The Chairman of the Alliance for Economic Research and Ethics (AERE), Dele Oye, has said Uber’s withdrawal from Nigeria after 12 years of operation has exposed gaps in the country’s transport regulatory framework, particularly in competition, consumer choice, airport operations and transparency.

Oye said the development should trigger a broader review of the way Nigeria regulates emerging mobility platforms, stressing that regulation must protect public safety and security without creating unnecessary barriers to competition or driving up transportation costs.

Uber on September 2, 2026, attributed the decision to a review of its business priorities and investment focus across Africa, adding that its withdrawal was unrelated to the recent directive by the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) on e-hailing operations at Nigerian airports.

However, Oye said the timing, amid disagreements over e-hailing operations at airports, raised concerns about the country’s regulatory environment and its implications for mobility businesses and consumers.

“The issue is not whether Nigeria should regulate airport transport. It must. Airports are sensitive security environments, and authorities have a legitimate responsibility to know who is transporting passengers from their premises,” Oye said.

“The question is whether regulation is transparent, proportionate and designed in a way that protects both security and competition.”

According to him, developments surrounding airport transport had highlighted the need for greater transparency in the regulation of mobility services.

FAAN has maintained that its framework is designed to improve the identification of drivers and vehicles, operational visibility, passenger safety, and the management of solicitation and touting within airport premises.

The Authority has also explained that its ACHRAMS platform is an airport-management and operational-visibility system and not an e-hailing platform competing with operators such as Uber or Bolt.

Nevertheless, Oye said the public experience surrounding airport transportation raised broader concerns about affordability and competition.

Citing a reported case involving an American traveller on a trip to Ikeja GRA, he said the disparity was significant enough to warrant scrutiny of how competition, pricing and consumer choice are structured within regulated airport environments.

He further argued that every airport transport requirement should clearly state the safety or operational risk it seeks to address, the compliance cost imposed on operators and the service being provided in return.

Oye also called for comparable regulatory requirements for Uber, Bolt, inDrive, traditional car-hire companies and other licensed operators, covering driver identification, vehicle standards, insurance, incident reporting and passenger complaints.