The Nigerian oil and gas sector is currently grappling with a deepening feud between the Dangote Refinery and various key players, including oil workers’ unions and industry stakeholders. This contentious situation has sparked significant debate regarding energy security, legal compliance, and economic stability within the nation.

Billy Gillis-Harry, President of the Petroleum Retail Outlets Association of Nigeria (PETROAN), has voiced serious concerns about the potential for the Dangote Refinery to consolidate excessive control over Nigeria's oil and gas sector. He warned that concentrating power across refining, storage, distribution, and even retail outlets in the hands of one corporate entity could pose substantial risks to the country's energy security. Speaking on ARISE News, Gillis-Harry emphasized the necessity for the debate surrounding the refinery to be grounded in verifiable facts, rather than mere accusations. He also refuted claims that the federal government had ceased selling crude oil to domestic refineries, stating that to his knowledge, no such directive had been issued. PETROAN has consistently advocated for government intervention in disputes between the Dangote Refinery and oil workers' unions, emphasizing a collaborative approach among stakeholders like Merman, DAPPMAN, NUPENG, NOGASA, PENGASSAN, NATO, and PETROAN to ensure the refinery's success. Gillis-Harry defended unions like PENGASSAN and NUPENG, asserting they are acting within their mandate to protect their members, and that their actions are a reaction to perceived threats, guided by the law.

In stark contrast, energy expert Kelvin Emmanuel has characterized attempts by oil workers' unions to disrupt operations at the Dangote Refinery as a direct threat to Nigeria's national security. Emmanuel expressed shock at statements attributed to PENGASSAN, highlighting that the Trade Union Act and Trade Disputes Act govern union operations in Nigeria. He cited Sections 9 of the Trade Union Act and Sections 41(1a) and (1b) of the Trade Disputes Act, which classify energy supply as an essential service. This classification, he explained, means that disruptions cannot occur without due process, including a mandatory 15-day notice for picketing. The law also prescribes clear procedures for trade disputes, involving the Minister of Labour, a conciliatory mediator, the Industrial Arbitration Panel (IAP), and ultimately the National Industrial Court, before a legal strike notice can be issued. Emmanuel condemned the Nigeria Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers (NUPENG) for unlawfully blocking the refinery's entrance, viewing it as a threat to national security. He questioned the inaction of the DSS and NIA in this regard.

Emmanuel further defended Dangote's right to reorganize its company, noting that it is a private businessman who borrowed funds to build the refinery and has significantly reduced its debt. He stated that Dangote has adhered to the Trade Union Act and ILO Conventions on collective bargaining and freedom of association, stressing that unions cannot compel employees to join. He dismissed fears of Dangote’s expansion into distribution as anti-competitive, pointing to the introduction of 4,000 CNG trucks, which are energy-efficient, reduce carbon emissions, save transportation costs, and create 24,000 new jobs with better pay. The expert warned of severe economic consequences if the refinery's operations were disrupted, given its daily production of 44 million litres of PMS, 26 million litres of diesel, and 14 million litres of Jet A1, and its recent exports of refined petroleum products to the United States. He highlighted the anomaly of Nigeria still importing crude while exporting refined products, despite 57 years in the oil industry. Emmanuel also lamented the silence of the president and key ministers on the issue, stressing that the Dangote Refinery is a national asset that should be designated as critical national infrastructure, given Nigeria's history of failed refinery privatizations.

The dispute escalated when the Petroleum and Natural Gas Senior Staff Association of Nigeria (PENGASSAN) instructed its members to disrupt activities at the Dangote Refinery by blocking gas and crude oil supplies, which are crucial for powering its equipment. PENGASSAN’s decision came in response to the refinery management disengaging union members and allegedly spreading misinformation. A letter from PENGASSAN to its members explicitly directed the shutting off of crude oil supply valves, halting vessel loading operations, and cutting off gas supply to the refinery, effective immediately.

In a swift and stern response, Dangote Refinery’s management described PENGASSAN’s order as illegal and cautioned the association to adhere to Nigerian laws. The refinery asserted that PENGASSAN has no legal right to disrupt or interfere with its contracts with third-party vendors for gas and crude oil supply. It unequivocally labeled the directive as a “brazen, albeit shocking display of lawlessness and criminality” and a clear act of economic sabotage. The refinery warned that PENGASSAN’s actions would disrupt the supply of essential petroleum products, including aviation fuel, petrol, diesel, kerosene, and cooking gas, causing “unquantifiable and irredeemable hardship” for millions of Nigerians. Dangote Refinery appealed to the Federal Government and its security and law enforcement agencies to intervene and call PENGASSAN to order, emphasizing that the association is not above the law and its actions have the potential to inflict significant harm on the Nigerian economy and citizens. It urged all Nigerians to recognize the severe impact of PENGASSAN's proposed actions.

The root cause of PENGASSAN’s directive was the termination of appointments of some refinery workers. Dangote Group’s Chief General Manager, Human Asset Management, Femi Adekunle, confirmed that the decision to disengage staff was due to “repeated acts of sabotage” that raised significant safety concerns and affected operational efficiency, emphasizing it was a necessary measure to protect the facility. Conversely, PENGASSAN alleged that the sack was unjust, violated the Labour Act, and accused the refinery’s management of discriminating against Nigerian workers in favor of foreign labor. The association demanded the recall of all terminated Nigerian workers, threatening to explore all legal avenues available under the Nigerian Constitution and relevant labor laws to uphold workers' rights. This position contrasts with PENGASSAN's earlier public commitment to