By Alex Ter Adum, PhD
UMAHI’S ENGINEERING OF CONFUSION: SYCOPHANCY, DOUBLE-SPEAK AND THE PROCUREMENT QUESTIONS BEHIND THE LAGOS–CALABAR COASTAL HIGHWAY
David Umahi’s handling of the Lagos–Calabar Coastal Highway controversy illustrates the dangers of allowing political sycophancy to overshadow professional integrity, engineering discipline and public accountability.
Yesterday, the Minister of Works reportedly, excitedly announced President Bola Tinubu’s directive to reroute the coastal highway through the existing East-West Road, celebrating the intervention as a wonderful engineering feat. Today, confronted with public scrutiny of that announcement, Umahi has blamed social-media mischief-makers, as though Nigerians invented his words or fabricated the presidential directive.
What manner of public administration is this, in which a presidential directive becomes an engineering masterstroke when announced but social-media mischief when its implications attract uncomfortable scrutiny?
If the President ordered a change of alignment, say so. If the original announcement was misunderstood, publish the full transcript and explain precisely what was misunderstood. A minister cannot announce a consequential decision with celebratory fanfare and subsequently attempt to escape accountability by blaming imaginary enemies in the digital space.
THE ADDITIONAL 400 KILOMETRES: WHERE IS THE APPROVAL?
Even more troubling is Umahi’s announcement that an additional 400 kilometres of the East-West Road will be incorporated into the coastal highway project. Rather than resolving the controversy, this claim raises fundamental questions about the legality, scope and financial implications of the procurement.
Reports of the minister’s October 12 briefing indicated that the proposed addition was still awaiting Federal Executive Council (FEC) approval. If so, what exactly is Umahi celebrating? Is the additional 400 kilometres an approved contract, a proposed project, an extension of an existing contract or a separate procurement yet to pass through the statutory approval process?
These are not semantic distinctions. They determine whether public money can lawfully be committed, which procurement procedures apply and whether the contractor can legitimately be instructed to undertake additional work.
A President’s verbal instruction is not a procurement award. A ministerial press conference is not FEC approval. Political enthusiasm cannot substitute for statutory compliance.
Under Nigeria’s Public Procurement Act 2007 and the applicable federal procurement framework, the expansion of a major public works contract cannot simply be regularised through presidential enthusiasm or a ministerial announcement.
The Bureau of Public Procurement’s revised contract-variation guidelines, reported in May 2026, require proposed changes to contract sums and scope to undergo the prescribed review and certification. Variations must satisfy the applicable conditions and must not be used to introduce fundamentally different work under an existing contract. New components outside the original scope may require separate procurement.
The applicable approval route depends on the contract, the nature of the proposed work and the relevant statutory thresholds. But neither the President nor the minister can dispense with mandatory procurement requirements by announcing a decision publicly.
THE QUESTIONS UMAHI MUST ANSWER
First, what memorandum did the Ministry of Works present to FEC concerning the additional 400 kilometres? On what date was it presented, and at which meeting was it considered?
Second, if the additional scope has been approved, where is the FEC resolution? What was the original contract sum, what is the additional cost, and what is the revised total?
Third, if FEC approval is still pending, why is the minister presenting the proposed addition as an accomplished presidential achievement? What precisely has been approved: the engineering concept, the policy proposal, the procurement process or the actual financial commitment?
Fourth, has the Bureau of Public Procurement reviewed the proposal and issued the required Certificate of No Objection, where applicable? Where are the revised engineering designs, cost estimates, feasibility assessments and Bills of Engineering Measurement and Evaluation?
Fifth, who will execute the additional 400 kilometres? Will the existing contractor receive the work without a separate competitive procurement process? If so, what legal provision and procurement justification support that arrangement?
Finally, what budgetary provision and financing arrangements will cover the additional expenditure?
These are elementary questions of public accountability, not the inventions of social-media mischief-makers.
A PROFESSOR OF PRACTICE CANNOT SUBSTITUTE PRAISE FOR ENGINEERING
The irony is particularly pronounced when Umahi presents himself as a Professor of Practice in Engineering. Whatever the precise academic significance of that designation, it should reinforce expectations of technical rigour, intellectual honesty and fidelity to evidence.
Engineering is not a branch of political praise-singing. Roads do not become technically sound because a President ordered their construction, and questionable design decisions do not acquire scientific validity because a minister celebrates them as extraordinary achievements.
A coastal highway of this magnitude demands feasibility studies, geotechnical investigations, environmental impact assessments, sound alignment decisions, accurate costing and rigorous procurement discipline.
If the original alignment became impracticable because of flooding, difficult terrain or other engineering constraints, Nigerians deserve to know when those problems were discovered, why they were not adequately addressed at the design stage and what financial consequences the revised arrangement will impose.
A presidential directive is not an engineering justification. A press conference is not a feasibility study. Sycophantic applause is not professional certification.
A competent minister serves the President and the country better by identifying defective designs, unrealistic cost estimates and avoidable engineering errors before they become expensive public liabilities. Political loyalty does not require the suspension of independent professional judgment.
A PRESS CONFERENCE THAT ANSWERED NOTHING
Umahi’s attempt to blame social media does not resolve the controversy. The appropriate response is to publish the original and revised alignment maps, engineering reports, contract documents, procurement clearances, FEC resolutions and revised cost estimates.
If the additional work is still awaiting approval, the public must be told why it is being presented as an accomplished presidential intervention. If it has been approved, the documentary trail should establish when, how and at what cost.
Should the project proceed without mandatory reviews, budgetary authority or required approvals, the responsible officials could face legal and administrative consequences. Whether an actual breach has occurred must, however, be established from the procurement records.
The deeper issue is whether a material change to the highway’s alignment has occurred, whether the additional 400 kilometres constitutes a separate undertaking or a lawful variation, and whether the original and expanded works have been properly designed, costed and procured.
Umahi cannot celebrate a presidential intervention as a magnificent engineering accomplishment while dismissing scrutiny of that same intervention as mischievous fabrication.
Nigeria needs ministers who submit political decisions to professional scrutiny, not professional principles to political worship. It needs transparent contracts, lawful procurement, sound engineering and accountable expenditure, not grandiose announcements followed by contradictory explanations.
Until the government publishes the relevant approvals, engineering designs, contractual details and financial implications, the controversy remains unresolved.
The Lagos–Calabar Coastal Highway risks becoming a monument not merely to engineering ambition, but to the consequences of opaque procurement and inadequate accountability.
Nigeria does not need another presidential monument defended by ministerial acrobatics. It needs public officials who understand that accountability is a constitutional obligation, not an act of disloyalty.
Alex Ter Adum, PhD
DDG THE NARRATIVE FORCE
