Note to readers: this article was prepared with information available through January 31, 2024. There were no public reports before that date of an EC130 crash involving Herbert Wigwe. Given the prominence of high net worth travelers who use private and charter aircraft, I will use that context to examine oversight gaps and operational risks that matter when VIPs fly on business jets and helicopters.

Start with the regulatory baseline. Nigeria took a major step toward modernizing oversight when the Civil Aviation Act 2022 established a clearer, more autonomous role for the Nigeria Civil Aviation Authority. That legal foundation matters because effective regulation is the first line of defence against unsafe commercial operations masquerading as private flights.

But a law on paper is not the same as robust, consistent surveillance in the field. The International Civil Aviation Organization’s USOAP continuous monitoring audit completed in September 2023 showed Nigeria at 70 percent Effective Implementation. That score is an important indicator. It means the State has strengths in areas like airworthiness and accident investigation, but it also shows remaining gaps in surveillance, operations oversight and air navigation services that deserve attention. Those are the areas that directly affect day to day safety for business and charter flights.

At the operational level there has been persistent concern about private jet owners operating commercially without the regulatory regime that applies to charter operators. By late 2023 aviation experts were raising this issue publicly, arguing that private-jet activity sometimes looks like hire and reward in practice even when the paperwork says otherwise. That behavior creates regulatory blind spots. When an aircraft is effectively providing commercial service it should meet the certification, maintenance, pilot training and insurance standards that come with an Air Operator Certificate.

Why does that matter to pilots and to passengers? Because the difference between a legitimately private flight and a commercial operation is not just paperwork. It is mandated procedures and oversight: formal maintenance tracking and deferred item logs, a documented safety management system, formal pilot duty and training records, robust flight following and risk assessment practices, and documented dispatch or flight follower oversight when required. If an operator is operating outside the approved envelope, those protections may be missing or inconsistent.

From the cockpit perspective there are three practical risk vectors that keep me up at night when I see blurred lines between private and commercial operations:

  • Weather and decision making. Commercial operators are expected to apply structured flight risk assessments and dispatch policies before accepting a passenger trip, and to refuse flights when conditions exceed the operator or crew limits. Privately permitted flights sometimes lack that discipline. That increases the chance of getting airborne when night VFR will become marginal or when weather can force a pilot into IMC without proper equipment or recent instrument practice.

  • Maintenance and deferred items. Commercial operators must track discrepancies and meet regulatory requirements for equipment dispatchability. When an aircraft is effectively being used like a charter but is not held to those standards, there is a risk of gaps in maintenance records, deferred defect management, or inconsistent use of safety-critical equipment.

  • Pilot currency, training and fatigue management. Charter operations carry obligations for recurrent training, crew pairing rules, and duty time limits. Those are harder to enforce when operators are informally carrying paying passengers under a private permit. The consequences can be subtle degradation in decision-making or missed procedural checks when something unexpected happens.

Those operational deficiencies are not hypothetical. The ICAO audit flagged surveillance and operations capability as areas needing focused corrective action. That audit should drive follow through from the regulator and from operators. It is also why the distinction between Permit for Non Commercial Flights holders and AOC holders deserves stronger enforcement and clearer, public guidance.

What should be done now, in concrete operational terms:

1) Tighten enforcement of the PNCF rules and make enforcement visible. If private-permit aircraft are being used for hire and reward they must be treated as commercial operations and transitioned to an AOC environment. Public, timely enforcement actions discourage gray market behavior.

2) Require documented flight risk assessments for any movement that carries third parties, whether or not money changes hands. A short, structured preflight RAS that is retained for audit can be a low administrative burden but a high safety return.

3) Mandate basic SMS elements for any platform carrying non-crewmembers on a repeated basis. This can be scaled, but there must be clear expectations for reporting, hazard identification and corrective action.

4) Increase surveillance of general aviation terminals and private wings at major airports. Physical presence and routine inspections close gaps that paper-based systems miss.

5) Push for transparency on operator maintenance records and crew training history when transporting high profile passengers. Operators and charter brokers should recognize the reputational and legal consequences of cutting corners.

For pilots who fly these missions, a few practical pieces of advice:

  • Treat every passenger-carrying flight as if you are operating commercially. Do the risk assessment, brief thoroughly, and set conservative personal minimums. Establish go/no-go criteria before you start the trip.

  • Push for documented maintenance status. If a safety or navigation-critical item is unserviceable, insist on documented acceptance or get the aircraft replaced. Verbal assurances are not enough.

  • Maintain instrument currency and recent night experience if you expect to be repositioning at dusk or at night. Weather can deteriorate quickly and VFR into night or marginal conditions is a common, preventable hazard.

The policy takeaway is straightforward. Nigeria has a modernized legal framework and measurable audit data that show progress. Those foundations must now support a step change in practical enforcement and in aligning commercial expectations with real world practice. For wealthy travelers and corporate clients there is a duty to insist on operators who meet the full commercial standard when flights look and act like commercial services. For regulators, the task is to close surveillance gaps and to make compliance the baseline, not the exception.

If the aviation community wants to reduce catastrophic outcomes it has to focus both on rules and on the day to day culture of compliance. The tools exist. The imperative for enforcement is real. From my seat in the flight deck the single most effective safety lever is simple: do not fly unless the aircraft, the crew and the operator can demonstrate they meet the standard the passengers expect and deserve.