Airline operators have no power to impose industry-wide lifetime bans – Ubani

A Senior Advocate of Nigeria,  Monday Ubani, has raised serious constitutional and legal concerns over the reported lifetime no-fly ban imposed on a passenger, Comfort Emmanson, by the Airline Operators of Nigeria (AON), describing the action as “potentially unlawful” and lacking due process.

The ban follows a recent wave of unruly behavior by passengers on domestic flights, with two high-profile incidents making headlines — those involving Fuji musician Wasiu Ayinde Marshal (popularly known as K1 De Ultimate), and Ms. Emmanson. While K1 was placed on a six-month no-fly list by the Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority (NCAA), Emmanson reportedly faces a lifetime ban across all airlines — a far more severe penalty issued not by a regulatory body but by the AON, a trade association.

Ubani argues that the decision violates key constitutional protections, including the right to fair hearing and freedom of movement, guaranteed under Sections 36 and 41 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended). “The AON’s unilateral imposition of a lifetime ban — without giving the accused a chance to be heard — undermines the fundamental principle of audi alteram partem,” he said.

No Legal Backing for Industry-Wide Lifetime Ban

According to Ubani, while an individual airline may refuse to board a disruptive passenger based on safety concerns, a permanent, industry-wide sanction imposed by a non-regulatory body like AON lacks legal authority. He pointed out that the NCAA is the only body empowered by law to regulate civil aviation and impose sanctions under the Civil Aviation Act.

Even in countries with strict no-fly regimes, such as the United States, no-fly lists are managed by government agencies under established legal frameworks with room for appeal and review, not by private organizations.

Ubani warned that allowing a private association like AON to act simultaneously as accuser, investigator, judge, and enforcer creates a dangerous precedent, ripe for abuse and bias. “The decision is not only punitive and disproportionate, but also sets a troubling model where reputational punishment can be handed down without proof or legal recourse,” he said.

In  Emmanson’s case, the matter is already before a court, where she has been arraigned and remanded pending trial. According to Ubani, imposing a permanent industry-wide sanction before a legal verdict has been reached is not only premature but also unjust.

Ubani emphasized that  Emmanson could challenge the AON’s action in the Federal High Court, seeking both a declaration that the ban is unconstitutional and an award of damages for breach of her fundamental rights.

While he condemned the alleged disruptive conduct on board aircraft, Ubani insisted that justice must be balanced and consistent. “Unruly behavior must be addressed, but within the framework of law and fairness. One cannot be the accuser, prosecutor, and judge all in one,” he said.

Ubani urged aviation authorities to adhere strictly to legal processes in dealing with in-flight misconduct.