Federal Government’s Rerouting of Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway Sparks Controversy

The Federal Government’s decision to reroute the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway inland to avoid constructing multiple bridges across five states has sparked criticism from Nigerians, who argue that the move undermines the project’s original intent.

Minister of Works David Umahi revealed on Sunday during a stakeholders’ engagement meeting in Lagos that the highway’s alignment is being adjusted to avoid the costly construction of long bridges in Ondo, Delta, Rivers, Akwa Ibom, and Bayelsa states. The redesign, he said, would cut costs while ensuring a return on investment.

“For the sections of Ondo, the section of Delta, the section of Port Harcourt, the continuous section in Akwa Ibom and Bayelsa, we are confronted with a lot of bridges, some as long as three kilometres. We don’t want to do that. That is going to cost us a fortune. So, we are redesigning, going to the uplands of the corridor, and so that is going to eliminate about 90 per cent of the bridges so that it will be cost-effective and then there will be a return on investment. This is what is happening on the Lagos-Calabar coastal highway,” Umahi stated.

The announcement has drawn backlash on social media, with many questioning why a “coastal” highway is being rerouted from the coastline.

On X, @FinPlanKaluAja1 expressed skepticism, writing:

“Did I not tell you? So it’s no longer a coastal road? Ok. We have an East-to-West road, which is not completed. Is this new road not a duplication?”

Another user, @Eric_NiceGuy, suggested that the project lacked a clear plan from the start, commenting:

“They will eventually link that road to the East-West road, no way they will construct a new road. They have no plans before, they are just making it up as they go.”

Others also raised concerns about the project’s transparency and planning process. @TimedFrank questioned the lack of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and a proper project model before the road’s commencement:

“This project was rushed. No EIA report was made publicly available. No 3D prototype/model was produced or shown. So how was the project pricing done if there was no drawing plan? If it’s a COASTAL Highway, then it should run along the coastline, else it’s just another highway.”

@ValFrancis001 echoed similar sentiments, arguing that the Federal Ministry of Works did not conduct an EIA before the project’s commencement:

“The long and short of the confusion is that the Federal Government, through the Federal Ministry of Works, did not do an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) before commencing construction of the Coastal Road. Poor work, poor engineering.”

While the government insists that the realignment will reduce costs and enhance commercial activities, debates persist about whether the project deviates from its original purpose. The Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway was initially envisioned as a major economic corridor that would connect states and promote tourism and renewable energy initiatives.

Umahi had earlier announced President Tinubu’s directive to commence sections three and four of the highway, spanning Cross River and Akwa Ibom. However, he noted that construction was pending the approval of the Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP).

That realignment follows the earlier termination of a controversial section that would have displaced residents in Okun-Ajah and affected submarine cables along the coastline. Recall previous demolitions that affected the beachfront of private businesses, including LandMark, costing losses in millions of dollars.

As debates continue, Nigerians await further clarity on whether the rerouted highway will still deliver on its economic and infrastructural promises.