Ibaka Or Ibeno? Enyong’s Seaport Promise Reopens Akwa Ibom’s Biggest Infrastructure Debate
By ETETE EKONG
THE proposed Ibom Deep Seaport has returned to the centre of Akwa Ibom’s political conversation as the 2027 governorship election approaches. This time, the debate has acquired a fresh deadline, a proposed change of location and new questions about how the multibillion-dollar project would be financed.
Michael Enyong, the governorship candidate of the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC), says he will commence actual construction within 90 days of assuming office in 2027.
The former House of Representatives member also wants to relocate the project from Ibeno to Ibaka, arguing that the latter offers a more suitable natural harbour and could reduce dredging costs.
Furthermore, he claims to have secured the interest of an American investor and a prospective French investor, although he has not publicly identified either party or disclosed their proposed financial commitments.
Enyong made the commitments on 1 November, following an earlier engagement with the Akwa Ibom State Council of the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ) in Uyo.
He was emphatic that his promise did not concern merely opening negotiations or commissioning another feasibility study. Rather, he said construction would begin within his first 90 days in office.
“Within the first 90 days, I will get it going,” he said.
The declaration represents a significant campaign promise concerning a project that has remained part of Akwa Ibom’s development ambitions for more than 20 years without reaching the construction stage.
Moreover, NDC presidential candidate Peter Obi has also pledged to develop the seaport if elected in 2027, giving the project an additional place in the party’s national and state-level campaign messaging.
A familiar project with a renewed location controversy
At the heart of Enyong’s proposal is the argument that Akwa Ibom should return the seaport to its original proposed location.
He traced the project to the Ibaka Deep Seaport concept under former Governor Victor Attah. According to him, the succeeding administration of former Governor Udom Emmanuel subsequently moved the project towards the Ibeno axis and renamed it Ibom Deep Seaport.
Although Enyong does not intend to change the project’s current name because it is registered and approved under that identity, he wants the physical development returned to Ibaka.
His principal argument is economic. He maintains that the Ibeno location is too shallow and would require substantial dredging, increasing construction costs and potentially discouraging private investors.
By contrast, he describes Ibaka as a more suitable natural harbour that would reduce the financial demands of preparing the site.
“The moment you return it to Ibaka, investors will know that they won’t spend too much money on dredging an artificial location because the water there is shallow,” he said.
Nevertheless, the location debate is not new, and Enyong’s position challenges an earlier assessment of the proposed sites.
In December 2014, reports indicated that the project had been moved from Ibaka to Ibeno after consultants reportedly determined that Ibaka would not be commercially viable because of its distance from the sea.
The Akwa Ibom State Government subsequently defended the decision. It said experts had assessed different locations, considering commercial viability and accessibility, before selecting a site covering parts of Mbo and Ibeno local government areas.
Consequently, Enyong’s proposed relocation raises questions that require technical evidence rather than political assurances alone.
He did not present a new feasibility study demonstrating that Ibaka would outperform the existing proposed location in terms of navigability, accessibility, dredging requirements, construction costs or commercial viability.
Without such evidence, the competing claims about the two locations remain unresolved.
The financial blueprint & its unanswered questions
Enyong’s proposal also rests on an existing federal approval and a financing structure that he believes can mobilise public and private capital.
He said the Federal Executive Council, under the late President Muhammadu Buhari, approved the first phase of the Ibom Deep Seaport on 16 December 2020, with an estimated investment of $2.016 billion.
On that basis, he argued that the project does not require a fresh presidential approval to proceed. He also dismissed the suggestion that Governor Umo Eno’s defection to the All Progressives Congress was a necessary condition for its implementation.
However, the financing arrangement Enyong outlined differs from the structure announced when the project secured federal approval.
He proposed that private investors should provide 50 per cent of the required funding, while the state and federal governments should jointly contribute the other 50 per cent.
Under this arrangement, the state would need to provide approximately $400 million, which he estimated at ₦538.59 billion using an exchange rate of ₦1,346.47 to the dollar on 1 November.
To justify the proposed contribution, Enyong cited the state’s revenue performance under Governor Eno.
“Assuming we divide the money in half, the state’s portion is very affordable to achieve considering that in the last 42 months, the state has gotten over ₦3.7 trillion,” he said.
Yet the earlier financing structure was different.
In December 2020, the then Commissioner for Economic Development and Ibom Deep Seaport, Akan Okon, announced that private investors would provide 60 per cent of the first-phase funding, while the public sector would contribute 40 per cent.
Based on the $2.016 billion estimate, the private sector’s contribution under that arrangement would amount to $1.2096 billion, while the public sector would provide $806.4 million.
If Akwa Ibom and the federal government shared the public sector contribution equally, the state’s portion would be $403.2 million. That is close to Enyong’s proposed $400 million estimate.
Nevertheless, he did not explain why he preferred a 50-50 arrangement when the previously announced financing model provided for a 60-40 public-private partnership.
More importantly, his claims about prospective foreign investors remain unsupported by publicly disclosed agreements or investment documents. He did not identify the American and French investors, specify the amounts they would commit or establish whether they had entered into formal agreements with him or the project authorities.
When questioned about the federal government’s contribution, Enyong argued that Akwa Ibom should demonstrate its willingness to finance the project first. He believes this would encourage federal participation.
Even without federal funding, however, he insisted that the project could proceed.
“But even if the federal government fails to invest, don’t we have the $800 million? It is our project that will turn around things,” he said.
The overall cost presents another challenge. The $2.016 billion approval covers only the first phase, while the entire project has been estimated at $4.6 billion.
Enyong acknowledged the wider financing requirement but argued that additional investors would be attracted once construction began.
“When you start a project and people begin to see where you are going, don’t others join?” he asked.
That position, however, leaves open the question of how the government would finance the remaining phases and secure binding commitments before committing public resources.
Budget allocations without a clear spending trail
Meanwhile, the proposed seaport has continued to receive budgetary attention under Governor Eno.
The state’s approved budgets allocated ₦2.6 billion to the project in 2024, ₦2 billion in 2025 and ₦7.36 billion in 2026. No allocation was identified in the 2023 revised budget.
These allocations indicate that the project remains part of the state’s infrastructure priorities. However, they do not independently establish how much money the administration has actually released or spent.
Recent budget performance reports and audited financial statements do not provide sufficiently detailed capital expenditure information to establish the project’s actual spending history.
The gap is particularly important because the state’s revenue has reportedly increased substantially during Eno’s administration.
A previous report estimated that the administration received at least ₦2.934 trillion in public revenue during its first 38 months. A subsequent analysis placed the figure at no less than ₦3.218 trillion within 41 months.
The latter estimate excluded internally generated revenue and the state’s 13 per cent derivation refunds for May and June 2023.
However, the state’s decision to stop publishing detailed revenue receipts and capital expenditure records has complicated independent scrutiny. Consequently, it remains difficult to determine precisely how much of the reported revenue has gone into individual infrastructure projects, including the deep seaport.
For a project requiring billions of dollars, that information is central to public accountability and financial planning.
Governor Eno’s preparations & the search for investors
Although construction has not begun, Governor Eno’s administration says it has undertaken several preparatory activities.
In April, the governor received the project’s feasibility report from a technical committee led by Mfon Usoro, a former Director-General of the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency.
Eno said his government had funded feasibility studies, prepared investor documents, conducted geophysical and geotechnical assessments and established a dedicated project office.
Additionally, the technical committee reported progress in financial modelling, due diligence and international bidding, with preferred bidders emerging.
The governor subsequently travelled to Paris in June for discussions with prospective project partners. The engagements focused on securing clearer implementation timelines and investment commitments.
Eno has consistently described the seaport as a long-term infrastructure undertaking that requires careful planning and sustainable financing.
These reported preparations provide a different implementation picture from Enyong’s proposed 90-day construction timetable. However, the available information does not establish that the project has secured all the funding required for construction.
Healthcare & employment proposals broaden the campaign
Beyond the seaport, Enyong has presented proposals aimed at addressing healthcare shortages, educational access and unemployment.
He promised scholarships and free tuition for indigent medical students, alongside automatic employment after they complete their training.
According to him, beneficiaries would receive attractive remuneration to encourage them to work in Akwa Ibom rather than seek opportunities elsewhere.
He argued that the initiative would help address the shortage of healthcare professionals and discourage skilled medical personnel from leaving the state.
Furthermore, he promised to strengthen existing public healthcare facilities by providing the equipment and operational support they need. He argued against establishing additional hospitals without adequately equipping and maintaining them.
On employment, Enyong claimed that he had facilitated jobs for more than 200 citizens through the Human Resource Information System. If elected, he promised to expand such interventions.
However, the candidate did not provide detailed implementation costs or funding arrangements for these additional proposals during the NUJ engagement.
The political calculations behind the 2027 ambition
Enyong’s governorship ambition also carries a history of competition within the Peoples Democratic Party.
He contested the party’s governorship ticket in 2023 but lost to Umo Eno. In February that year, a court order reportedly replaced Eno with Enyong as the party’s candidate, triggering a legal dispute.
A higher court subsequently set aside the order in favour of Eno.
For 2027, the political conversation has expanded to include zoning, an informal arrangement under which the governorship is expected to rotate among Akwa Ibom’s three senatorial districts.
Enyong represented the Uyo/Uruan/Nsit Atai/Ibesikpo Asutan Federal Constituency in the House of Representatives between 2015 and 2023. The constituency belongs to Uyo Senatorial District, which features prominently in current discussions about the next governorship.
Another consideration is the expected rotation of the governorship to Ikot Ekpene Senatorial District in 2031. This raises questions about whether a governor elected in 2027 should seek a second term or respect the informal zoning arrangement.
Enyong did not disclose his position on a possible second term during his engagement with journalists.
Journalists reject any suggestion of endorsement
The NUJ State Chairman, Nsibiet John, welcomed the opportunity for the candidate to present his proposals but emphasised the union’s non-partisan position.
He explained that the engagement formed part of the union’s responsibility to provide political stakeholders with opportunities to explain their programmes to journalists.
However, John made it clear that the visit did not amount to an endorsement of Enyong or the NDC.
He maintained that journalists must continue to scrutinise political promises and report objectively in the public interest.
That distinction is particularly relevant as campaign activities gather momentum ahead of 2027. Enyong’s seaport proposal offers voters a specific construction deadline and a proposed financing model, but the public will still need evidence of the technical, financial and institutional arrangements behind the commitment.
Ultimately, the debate is not simply about whether Akwa Ibom needs a deep seaport. It is also about which location can support a commercially viable port, how the project will attract and retain investors, what governments can realistically contribute and how public spending will be monitored.
For Enyong, the first 90 days of a possible administration would provide the test of his promise. For the state, however, the more enduring test will be whether the project can move from repeated political commitments to a transparent, adequately financed and technically sustainable construction programme.
