for the issuance of the promissory note through the Debt Management Office.

The President explained that the Federal Executive Council, at its second extraordinary meeting held on 23 May, 2023, approved the takeover of the airport, constructed by the Yobe State Government, as well as the reimbursement of the construction cost through a promissory note programme.

The Managing Director of the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria, FAAN, Mrs Olubunmi Kuku, has cautioned state governments against embarking on airport projects without conducting thorough economic and feasibility assessments, warning that less than 10 per cent of Nigerians currently travel by air.

Speaking on the development, aviation analyst and member of the Aviation Round Table, Olumide Ohunayo, questioned the rationale behind state governments constructing airports that may be too expensive to operate and maintain relative to their economic capacity.

“We must agree that most airports start as social projects. However, when a state goes ahead and builds an airport that is far bigger than its economy can sustain, the end result is situations like this reimbursement controversy,” Ohunayo said.

He argued that such projects could become driven more by political considerations than by sound economic planning, particularly when they were undertaken in the period leading up to elections.

According to him, the possibility of securing reimbursement from the Federal Government could create incentives for some state governments to inflate project costs or compromise construction standards.

Ohunayo added that a comparison between the physical state of some airport projects and the amounts claimed for reimbursement could raise questions about whether the sums being requested adequately reflected the quality of the infrastructure delivered.

Meanwhile, former Rector of the Nigeria College of Aviation Technology, Samuel Caulcrick, highlighted the constitutional distinction between the power to construct airports and the authority to regulate aviation activities in Nigeria.

Caulcrick explained that aviation and airports fall under the Exclusive Legislative List in Item 3 of Part I of the Second Schedule to the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

He said this arrangement allows state governments to construct, finance and maintain airports or airstrips within their territories, while regulatory authority over aviation operations remains with the Federal Government.

“This means states can build, but cannot regulate; while state governments can construct, fund, and maintain airports or airstrips within their territories. They do not possess the constitutional authority to regulate aviation operations, control airspace, or issue aviation licenses,” Caulcrick said.

He explained that such regulatory responsibilities rest with federal aviation agencies, including the Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority, the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria and the Nigerian Airspace Management Agency.