We are not surprised at the resurgence of animus over the Bilateral Air Services Agreement (BASA) between the Nigerian government and its British counterpart. On August 1, Minister of Aviation and Aerospace Development, Festus Keyamo, had, in a letter to UK Transport Secretary, Louise Haigh, served notice that unless the Nigerian airline, Air Peace, was granted the landing slots at London Heathrow Airport, the two British carriers, the British Airways and Virgin Atlantic, stood the risk of being denied access to the major international gateways of Lagos and Abuja. Air Peace is currently restricted to the country’s second-tier Gatwick Airport.

Nigeria, the minister maintained, will no longer allow a situation where its local airlines are not allowed into tier one airports in the UK, in line with the BASA.

The Issue, although historic, would seem a fairly straight-forward one. Until March 30 when Air Peace began flying the Lagos – London route, the issue of reciprocity could not have arisen. That was why the two British carriers not only enjoyed the absolute monopoly of the BASA slots but also the prime advantage of operating from its tier-one Heathrow Airport.

With the coming of Air Peace to the route however, we recall the minister as not only describing the Gatwick Airport as “a low-hanging fruit and a starting point”, but that he was reviewing the BASA after which some decisions would be made after the exercise. Now that the minister appears to have come to a decision, the logical expectation is that he will follow up by demanding that his UK counterpart observe the letters and spirit of the BASA.

We have heard the argument that the slot system is handled by an independent slot coordinator in which the UK government has no input but is rather subject to the International Air Transport Association (IATA) guidelines. Were that to be the case, still, it remains extremely hard to see where the minister, in choosing to tackle the brazen lop-sidedness, could be said to have erred. This is because the issue at stake isn’t one that IATA could claim to be either unaware of or even unfamiliar with. Or, are there especial categorisations of which the Nigerian aviation authorities are unaware of such as would make Air Peace ineligible for the Heathrow slot?

In fact, the real puzzle is why the Nigerian carrier would be restricted to the second-tier airport in the first place, particularly when each of the two British carriers already enjoy the advantage of operating in the two choice operational destinations.

Fair, as they say, is fair; in this instance, it would appear that the UK authorities have neither played fair nor acted in good faith. Interestingly, this would not be the first time the country will be subjected to such blatant breach in the rule of reciprocity.

The UAE authorities whose Dubai-based Emirates Airline operated 21 flights per week into Nigeria’s Abuja and Lagos airports is also restricting the same Air Peace to its Sharjah International Airport, citing frivolous reasons.

For, far from asking for any favours, the demand for reciprocity is not only legitimate, it is at the heart of the agreement. It is not about terminating the benefits hitherto enjoyed by one party in the agreement; it is about the other party, a late entrant, insisting on being accorded the same privileges as spelt out in the agreement. This is the sense in which to see the minister’s anger and perhaps frustration. To state that Nigeria’s case is compelling is to put things mildly.

We expect the two sides and the IATA to come together to work out the issues. With good faith, it should be possible to come to a swift and amicable resolution without the resort to drastic measures. Nigerians historic relations with the UK demands that. (The Nation Editorial)

Update news