There is something deeply unsettling about a policy recommendation that appears, triggers national concern, and then quietly disappears.

That is exactly what followed the World Bank’s April 2026 Nigeria Development Update, which advised Nigeria to resume petrol imports before the report was later withdrawn from its website after public backlash.

At the centre of the controversy was the suggestion that imported petrol could be cheaper than locally refined fuel, with the World Bank estimating prices at about N1,122 per litre compared to N1,275 offered by the Dangote Refinery at the time.

It further argued that reopening import licences would increase competition, ease inflation, and serve as a buffer against supply disruptions.

However, critics argue the recommendation is overly simplistic and disconnected from Nigeria’s economic and legal realities.

The proposal appears to conflict with the Petroleum Industry Act (2021), which prioritises domestic refining and restricts fuel imports where local capacity exists. With the Dangote Refinery supplying a significant share of Nigeria’s petrol consumption, import liberalisation could undermine national energy policy and discourage domestic production.

Energy analysts have also questioned the pricing assumptions, arguing that once freight, insurance, and logistics costs are considered, imported petrol would likely be more expensive than projected. This raises concerns about the feasibility of the World Bank’s price comparison.

Beyond pricing, experts warn that encouraging imports at this stage could weaken investor confidence in Nigeria’s downstream sector.

The Dangote Refinery represents a multi-billion-dollar investment, and policy shifts that disadvantage local refining could discourage future investment in domestic energy infrastructure.

There are also broader macroeconomic risks. Increased petrol imports would raise demand for foreign exchange, putting pressure on the naira and potentially worsening inflation. Since fuel imports are dollar-denominated, greater reliance on imports could destabilise the wider economy.

Critics argue that Nigeria’s long-term solution lies not in reopening import channels but in fixing structural inefficiencies in domestic refining, including crude supply challenges, high operating costs, and regulatory bottlenecks affecting local refiners.

While some stakeholders support import liberalisation as a way to improve competition, others insist that competition should be strengthened within Nigeria through new refineries, improved crude allocation systems, and reform of state-owned refineries.

The controversy reflects a broader debate about external economic advice and its fit with local realities.

Nigeria has previously experienced policy disruptions from global institutions whose recommendations did not fully align with domestic conditions, a pattern also seen in other developing economies.

Ultimately, the withdrawn report highlights a critical tension between theoretical economic efficiency and practical national realities.

While global institutions offer valuable expertise, their recommendations must be carefully assessed within Nigeria’s legal framework, market structure, and long-term development goals.

Nigeria’s economic future, critics argue, must be shaped by home-grown policies that reflect its unique challenges rather than imported assumptions.