In the years immediately after the Nigerian Civil War, Nigeria entered one of the most ambitious periods of reconstruction and development in its history.
The war had ended in January 1970, leaving the federal government with the enormous task of rebuilding infrastructure and strengthening national institutions. At the same time, petroleum was rapidly becoming the foundation of the Nigerian economy.
The rise in oil revenue gave the government money to pursue projects on a scale that had previously been difficult to finance. Roads, public buildings, factories, housing schemes and military facilities were being developed, while the armed forces themselves had expanded considerably during the civil war.
All of these projects required one basic material: cement.
Nigeria did not produce enough cement domestically to satisfy the rapidly expanding demand. Imports were therefore necessary.
The problem was not that the government decided to import cement. The problem was the extraordinary scale of the orders and the failure to match those orders with the capacity of the country’s ports.
By 1975, Nigeria was about to discover that having the money to buy something did not necessarily mean having the infrastructure to receive it.
READ MORE: Ancient & Pre-Colonial Nigeria
Why the Government Needed So Much Cement
One of the most important forces behind the procurement programme was the expansion of military accommodation.
During the civil war, the Nigerian armed forces had grown substantially. After the war, the federal government embarked on programmes to provide permanent barracks and other facilities for military personnel across the country.
The Ministry of Defence therefore became a major purchaser of cement.
Towards the end of 1974, the ministry began inviting companies to supply cement. The orders that followed were enormous.
Later court proceedings established that Nigeria entered into contracts with dozens of international suppliers for more than 20 million metric tonnes of cement under the massive procurement programme mounted in 1975.
The scale was extraordinary when compared with Nigeria’s existing consumption and port capacity.
The Court of Appeal in England, in its 1977 judgment in Trendtex Trading Corporation Ltd v Central Bank of Nigeria, recorded that Nigeria had previously imported approximately two million tonnes of cement a year, yet government departments ordered about 20 million tonnes to be delivered over the following twelve months.
That meant that the government was attempting to bring into Nigeria in a single year roughly ten times the country’s previous annual cement import volume.
The decision was made during a period when Nigeria was developing rapidly and genuinely required large quantities of construction materials. But the system responsible for receiving those imports had not expanded at the same speed.
The Orders Begin to Move Across the World
Once the contracts had been signed, the problem was no longer confined to government offices in Lagos.
International suppliers began arranging production and shipment.
Cement was purchased in Europe and elsewhere, vessels were chartered and cargoes were prepared for delivery to Lagos.
The contracts were often supported by irrevocable letters of credit issued through the Central Bank of Nigeria and its correspondent banks abroad.
This arrangement gave suppliers confidence that they would be paid when the required shipping documents were presented.
The contractual arrangements also contained provisions for demurrage, the money payable when a vessel remains waiting beyond the agreed period for loading or unloading.
That provision would become one of the most expensive features of the entire affair.
As the vessels began heading towards Nigeria, the country’s principal port at Lagos, particularly the Apapa complex, was already incapable of handling anything approaching the volume that was coming.
Lagos Begins to Fill With Ships
By July 1975, the situation had become extraordinary.
The berths at Lagos and Apapa were occupied.
Outside the port, hundreds of vessels waited for their turn.
The judgment in Trendtex recorded that approximately 300 to 400 ships were waiting outside Lagos in July 1975, with more arriving each day. Most were carrying cement, and the vessels were accumulating demurrage while they waited.
A United States federal court later described the procurement programme as involving 68 international suppliers and more than 20 million metric tonnes of cement, while noting that Lagos had an unloading capacity of only about one million metric tonnes a year in the circumstances considered by the court.
The result was a maritime bottleneck of extraordinary proportions.
Nigeria had effectively created a queue at sea.
Every vessel waiting for a berth became another source of delay and another potential demurrage claim.
And every new vessel arriving made it harder for the port to deal with the ships already waiting.
When the Cement Crisis Became a National Crisis
The congestion did not affect only cement.
Lagos was Nigeria’s principal gateway for international trade, so when the port became overwhelmed, other imports were affected.
Machinery, industrial equipment, consumer goods and other cargoes were delayed because vessels carrying cement occupied berthing and handling capacity.
The problem therefore became larger than the cement programme itself.
Nigeria was attempting to import the materials required to build a modern economy while its principal maritime gateway was becoming unable to process the volume of goods arriving.
The United States Court of Appeals later described the growing congestion as a national economic crisis because it threatened the supply of vital consumer goods.
The oil boom had increased Nigeria’s purchasing power, but the country’s physical infrastructure had not developed quickly enough to accommodate the resulting increase in imports.
Demurrage Begins to Mount
The longer the vessels remained outside Lagos, the greater the financial consequences became.
Demurrage was calculated according to the terms of individual contracts, and some agreements provided for daily payments.
In one of the cement contracts examined in the Trendtex litigation, the letter of credit included provision for demurrage of US$4,100 per day.
The problem was multiplied by the sheer number of vessels.
Nigeria was not dealing with one delayed ship.
It was dealing with hundreds.
A contract that might have been manageable if a vessel had waited for a few days could become enormously expensive when the vessel remained in or near Lagos for weeks or months.
The port congestion had therefore transformed the cement programme into a growing financial liability.
A Change of Government
The crisis unfolded during the final months of General Yakubu Gowon’s administration.
Gowon had governed Nigeria since the military coup of July 1966 and had led the country through the civil war and the early years of the oil boom.
On 29 July 1975, while Gowon was attending an Organisation of African Unity summit in Kampala, Uganda, a military coup removed him from power.
General Murtala Ramat Mohammed became Head of State.
The new administration inherited the cement crisis almost immediately.
The contracts had already been signed.
The cement had already been purchased.
Some vessels were already at sea.
Others were waiting outside Nigerian ports.
The government therefore had to deal with a problem that could not simply be cancelled by changing the people in power.
Nigeria Tries to Stop the Flow
The new administration moved to restrict the arrival of additional vessels.
In August 1975, Nigeria introduced measures controlling the sailing and arrival of ships destined for its ports.
The government instructed suppliers to stop loading and chartering additional vessels for Nigeria.
It also required ships intending to enter Nigerian ports to provide advance information and obtain approval.
The measures were designed to prevent the situation from becoming even worse.
But they created another problem.
Many of the ships were already at sea.
Suppliers had entered into contracts with shipowners.
Banks had already issued letters of credit.
Commercial commitments had already been created in several countries.
Nigeria could not simply close its ports and make all those obligations disappear.
The Letters of Credit Dispute
The Central Bank of Nigeria subsequently instructed correspondent banks to stop certain payments relating to the cement contracts unless the claims had been certified by the Central Bank.
This became the basis of several international legal disputes.
One of the best known was the case brought by Trendtex Trading Corporation against the Central Bank of Nigeria.
Trendtex was involved in a contract to supply 240,000 tons of Portland cement. The transaction was supported by an irrevocable letter of credit issued through the Central Bank’s London correspondent.
When Trendtex presented documents for later shipments and demurrage, payment was withheld following instructions from Nigeria.
The dispute eventually reached the English Court of Appeal.
On 13 January 1977, the court ruled against the Central Bank’s claim to sovereign immunity in the circumstances of the commercial transaction.
The case became important not only because it arose from Nigeria’s cement crisis but also because it contributed significantly to the development of English law concerning sovereign immunity and the distinction between governmental and commercial activities.
A Nigerian procurement crisis had consequently become an important case in international commercial law.
The Government Creates a Cement Negotiating Committee
Nigeria also established a Cement Contracts Negotiating Committee to deal directly with suppliers.
Its purpose was to renegotiate the contracts and associated letters of credit in an attempt to reduce the country’s exposure to the rapidly accumulating obligations.
The negotiations were complicated.
Suppliers had already committed themselves financially.
Shipowners were demanding payment for vessels that had remained idle.
Nigeria wanted to reduce the quantity of cement it would receive and limit the demurrage it would have to pay.
The resulting agreements varied from supplier to supplier.
Some contracts were renegotiated.
Some shipments were cancelled or reduced.
Some vessels continued to wait.
Others eventually left without unloading their cargoes.
The crisis therefore became a prolonged exercise in unwinding commitments that had been made when the government expected a much smoother flow of cement into Nigeria.
Some Ships Left With Their Cargoes
The consequences were not merely theoretical.
Court records preserve examples of vessels that waited for extended periods and eventually left Nigeria without discharging their cargoes.
In litigation involving National American Corporation, two vessels, the Joboy and Jotina, were among ships that departed in January 1976 without unloading their cement after their request for priority berthing in exchange for foregoing accumulated demurrage was refused.
The shipowners subsequently exercised liens over cargoes in certain circumstances to recover amounts owed to them.
Such cases demonstrate the extraordinary position in which the government found itself.
Nigeria had paid for some cement, but the cargo could remain trapped because the ships could not be unloaded.
The government could therefore incur costs from the cement itself, the ships carrying it and the legal disputes arising from the contracts.
The Belgore Tribunal Investigates the Cement Imports
The new military government also wanted to establish how the massive procurement programme had happened.
A tribunal headed by Justice Baturudeen Belgore was established to investigate the massive importation of cement by the Ministry of Defence.
The tribunal began public hearings in Lagos in October 1975.
The investigation attracted numerous officials, agents and representatives of companies connected with the cement agreements. The Nigeria Year Book 1976 records that the tribunal ordered dozens of agents and company representatives to appear before it.
The tribunal was not merely investigating the existence of the cement contracts. It was examining the circumstances surrounding the procurement programme and the people and organisations involved in it.
The inquiry reflected the seriousness with which the new administration viewed the affair.
The cement crisis had become a national political and administrative issue.
Why Did Nigeria Order So Much Cement?
The extraordinary quantity of cement naturally raised the question of why the government had ordered so much.
The surviving records do not provide one universally accepted explanation.
A United States District Court, in examining the National American Corporation litigation in 1978, noted that the reasons for the enormous procurement programme had never clearly emerged despite a trial lasting several weeks.
One explanation presented to the court was that Nigeria had previously experienced extremely poor delivery rates on cement orders and may therefore have ordered substantially more than it expected to receive.
Another suggestion was that Nigeria had deliberately attempted to corner the international cement supply.
The court did not establish either explanation as the definitive motive.
What is firmly established is that the government had a genuine and substantial need for cement, particularly for construction, while the volume ultimately contracted for vastly exceeded the unloading capacity available at the time.
The disaster was therefore not caused by a lack of need for cement.
It was caused by the enormous gap between the quantity ordered and the country’s ability to receive it.
Emergency Measures for Nigerian Ports
The crisis forced the federal government to take extraordinary measures to control maritime traffic.
The Ports Emergency Provisions Decree No. 40 of 1975 was promulgated in December 1975.
The decree required vessels intending to enter Nigerian ports to provide information concerning their movements to the Nigerian Ports Authority well in advance of their departure for Nigeria.
The new system effectively gave Nigerian authorities greater control over the flow of ships approaching the country’s ports.
The measure was a direct response to the congestion that had developed during the cement crisis.
Nigeria had learned, at enormous cost, that port management could not begin when a ship arrived at the harbour.
The government needed to know what was coming before the ship even sailed.
The Crisis Forces Nigeria to Expand Its Ports
The cement crisis also exposed the weakness of Nigeria’s port infrastructure.
Lagos was carrying a disproportionate share of the country’s international trade, and the events of 1975 demonstrated that the existing facilities were inadequate for an economy whose imports were rapidly expanding.
One of the most important responses was the accelerated development of Tin Can Island Port in Lagos.
Construction was pushed forward after the cement crisis, and the port was commissioned on 14 October 1977.
Tin Can Island became an important additional facility for Lagos and helped reduce the pressure on Apapa.
Port development also continued elsewhere.
Facilities at Apapa were expanded, while improvements were made at other Nigerian ports, including Warri and Calabar. Lighter terminals were also developed in places such as Kirikiri, Onne and Ikorodu.
The crisis had therefore helped expose a wider national infrastructure problem.
Nigeria could no longer depend on a single major port system to absorb the enormous volume of imports generated by its oil funded economy.
The Legal Aftermath Continues
The end of the physical congestion did not mean the end of the Cement Armada.
Its legal consequences continued for years.
In the United States, National American Corporation sued Nigeria over cement contracts connected to the procurement programme.
The case reached the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in 1979.
The court upheld the validity of the renegotiated arrangements at issue in that case.
Another important case, Texas Trading & Milling Corporation v Federal Republic of Nigeria, arose from the same broad procurement programme.
The litigation involved questions surrounding Nigeria’s attempts to alter the terms of cement contracts and letters of credit after the port crisis had developed.
The cases demonstrated how a procurement decision made in Nigeria could continue producing legal consequences across several countries long after the original ships had arrived.
The Scale of the Affair
The surviving records give several ways of measuring the size of the Cement Armada.
The most frequently cited figure is more than 20 million metric tonnes of cement contracted from international suppliers.
A major United States court record refers to 68 international suppliers and more than 20 million metric tonnes.
Other records concerning particular groups of contracts give different totals because they were dealing with different portions of the procurement programme.
The number of ships also varied as vessels arrived, departed and waited at different times.
The English Court of Appeal referred to between 300 and 400 ships waiting outside Lagos in July 1975.
Other contemporary accounts described roughly 400 cement vessels in the Lagos port area during the crisis.
The figures should therefore be understood as measurements of different stages and parts of the crisis rather than as contradictory descriptions of one single moment.
Whatever figure is used, the scale was extraordinary.
Nigeria had created a demand for cement so large that the country’s principal port became unable to process the resulting traffic.
What Became of the Cement?
The Cement Armada did not mean that every tonne of cement was abandoned.
Large quantities were eventually discharged and used.
Some contracts were renegotiated.
Some deliveries were reduced.
Some vessels departed without unloading.
The fate of individual cargoes depended on the particular supplier, contract, vessel, payment arrangement and subsequent negotiations.
The historical importance of the episode therefore does not lie in the idea that Nigeria simply bought cement and left all of it sitting unused.
The real failure was logistical.
The government had created contractual commitments that could not be synchronised with the capacity of the ports through which the goods had to enter the country.
A Procurement Decision Becomes a National Lesson
The Cement Armada revealed a fundamental weakness in Nigeria’s rapidly expanding oil economy.
Petroleum revenue had given the federal government unprecedented purchasing power.
But purchasing power was only one part of economic capacity.
A country also needed ports capable of receiving imports, roads and railways capable of moving them, storage facilities capable of holding them, banks capable of processing the payments, and administrative institutions capable of coordinating the entire process.
Nigeria had expanded its ability to buy much faster than it had expanded its ability to receive.
The cement ships made that imbalance visible to the world.
The Legacy of the Cement Armada
The Cement Armada became one of the most extraordinary episodes of Nigeria’s early oil boom.
It began with a legitimate national requirement. Nigeria was rebuilding after a devastating civil war, expanding military infrastructure and pursuing ambitious development projects. Cement was essential to those plans.
But the procurement programme grew far beyond the capacity of the country’s existing port system.
The consequences were immediate and severe. Hundreds of vessels waited outside Lagos. Demurrage accumulated. Other imports were delayed. Letters of credit became the subject of international disputes. The new military administration established an investigation and a negotiating committee, while emergency measures were introduced to control the arrival of ships.
The crisis also left a lasting physical legacy. Nigeria accelerated the development of its port infrastructure, most notably the Tin Can Island Port, which became an additional major gateway for Lagos.
Its legal legacy was equally significant. Disputes arising from the cement contracts produced important decisions in English and American courts, including Trendtex Trading Corporation Ltd v Central Bank of Nigeria, a landmark case in the development of the law of sovereign immunity.
More than anything else, the Cement Armada became a powerful chapter in the history of Nigeria’s oil boom because it showed the danger of allowing procurement, infrastructure and planning to move at completely different speeds.
EXPLORE NOW: Military Era & Coups in Nigeria
Nigeria had the cement.
It had the money to order it.
It had the ships to transport it.
What it did not have was enough port capacity to bring it all ashore.
And that simple mismatch turned an ambitious development programme into one of the most memorable logistical crises in Nigerian history.
Author’s Note
The Cement Armada was more than a story about ships carrying too much cement to Lagos. It was a defining episode of Nigeria’s oil boom, when ambitious reconstruction and development plans met the physical limits of the country’s infrastructure. The crisis disrupted other imports, generated enormous demurrage claims, led to investigations and international court cases, and helped accelerate the expansion of Nigeria’s ports. Its lasting lesson is found in the gap between having the resources to undertake development and having the systems, infrastructure and planning required to manage that development successfully.
References
Trendtex Trading Corporation Ltd v Central Bank of Nigeria, Court of Appeal, England and Wales, 13 January 1977.
National American Corporation v Federal Republic of Nigeria and Central Bank of Nigeria, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, 27 March 1978.
National American Corporation v Federal Republic of Nigeria and Central Bank of Nigeria, United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, 30 March 1979.
Texas Trading & Milling Corporation v Federal Republic of Nigeria, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, 1980.
Hispano Americana SA v Central Bank of Nigeria, English Court of Appeal.
The Nigeria Year Book 1976, Daily Times of Nigeria.
The Nigeria Year Book 1977, Daily Times of Nigeria.
Supo Ibikunle, “Cement Armada on Nigerian Waters,” Spear Magazine, January 1976.
Nigeria, Ports Emergency Provisions Decree No. 40 of 1975.
Nigerian Ports Authority, historical records on Nigerian port development.
