By Dennis Okechukwu
A Committee of Lawyers and Stakeholders from Ondo State has raised concerns over the alleged diversion of the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway away from the state’s coastline, accusing the Federal Minister of Works, Engr. dave Umahi of marginalising communities in the Ilaje Local Government Area.
The group made its position known at a press conference held in Lagos on Thursday, September 10, 2026, where it appealed to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to intervene and restore the highway to its original coastal alignment through Ondo State.
Addressed by Dr. Benson Enikuomehin, Esq., FCPA, Attorney-at-Law, in the presence of other members, the committee acknowledged the Federal Government’s decision to revive the long-planned coastal highway project, describing President Tinubu’s initiative as a welcome development capable of promoting economic integration, trade, tourism and development across the coastal states.
Tinubu had described the project as a “symbol of hope, unity, and prosperity” that would connect communities across nine states, facilitate trade and commerce, boost tourism and create new opportunities.
However, the committee expressed concern that the project had allegedly been altered in the Ondo State axis.
According to the group, the highway, which began from Ahmadu Bello Way in Victoria Island, Lagos, and is expected to terminate in Calabar, Cross River State, originally followed the coastline but has allegedly been diverted inland when it reaches Ondo State.
The committee said Ondo State has between 80 and 100 kilometres of coastline, largely inhabited by the Ilaje people, and argued that the state should therefore play a significant role in a project specifically designated as a coastal highway.
It listed several communities it claimed had been excluded from the current alignment, including Ugbonla, Ilowo, Ilepete, Obe-Enikanoselu, Obe-Rewoye, Ikorigho, Jinrinwo, Awoye and Igho.
The group alleged that more than 60 per cent of the coastal communities in Ilaje Local Government Area had been bypassed.
It further alleged that instead of continuing along the Ondo coastline towards Delta State, the road had been redirected through Oke-Upare and then linked to Ovia North and Ovia West areas of Edo State to accommodate Gelegele.
The committee argued that Gelegele was not a coastal community, claiming that the community is located approximately 10 to 20 kilometres from the coastline.
According to the lawyers and stakeholders, the development effectively transforms the project from a coastal highway into an inland highway in the Ondo State section.
The committee also rejected the argument attributed to the Federal Ministry of Works that constructing the highway through the Ilaje coastal communities would be prohibitively expensive.
It claimed that a direct route from Ugbonla in Ondo State to Escravos in Delta State would cover approximately 60 to 75 kilometres, while the proposed detour through Ebute-Ipare, Ovia North, Ovia West, Gelegele and Warri would stretch for about 130 to 150 kilometres.
It further estimated that construction along the Ugbonla-Escravos route would cost between ₦4 billion and ₦7.5 billion per kilometre, while construction through the alternative swampy inland route could cost between ₦7.5 billion and ₦12 billion per kilometre.
On the basis of those estimates, the committee put the projected cost of the coastal alignment at between ₦240 billion and ₦450 billion, compared with between ₦970 billion and ₦1.5 trillion for the inland detour.
The group therefore argued that the alleged cost justification for abandoning the Ondo coastal route was not supported by the figures available to it.
It also cited the 2010 construction of the Ugbo-Oghoye Road Phase 1 by the Niger Delta Development Commission as evidence that infrastructure could be constructed through the area.
According to the committee, the 40-kilometre project was awarded at a cost of ₦19.4 billion, with the Bureau of Public Procurement issuing a certificate of no objection on August 13, 2010.
The group questioned why the Federal Government, with greater resources and technical capacity, should consider the Ondo coastal terrain too difficult for the construction of the highway.
It described the alleged diversion as a deliberate attempt to marginalise the Ilaje communities, while stressing that it was not opposed to Edo State benefiting from the coastal highway project.
The committee, however, maintained that Edo’s benefit should not come at the expense of Ondo’s coastal communities.
“We strongly maintain that the road must remain COASTAL through Ondo State, passing through Ilaje communities on the coast,” the group said.
The lawyers further questioned the rationale behind maintaining the coastal alignment in Lagos, Ogun, Delta, Bayelsa, Rivers, Akwa Ibom and Cross River states while allegedly abandoning the coastline when the project reaches Ondo.
They also raised constitutional concerns, arguing that the alleged exclusion of the Ilaje communities could amount to discrimination contrary to Section 42 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, which prohibits discrimination on grounds including ethnic group and place of origin.
The committee urged the Minister of Works, Senator David Umahi, to explain the rationale behind the alteration of the route and called on President Tinubu to personally examine the issue.
The group said it was particularly concerned that the Ilaje people could become “sacrificial lambs” in the process of accommodating communities that, according to its submission, are not directly situated on Nigeria’s coastline.
It appealed to the President to “passionately” consider the plight of the affected coastal communities and redress what it described as a “monumental injustice.”