UNRULY PASSENGERS UNDER NIGERIAN AVIATION LAW: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS

By: Habeeb Olayinka Lawal¹

Introduction

Air travel is globally recognized as one of the safest and fastest means of transportation, yet it remains vulnerable to incidents of passenger misconduct. In Nigeria, recent disruptions involving popular Fuji musician K1 De Ultimate and another female passenger brought renewed attention to the phenomenon of unruly passengers and its implications for aviation safety. These incidents not only disrupted flight operations but also raised pressing questions about the adequacy of Nigeria’s legal and regulatory responses.

The issue of unruly behaviour is not merely a matter of etiquette or passenger inconvenience; it strikes at the core of aviation security, order and discipline. As a contracting State to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), Nigeria has domesticated international standards through the Civil Aviation Act 2022 and the Nigeria Civil Aviation Regulations (NCAR). Yet, the persistence of disruptive conduct suggests that enforcement and compliance remain areas of concern.

This article, therefore, examines the legal framework governing unruly passengers in Nigeria, analyzes the scope of conduct constituting unruly behaviour and proffers recommendations for more effective management of the problem.

Applicable Legal Framework

The legal framework for dealing with unruly passengers in Nigeria includes:

1. Civil Aviation Act 2022. This Act criminalizes unruly conduct on board and prescribes penalties.
2. Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority Regulations (NCAR), Part 17 (Aviation Security) 2023, which incorporates the International Civil Aviation Organizations (ICAO) Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) under Annex 17 (Amendment 18) and Annex 9 (Amendment 29) to the Chicago Convention.
3. International Civil Aviation Organizations (ICAO) Standards, especially Annex 17 to the Chicago Convention, which Nigeria has adopted.

Together, these laws and regulations provide a comprehensive structure for preventing, controlling and punishing unruly passenger behaviour.

Definition of Unruly Passenger

The ICAO Standard Definition did not use the word “unruly” but rather provides for “disruptive” passenger under Annex 17 to the Chicago Convention, defining it as: “A passenger who fails to respect the rules of conduct at an airport or on board an aircraft or to follow the instructions of the airport staff or crew members and thereby disturbs the good order and discipline at an airport or on board the aircraft.”

The Civil Aviation Act 2022 does not expressly define “unruly passenger,” however, section 85 of the Act covers offences such as interference with crew duties, assault, intimidation or threats to crew members, and disobedience of instructions. These acts collectively amount to unruly conduct.

The Nigeria Civil Aviation Authority Regulations (NCAR), Part 17 Aviation Security (2023), Regulation 17.89.1.1 provides that: “Any passenger who becomes unruly at the airport terminal or on board an aircraft commits an offence.” It further elaborates that unruly conduct includes, but is not limited to, smoking in prohibited areas, use of mobile devices without approval, fighting, nuisance, disobedience to lawful instructions, endangering safety or tampering with equipment.

While the three legal frameworks, ICAO Standards, the Civil Aviation Act 2022, and the NCAR Part 17 (2023), provide a foundation for regulating unruly passengers in Nigeria, a closer examination reveals noticeable gaps. The ICAO definition is broad and general, serving as a baseline for international uniformity. The Civil Aviation Act narrows its focus to in-flight conduct, particularly interference with crew duties, threats and misuse of onboard equipment, but omits misconduct at airport terminals or disturbances affecting fellow passengers. In contrast, the NCAR expands the scope by expressly covering airport terminal behaviour, giving practical examples of nuisance, and extending authority to ground staff. Thus, while the Act primarily criminalizes, the NCAR provides a more comprehensive definition. However, this creates a regulatory imbalance, since the Regulations, being subsidiary legislation, do not carry the same legal weight as the Act, potentially limiting their enforceability.

Bridging the Act, NCAR and ICAO, a synthesized definition for Nigerian aviation law should be: “An unruly passenger is any person whose conduct at the airport terminal or on board an aircraft, by act or omission, fails to comply with lawful instructions or established rules of conduct, causes nuisance or disorder, disturbs good order and discipline, or endangers the safety and security of passengers, crew, aircraft, airport facilities, or property.”

This definition captures both in-flight and terminal conduct, aligns with international standards and provides clarity for prosecution and enforcement.

Acts that Constitute Unruly Behaviour

From the combined reading of the Civil Aviation Act 2022 and NCAR Part 17 (2023), the following conduct qualifies as unruly:

1. Smoking on board or in prohibited terminal areas.
2. Unauthorized use of electronic gadgets on board.
3. Fighting or disorderly conduct at the terminal or on board.
4. Harassment or nuisance towards other passengers.
5. Disobedience of lawful instructions issued by crew or security staff.
6. Any conduct that endangers or is likely to endanger flight safety.
7. Tampering with smoke detectors or aircraft equipment.
8. Interfering with crew duties or intimidating crew members.

These acts are not merely breaches of etiquette but direct threats to the safety and order of civil aviation operations.

Measures to Be Taken Against Unruly Passengers

Under NCAR Part 17 (2023), Regulation 17.89.1.3, when a passenger becomes unruly, the aircraft commander or airport authority must take necessary measures, including restraint where required.

Such measures may be aimed at:

1. protecting the safety of persons and property;
2. maintaining good order and discipline; or
3. ensuring that the offender is handed over to competent authorities.

Similarly, Section 85(4) of the Civil Aviation Act 2022 empowers the pilot-in-command to take any reasonable measures to ensure safety, including requesting assistance from other passengers.

It is important to state that while this discretion given to the aircraft commander or pilot-in-command and the airport authority under the Act and the NCAR is necessary given the high-risk environment of air travel, it raises critical operational and legal questions: What is the threshold for “necessary” or “reasonable” restraint? How can crew exercise this authority without infringing on passengers’ fundamental rights? This tension underscores the need for clearer regulatory guidance and standardized crew training to ensure that safety imperatives are balanced with respect for passengers’ fundamental rights.

Punishment for Unruly Passengers

The Civil Aviation Act 2022, Section 85, prescribes penalties for unruly conduct:

1. Interference with crew duties – Fine of up to ₦200,000 or imprisonment for at least two months or both.
2. Assault, intimidation or threats to crew – Fine of at least ₦200,000 or imprisonment for at least two months or both.
3. Unauthorized use of equipment or devices that may interfere with aircraft communication – Fine of up to ₦200,000 or imprisonment for at least two months or both.

Challenges in Managing Unruly Passengers in Nigeria

1. Weak Enforcement: Airlines and regulatory agencies sometimes shy away from prosecuting high-profile offenders/violators due to fear of political backlash.

2. Social Factors: Crew members may face restraint and feel powerless against influential individuals. This will made them reluctant to confront or report misconduct by prominent passengers.

3. Insufficient Awareness: Many passengers do not even realize that unruly conduct is a criminal offence under Nigerian aviation law. What they may dismiss as “mere misbehavior” (e.g., smoking or refusing crew instructions) could attract fines or imprisonment, but the absence of consistent awareness campaigns keeps ignorance high.

4. Inadequate Training of Staff: While crew members are trained in safety procedures, some lack advanced conflict management and de-escalation skills needed for confrontations with aggressive or intoxicated passengers. This often leaves situations escalating until they spiral out of control.

5. Judicial Delays: Even when offenders are charged, lengthy court processes undermine deterrence.

Recommendations

1. Strict Enforcement Regardless of Status: The NCAA and airlines must demonstrate that no passenger is above the law by applying sanctions uniformly, whether the offender is a celebrity, politician or ordinary passenger. Publicizing enforcement actions will reinforce deterrence.

2.Strengthening Crew Authority against Social Pressure: Airlines should adopt clear policies that back crew decisions in unruly passenger cases, protecting them from victimization when influential passengers are involved. Regulatory backing must be visible and consistent.

3. Awareness Campaigns: Continuous public sensitization through pre-flight announcements, posters at airports, and social media should emphasize that unruly conduct is a criminal offence with legal consequences. This will correct the widespread misconception that such acts are minor infractions.

4. Enhanced Crew Training: Crew training modules should be expanded to cover advanced conflict de-escalation, assertive communication and stress management techniques, enabling staff to handle disruptive passengers with confidence while minimizing escalation.

5. Fast-Track Aviation Offence Tribunals: Special courts or designated fast-track procedures should be introduced for aviation offences. This would ensure that cases are concluded swiftly, preventing offenders from exploiting judicial delays and reinforcing deterrence.

6. Collaboration with Law Enforcement: Standardized protocols should be established for the immediate handover of offenders to police or aviation security, avoiding the perception that offenders (especially high-profile ones) can walk away without consequence.

Ultimately, while the regulatory framework is robust on paper, its effectiveness in Nigeria will depend on the political will of regulators, the courage of airlines, and the readiness of courts to treat unruly passenger cases with urgency and impartiality.

Conclusion

The recurring incidents of unruly passenger behaviour in Nigeria, exemplified by the cases of K1 De Ultimate and the Abuja female passenger, highlight the tension between legal adequacy and practical enforcement within the aviation sector. Nigeria’s legislative and regulatory architecture, anchored on the Civil Aviation Act 2022, the Nigeria Civil Aviation Regulations Part 17 (2023), and the ICAO Standards, demonstrates commendable compliance with international obligations. However, the persistence of unruly conduct underscores a jurisprudential gap: the law, though sufficient on paper, falters in its operationalization.

A critical observation is the imbalance between the primary legislation and subsidiary regulation. The Civil Aviation Act provides limited but enforceable provisions largely focused on in-flight crew protection, while the NCAR offers a more comprehensive and practical enumeration of unruly conduct, including terminal behaviour. Yet, as subsidiary legislation, the NCAR lacks the normative force of the Act, creating an enforcement dilemma where the more detailed framework is not as authoritative as the statute. This raises questions of legal hierarchy and interpretive consistency, particularly in judicial adjudication of aviation offences.

Moreover, the discretion afforded to pilots-in-command and airport authorities to impose “necessary” or “reasonable” restraint raises constitutional considerations relating to proportionality and passengers’ fundamental rights. The absence of clear regulatory thresholds leaves room for arbitrariness, which could expose airlines and regulators to liability. Thus, the challenge is not only one of enforcement but also of reconciling aviation security imperatives with the jurisprudential demands of due process and human rights.

On a final note, safeguarding civil aviation in Nigeria requires more than regulatory text; it demands coherent enforcement strategies, judicial responsiveness and cultural reorientation. Only by bridging the gap between normative frameworks and practical application can Nigeria move from a reactive posture to a proactive regime, thereby affirming the principle that discipline, safety and order are non-negotiable pillars of air travel.

About the Author

Habeeb Olayinka Lawal is a legal practitioner and Accredited Mediator with practical experience in litigation, corporate advisory and dispute resolution. His research and publications focus on intellectual property, Islamic finance, dispute resolution and emerging areas law. He can be reached via 08169894541 or olayinkalawah@gmail.com