By Adedapo Adesanya

As the enforcement of the ban on single-use plastics (SUPs) by the Lagos State government nears, the Manufacturers Association of Nigeria (MAN) has called for a reconsideration.

The Lagos State Ministry of the Environment recently announced that the ban would take effect from July 1, 2025, as part of broader efforts to tackle the city’s growing environmental pollution challenges.

Now, MAN is warning that the policy, if enforced as planned, could trigger widespread economic, social, and operational disruptions across the manufacturing value chain.

In a statement, MAN cautioned that the proposed measure was not backed by robust data, and lacked adequate consultation with industry players, noting that it could inadvertently worsen unemployment and poverty levels.

“Not a plastic problem, but a waste management failure. It is the failure of plastic waste management that leads to pollution, not the material itself,” said Director General of MAN, Mr Segun Ajayi-Kadir.

He warned that banning SUPs would not resolve pollution issues but merely substitute one problem for another, especially without scalable alternatives or infrastructure to support the transition.

Citing findings from a study it commissioned, the group of manufacturers warned that the planned ban on single-use plastics could trigger significant job losses and business disruptions across the plastics value chain.

According to MAN, “100 per cent of manufacturers surveyed expressed fears of job losses and workforce restructuring if the ban is implemented.”

Curing more data, MAN said that 89 per cent of participants in the plastics value chain rely on SUPs as their primary source of income; More than 75 per cent of end users, including numerous small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), depend on plastic packaging, with no affordable or viable alternatives currently available; 93 per cent of dealers, many of whom are women entrepreneurs, reported having received no prior information about the ban or access to any form of social support to mitigate its impact.

It also noted that recyclers also raised concerns about a potential drop in the availability of plastic feedstock, which could further undermine the performance of their already underutilized plants.

“There is no form of arrangement for social protection for the employees who will lose their livelihoods as a result of this ban,” the association stressed.

MAN thus advocated for a system-oriented and circular economy strategy instead of an outright ban on the single-use-plastics, urging government to invest in recycling infrastructure, including sorting and collection systems.

The organisation also advised the government to support local production of sustainable alternatives and adopt evidence-based policymaking informed by context-specific data.

It said the federal government had already developed a national plastic Action Roadmap and a National Policy on Plastic Waste Management (NPPWM), both of which promote circularity and were developed through inclusive consultations.

Mr Ajayi-Kadir viewed that the ban focuses on the easiest approach to address the issue of plastic pollution rather than the most sustainable approach that gives balanced attention to social, economic, and environmental considerations.

He therefore called for discontinuation of the ban on plastics, noting that it is “a move in the wrong direction.”

“We support the environmental intent of plastic waste management, we however believe this can only be achieved through policies that are inclusive, evidence-based, and sustainably implemented.

“It is out of tune with the reality of our socio-economic situation, and is bereft of more ingenious and beneficial solutions. Quite importantly, the proposed ban is riddled with needless, potentially adverse economic and social impacts on the State and the country.

“The decision is predicated on the unsubstantiated claim that plastics, and especially some single-use plastics (SUPs) are associated with adverse health and environmental impact and therefore need to be banned.”

MAN also alleged that the state is yet to publish any study to substantiate this claim.

“On the contrary, plastic is indeed a versatile and highly durable material that is supporting mankind in various endeavors across industries. It is the failure of management of plastic waste that may result in adverse environmental and social impacts.

By Adedapo Adesanya

The Lagos State Government has launched the Lagos Identity Project, a digital house-numbering initiative aimed at enhancing property identification and service delivery across the state.

According to Mr Olajide Babajide, the Special Adviser to Governor Sanwo-Olu on Enterprise Geographic Information System, the system will significantly improve property identification and public service efficiency.

Speaking on Tuesday during the unveiling of the project in Alausa, Lagos, Mr Babajide explained that the digital plates, with QR codes and local government colour codes, would boost emergency response, postal services, and urban planning efforts.

“This project is about providing Lagosians with world-class services they truly deserve.

“We’ve had issues ranging from tax evasion to untraceable addresses. This new digital system is the solution,” he said, noting that scanning the QR code on a building will grant access to essential property information for residents and relevant stakeholders.

The Special Adviser said the project would prevent rental fraud and enhance emergency location tracking throughout Lagos communities, linking the smart city initiative to Lagos’ earlier milestones, including the data centre built under President Bola Tinubu’s tenure as governor of the state.

According to him, those innovations earned Lagos international recognition in digital governance from institutions like the World Bank.

Mr Babajide said the new initiative was developed in partnership with Interspatial, which conducted two years of aerial mapping across Lagos, adding that the initiative introduced a standardised civic address system that meets global identification and data protection standards.

“This isn’t just a project; it’s a legacy that aligns with international benchmarks,” Mr Babajide declared.

The system is currently being piloted in the Eti-Osa Local Government Area, and will be expanded to all 57 Local Government and Local Council Development Areas (LCDAs) once the pilot is complete.

The government noted the trained Ibile youth are implementing the system, ensuring both data accuracy and local community involvement.

Mr Babajide praised the Lagos State Government for funding the initiative, noting that its financial backing reflects serious commitment.

“Technology costs money, and this investment shows the government’s will to improve planning and services,” he said.

By Adedapo Adesanya

A High Court in Port Harcourt, Rivers State, has set July 16, 2025, to decide a case in which the Nigeria LNG (NLNG) was accused of breaching a contract it awarded to a local contractor, Macobarb International Limited.

Justice Chinwendu Nwogu, which is handling the matter with the suit number PHC/2013/CS/2022, will also decide and rule if the breach led to costs as high as N5.74 billion, which the claimants are seeking.

The fixing of the date of judgment came on Tuesday, June 24, 2025, after counsels for both parties adopted and adumbrated their final written addresses, each seeking to convince the judge to rule in their client’s favour.

Macobarb had sued NLNG, claiming it breached the terms of contract and that this breach led to various costs amounting to N5.74 billion, saying the contract was deemed to still be running and that cost is rising.

Adopting their address, the lead counsel to Macobarb, Mr Benefit Vilokpo, said, “Claimants have shown by their pleadings and documentary evidence that NLNG breached its terms of contract, and that Macobarb has demonstrated that the purported letter of termination dated 27th November, 2015, is unlawful, null, and void.”

He also said contract agreement made several provisions for ‘Standby Payments’ and that claimants have also shown that they are entitled to Standby Payments.

The claimants’ lead counsel submitted in his adopted final address what he considered issues for determination, adding that the built their claim on the ground that the person that terminated the contract (Mr Emeka Ohiri) was not known to the contract.

It was claimed that the Contract Holder is a Mr Dweller Francis, clarifying that the said Mr Francis never served Macobarb any termination letter.

The claimant counsel also said and pointed to the sections in their final address that the contract provided for standdown time.

The claimants final address noted that to demonstrate that the contract is still in existence, the defendant called for a meeting on the February 19, 2016 termed “Project close-out meeting”.

The contract close-out meeting with signatures of all the attendees showed where it was stated that to close out the contract, NLNG will have to establish what the costs for the materials delivered to NLNG were, as well as the cost for demobilising and to prepare the payment certificates for all items of the contract executed by the contractor.

Macobarb asked the court to view it that the contract is yet to be closed out and to also note that the defendant (NLNG) admitted receipt of materials including 20ft container from the claimants.

On its part, the NLNG lead counsel, Mr Bayo Aderelegbe, asked the court to determine whether the second claimant was a party to the contract and can sue in respect of the contract.

But Macobarb countered this, arguing that this contention by the NLNG had earlier been dismissed by the same court and judge when it was raised during preliminary objection and that in fact, the judge had awarded a fine of N200,000 against the NLNG.

The NLNG counsel also wants the court to determine whether his client breached the contract as alleged by the claimants; whether the defendant wrongfully terminated the contract; and whether the claimants were entitled to the N5.74 billion.

Another crucial matter both parties addressed is the issue of ‘Performance Bond’ mentioned in the contract. The NLNG submitted that the claimant (contractor) failed to submit it within 14 days and that this was the basis for termination of the contract.