The Managing Director of the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN), Olubunmi Kuku, has rejected claims that the agency’s restrictions on e-hailing services at airports played a role in Uber’s decision to leave Nigeria.
Speaking to journalists at Murtala Muhammed Airport in Lagos on Friday, Kuku described Uber’s exit as a business decision by the company. She maintained that FAAN’s main concern was to safeguard passengers and provide a smooth travel experience.
The development came a week after FAAN temporarily barred e-hailing drivers from making commercial pickups at its airports while awaiting the completion and signing of licence agreements.
The restriction led to speculation that FAAN was seeking to create space for its recently launched airport e-hailing platform, ACHRAMS.
However, Kuku said the agency’s intervention followed complaints from passengers, particularly during the December holiday period, over unpleasant experiences with some e-hailing and car-hire services operating around the airports.
“I work for the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria, and my first responsibility is to ensure that our passengers are safe, protected and have a seamless passenger experience.
“Regarding Uber, 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,” she said.
According to Kuku, FAAN received numerous complaints from passengers who used e-hailing and car-hire services during the festive period.
“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.
She said the complaints ranged from intimidation to passengers being dropped off at unintended locations, with some cases involving more serious incidents.
The FAAN boss also alleged that some drivers operating on e-hailing platforms had exploited the airport system by posing as legitimate e-hailing operators before joining car-hire operators to charge passengers higher fares.
“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,” she said.
Kuku said the app introduced by FAAN was designed primarily to improve transparency by enabling passengers to identify the car-hire companies and drivers conveying them to their destinations.
“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,” she said.
She stressed that FAAN neither operated the car-hire services nor collected payments on behalf of the drivers.
“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,” she said.
Addressing concerns over the cost of airport car-hire services, Kuku said the higher fares charged by such operators were largely linked to their business model, adding that passengers remained free to choose how they travelled.
“It is the passenger’s choice whether to pre-book a car, use an e-hailing app, or use a car-hire service. We have no jurisdiction over that,” she said.
She, however, maintained that FAAN’s responsibility was to ensure that passengers could identify the people transporting them within the airport environment.
“The only responsibility I have is to ensure that passengers have visibility into who is driving them and that there is accountability for those operating within our airports,” she said.
On the disagreement between FAAN and e-hailing companies, Kuku said one of the major sticking points was liability and responsibility for drivers operating on their platforms.
According to her, while the companies requested dedicated pick-up zones at the airports and FAAN agreed to the arrangement, the authority also expected them to accept responsibility for the conduct and safety of drivers using their platforms.
Kuku said FAAN was uncomfortable with a situation where the companies would direct passengers to rely on safety features on their platforms while declining responsibility for the drivers.
“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.
“So, 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,” she said.
The FAAN boss dismissed suggestions that the authority’s policies contributed to Uber’s decision to leave Nigeria, saying the company had been considering its exit for some time.
“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 said.