FG’s Truce with Bi-Courtney Reopens Airport Concession Debate

After nearly 20 years of legal disputes, the federal government’s settlement with Bi-Courtney is reviving hopes that airport concessions can finally attract serious private investment into Nigeria’s aviation sector, writes Chinedu Eze

For nearly two decades, the legal and commercial dispute between the federal government and Bi-Courtney Aviation Services Limited (BASL) stood as one of the biggest cautionary tales against private investment in Nigeria’s aviation infrastructure.

The prolonged conflict over the concession of the Murtala Muhammed Airport Terminal Two (MMA2) in Lagos not only created uncertainty around Public-Private Partnership (PPP) arrangements but also weakened investor confidence in Nigeria’s ability to respect concession agreements.

Now, with the recent settlement announced by the Minister of Aviation and Aerospace Development, Festus Keyamo, stakeholders believe the federal government may finally be sending a different message to investors: that Nigeria is prepared to resolve long-standing contractual disputes and create a more stable environment for infrastructure investment.

The resolution of the impasse between BASL and the federal government is significant, not merely because it closes one of the aviation industry’s most controversial chapters, but because it could redefine the future of airport concession in Nigeria.

The roots of the dispute date back to the early 2000s after the old domestic terminal of the Murtala Muhammed International Airport was destroyed by fire in May 2000. Faced with the urgent need for a modern domestic terminal, the federal government adopted a PPP model under which BASL was selected to build and operate a new terminal under a Build, Operate, and Transfer arrangement.

The concession agreement, signed in 2003, eventually produced MMA2, which at the time of its completion was widely celebrated as one of the most modern airport terminals in West Africa. Even years later, the terminal remains arguably Nigeria’s best domestic airport facility, combining aesthetics, functionality, and operational efficiency in a way that stands in stark contrast to many publicly managed terminals across the country.

However, what began as a showcase PPP project soon degenerated into a bitter legal confrontation.

At the centre of the dispute were disagreements over the interpretation of the concession agreement. BASL maintained that all scheduled domestic airlines were expected to operate from MMA2 upon completion of the project. The company also insisted that the General Aviation Terminal (GAT), now known as MMA1, formed part of the concession territory and argued that it possessed the right of first refusal should another airport terminal be developed in Lagos State.

The disagreements rapidly escalated into legal battles involving BASL and the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN). Over the years, courts repeatedly ruled in favour of BASL, including decisions affirming the validity of the concession agreement and recognising the company’s claims regarding aspects of the disputed assets.

One of the most consequential rulings came in 2012 when a Federal High Court awarded over N132 billion in damages against FAAN. Additional rulings criticised the authority for taking unilateral actions outside judicial processes.

Yet despite these judgments, the dispute lingered through multiple administrations, turning the MMA2 concession into a symbol of policy inconsistency and institutional distrust.

For many investors, the conflict was a troubling signal about Nigeria’s investment climate for infrastructure. It reinforced fears that concession agreements could become vulnerable to political changes, bureaucratic resistance, and prolonged litigation. That perception may now be changing.

Speaking after the Federal Executive Council meeting on April 30, Keyamo disclosed that both parties had agreed to a broad settlement framework.

Under the arrangement, BASL agreed to relinquish claims over the GAT terminal, abandon the right of first refusal over future airport projects in Lagos, and also write off the N132 billion debt claim against FAAN.

In return, the federal government granted BASL approval to resume construction of the long-abandoned hotel and conference centre projects adjacent to MMA2. The government also approved regional flight operations from MMA2, while pledging to expand the terminal apron to accommodate more aircraft.

That aspect of the settlement may prove commercially transformative for BASL.

Regional operations had long been one of the company’s major ambitions. BASL had invested heavily in upgrading MMA2 with immigration facilities, Customs infrastructure, and passenger handling systems tailored for regional flights. However, despite those investments, approval for regional operations never materialized, deepening the acrimony between the two parties. With the new agreement, MMA2 may finally begin operating closer to the original commercial vision its promoters envisioned.

Beyond the immediate settlement, the development carries wider implications for Nigeria’s aviation sector. Infrastructure financing remains one of the country’s biggest economic challenges. Government revenues are constrained, public debt servicing pressures remain elevated, and infrastructure deficits continue to widen across critical sectors.

In aviation, airport modernization in particular requires substantial capital commitments that the government alone may struggle to provide sustainably. This reality explains why concession arrangements have increasingly become attractive.

But concession models only work where investors are convinced that agreements will be respected across political cycles. The Bi-Courtney dispute had badly undermined that confidence.

Industry stakeholders, therefore, see the settlement as an opportunity to rebuild trust.

Managing Director of Flight and Logistics Solutions Limited, Amos Akpan, described the settlement as potentially one of the most important PPP success stories in Nigerian aviation if properly implemented.

According to him, the concession survived five administrations – from the government of Olusegun Obasanjo through those of Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, Goodluck Jonathan, Muhammadu Buhari, and now Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

For Akpan, the current administration’s ability to negotiate a settlement after years of hostility demonstrates that disputes arising from PPP projects can be resolved without destroying the underlying investment structure.

The Tinubu administration’s broader disposition toward airport concessions also appears more pragmatic than that of previous efforts.

In recent months, the Ministry of Aviation has successfully advanced concession arrangements for Akanu Ibiam International Airport and Port Harcourt International Airport, signaling a renewed government commitment to private-sector participation in airport management.

Still, challenges remain. Airport concession is politically sensitive in Nigeria. Labour unions often fear job losses, while critics worry about transparency, tariff increases, and possible asset stripping. Investors, on the other hand, remain concerned about regulatory stability, foreign exchange volatility, and policy reversals.

The success of the renewed BASL arrangement will therefore depend largely on implementation discipline, regulatory clarity, and sustained political commitment.

For now, however, the settlement represents something Nigeria’s infrastructure sector has struggled to achieve for years: a negotiated resolution that balances government interests with investor confidence.

After two decades of disputes, court rulings, and mutual distrust, the federal government’s armistice with Bi-Courtney may finally offer the aviation sector a fresh opportunity to demonstrate that PPP arrangements can work in Nigeria after all.