The human rights lawyer challenges the decision to build a new coastal highway while the East-West Road remains unfinished, raising questions about public spending, environmental safeguards and accountability.
“Do they think we are all idiots?”
That was Prof. Chidi Odinkalu’s blunt response to the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway project, which he says exposes troubling choices in the government’s approach to infrastructure. His criticism goes beyond the cost or construction of one road. It asks why Nigeria is committing enormous resources to a new highway while an existing strategic route, the East-West Road, remains in need of attention.
The comparison is difficult to dismiss. The East-West Road serves communities and businesses across the Niger Delta, linking major centres in a region vital to Nigeria’s oil and gas industry. Its long history of delays and incomplete sections has left road users contending with poor conditions and disrupted journeys. Against that background, the coastal highway raises an obvious question about the order in which public infrastructure needs are being addressed.
The Federal Government has defended the project as a strategic route that will improve connectivity, open up economic opportunities and link communities along the coast. In an update on October 7, the Ministry of Works said the first 47 kilometres had been completed, with work advancing on the next section. The government’s case is that the highway is not an indulgence but a long-term investment in the country’s transport network.
Yet the existence of a strategic case does not settle the question of priority. Governments must choose which projects to fund, how quickly to deliver them and what competing needs will have to wait. A new road may offer economic benefits, but those benefits must be weighed against the cost of leaving older, heavily used routes unfinished or in poor condition.
Environmental concerns also require more than assurances. The Federal Ministry of Environment published draft Environmental and Social Impact Assessment reports for the first two sections of the highway in 2024, inviting public comments.
The existence of those reports means it would be wrong to suggest that no assessment process took place. The questions are what the assessments found, how communities were consulted, what approval conditions were imposed, and whether the promised safeguards are being enforced as construction proceeds.
The project has also attracted questions about procurement and financing. In May 2024, the House of Representatives called for an investigation into the procurement process. BudgIT’s Tracka subsequently sought documents concerning the contract, its financing, environmental assessments and compensation. A report by The Guardian said the organisation had received no response by mid-April 2026.
Those concerns do not, by themselves, establish wrongdoing. They do, however, underline the need for the government to make the relevant records accessible and explain how the contract was awarded, financed and monitored. A project of this scale should withstand public examination without its critics having to rely on fragments of information.
Odinkalu has also alleged that mega-projects can serve as vehicles for building partisan war chests. That is a serious allegation, and it remains his claim rather than an established finding. It should be tested against documentary evidence, including contract arrangements, payments, beneficiaries, and the safeguards governing public expenditure.
The coastal highway is therefore being judged on more than the kilometres completed. Its value will depend on whether it delivers the benefits promised, whether affected communities and the environment are properly protected, and whether the public can see how the money is being spent.
The Federal Government is entitled to pursue major infrastructure projects. It must also explain why those projects take precedence over competing needs, account for the decisions behind them, and demonstrate that the benefits justify the cost. For Nigerians who have waited years for existing roads to be completed, those are not unreasonable demands.
As public skepticism mounts over soaring infrastructure costs and neglected domestic priorities, Odinkalu’s intervention serves as a sharp reminder that true governance must be measured by accountability to the public interest rather than the grand scale of political monuments.
