The exit of the e-hailing giant, Uber, has been a major topic of discussion among Nigerians lately, particularly aviation stakeholders and the airport community, as many believe that the recent suspension of the e-hailing company from airports in Nigeria instigated its exit. OLASUNKANMI AKINLOTAN writes.
The Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria has distanced itself from Uber’s decision to withdraw from Nigeria, insisting that the ride-hailing giant’s exit has little to do with its airport operations and everything to do with the company’s wider business considerations.
Uber announced last Wednesday that it would wind down operations in Nigeria and Uganda effective September 2, 2026, following what it described as a ‘thorough review’ of its operations and evolving business priorities.
The company said, “After a thorough review, we have taken the difficult decision to wind down operations in Nigeria and Uganda, effective September 2, 2026.”
But as questions mounted over whether regulatory friction with FAAN contributed to the Nigerian exit, the authority’s Managing Director, Olubunmi Kuku, was emphatic: FAAN had no hand in Uber’s decision.
“I can’t speak to their exit from Nigeria. I’m sure they have their own economic and regulatory considerations as to why they chose to exit,” Kuku told journalists at the airport.
FAAN said the issue was never about forcing Uber out of Nigeria. It was about what the authority described as growing concerns over passenger safety, accountability, touting and the conduct of drivers operating within the airport environment.
Weeks before Uber’s announcement, FAAN had temporarily restricted e-hailing operators from conducting commercial pick-ups at its airports pending the finalisation and execution of licence agreements. While Bolt was subsequently cleared to resume operations after meeting the required standards, Uber remained barred from operating to and from the airports.
The development fuelled speculation that FAAN’s regulatory push, particularly its newly introduced airport e-hailing platform, ACHRAMS, was part of a strategy to edge established platforms out of the airport transport space.
FAAN’s position
She said FAAN’s intervention was triggered by complaints from passengers, particularly during the December holiday period, about unpleasant experiences involving some e-hailing and car-hire operators.
“We received a lot of complaints, especially around the December holiday period, from passengers who used some of the e-hailing services, as well as car-hire services, and had very unpleasant experiences,” she said.
According to Kuku, the complaints included intimidation, passengers being dropped at unintended locations and other incidents that raised questions about who was accountable for drivers operating within airport premises.
She alleged that some drivers associated with e-hailing platforms also exploited the airport system by presenting themselves as legitimate e-hailing operators before joining car-hire operators and charging passengers higher fares.
For this, FAAN believed that it was sufficient reason to impose tighter oversight. She said, “We also had situations where some Uber and Bolt drivers would get out of their cars under the guise of coming into the airport as e-hailing drivers, and then join the car-hire operators to charge higher fares.
“Because there were widespread complaints about touting at the airport, it was important for us to provide some form of regulatory oversight for the car-hire operators.”
That concern, she explained, also informed the development of ACHRAMS, which she said was not designed for FAAN to operate a transport business or collect fares, but to improve transparency and accountability.
She explained, “The app that was developed was strictly focused on ensuring that passengers have visibility into who the car-hire companies are and who the driver taking them from Point A to Point B is.
“FAAN does not collect money on behalf of the drivers. Those car-hire drivers are not FAAN drivers. All we do is provide an indication of the rates based on the destination you are travelling to.”
At the heart of the dispute with e-hailing companies, however, was liability. Kuku said FAAN agreed to the request for dedicated airport pick-up zones but expected the platforms to accept greater responsibility for the conduct and safety of drivers using their services.
“One of the issues we were struggling with the e-hailing companies over was largely around liability clauses. But we also wanted them to take responsibility for the drivers. However, we were told that those drivers are not Uber’s drivers; rather, they are independent drivers,” she stated.
That position, she added, presented a major concern for the airport authority. Against that backdrop, Kuku insisted FAAN should not be blamed for Uber’s wider corporate decision.
“With regard to any safety concerns we raised, they wanted passengers to use the safety features available on their platforms. They did not want to take on that responsibility, and we had a major issue with that.
“I’m sure they had their own reasons, and I know they had been considering exiting Nigeria for a while, which is why we had a stumbling point with them. So, it has nothing to do with FAAN. Again, the airport is just a small part of the wider area in which they operate within Nigeria,” she insisted.
Uber, meanwhile, said its withdrawal from Nigeria and Uganda was part of a broader global restructuring that includes cutting about 3,300 jobs, or roughly 10 per cent of its 34,000-strong workforce.
The company said it remained committed to Sub-Saharan Africa, describing the region as one with “robust growth and long-term opportunity.”
However, the message for FAAN was that whatever ultimately drove Uber from Nigeria, passenger safety and accountability at the nation’s airports remain non-negotiable.
Meanwhile, the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission is looking into Uber’s abrupt exit from Nigeria, with the regulator focusing on whether the ride-hailing company left behind unfulfilled services and obligations to customers.
In a report by Bloomberg, the FCCPC Chief Executive Officer, Tunji Bello, disclosed the development in a text message to the foreign media house, which reported that the antitrust and consumer protection regulator had begun examining the manner of Uber’s departure from the Nigerian market.
Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc. (Syndigate.info).
