Namibia Rejects Ghanaian Entrepreneur Jory Adu-Boahene’s N$4 Billion Oil and Gas Supply Base Proposal Over Funding and Technical Capacity Concerns
Namibia’s ambition to become one of Africa’s leading offshore oil producers has taken a significant turn after the Namibian Ports Authority (Namport) rejected a proposal by a Ghanaian-led consortium to develop a N$4 billion (approximately $244 million) oil and gas supply base at the Port of Lüderitz.
The decision represents a major setback for Ghanaian entrepreneur Jory Adu-Boahene and his company, Alpha Nautical Services Limited (Anol), which had hoped to establish a strategic logistics hub to support Namibia’s rapidly expanding offshore petroleum industry.
According to The Namibian, the proposed supply base was intended to provide critical infrastructure for offshore oil and gas exploration, production support, marine logistics, vessel servicing, and equipment storage as international energy companies increase exploration activities along Namibia’s coastline following a series of major oil discoveries.
Namport cites financial and technical shortcomings
After reviewing documents submitted by Anol, Namport concluded that the consortium failed to demonstrate the financial strength, operational experience, technical expertise, and delivery capacity required to undertake a project of such magnitude.
Namport Chief Executive Officer Andrew Kanime said the authority’s assessment was based entirely on information supplied by the consortium.
According to Kanime, the review found that Anol did not satisfy the technical capability and proven track record required to establish and operate an oil and gas supply base at Lüderitz, one of Namibia’s key ports expected to play a central role in servicing offshore petroleum operations.
The authority further stated that the consortium had not provided sufficient evidence to convince evaluators that it possessed the expertise necessary to successfully deliver and manage the facility throughout the proposed concession period.
Strategic project for Namibia’s energy future
The project forms part of Namibia’s broader strategy to develop world-class infrastructure capable of supporting what is expected to become one of Africa’s fastest-growing offshore energy sectors.
In 2025, Namibia’s Cabinet tasked the Namibia Industrial Development Agency (NIDA) with identifying a private developer for the project under a 25-year Design, Build, Own, Operate and Transfer (DBOOT) concession model.
The planned supply base was expected to become a critical logistics hub serving offshore drilling operations, attracting international investment while creating employment opportunities and strengthening Namibia’s position within the global energy industry.
Ownership negotiations had already begun
Before the rejection, discussions over the project’s ownership structure had advanced considerably.
Earlier in February 2026, NIDA proposed retaining a 51 percent ownership stake while Adu-Boahene and his consortium would collectively own the remaining 49 percent.
NIDA Acting Chief Executive Phillip Namundjebo met with Adu-Boahene and Namport CEO Andrew Kanime in Walvis Bay to discuss governance arrangements, implementation strategies, and long-term operational management of the project.
The proposal also attracted interest from Namibian businessman Josef Andreas, who disclosed that he was undertaking due diligence to assist in securing the substantial capital required for the development.
Andreas previously chaired Guinas Investments, a company linked to Namibia’s ruling SWAPO party, which had earlier expressed interest in developing the project before its unsolicited proposal was rejected by Namport.
The competing interests revived debate within Namibia over whether strategic national infrastructure projects should be developed through state-led partnerships or subjected to open international competitive bidding.
Adu-Boahene rejects Namport’s assessment
Anol has strongly disputed Namport’s conclusions, insisting that the consortium possesses the expertise, financial backing, and industry experience necessary to execute the project successfully.
Adu-Boahene argued that the company deliberately established a Namibian-registered entity to comply fully with local ownership regulations rather than operating through a foreign corporate structure.
According to him, that decision has unfairly resulted in Namport underestimating the consortium’s experience and technical credentials.
He further questioned the consistency and fairness of Namport’s evaluation process, alleging that the authority had recently awarded a comparable project to a wholly foreign-owned company, Soneils.
Adu-Boahene suggested that companies complying with Namibia’s local participation requirements appeared to be placed at a disadvantage, raising broader concerns about transparency and equal treatment in project evaluations.
Funding documentation questioned
One of Namport’s primary concerns related to the consortium’s financing arrangements.
The authority stated that the letter of intent submitted by Anol was insufficient evidence that adequate funding had been secured for a project valued at N$4 billion.
Namport indicated that a comprehensive financing package should have included detailed information on equity commitments, debt financing arrangements, confirmed financial institutions, sponsor guarantees, and other evidence demonstrating the consortium’s ability to mobilize the necessary capital.
Without such documentation, the authority said it could not make an informed assessment of the project’s financial viability.
Experience in oil and gas operations also scrutinized
Beyond financing concerns, Namport questioned whether Anol itself possessed direct operational experience in managing oil and gas supply bases.
The authority maintained that its initial review found no independently verifiable operating history demonstrating that Anol had previously managed similar large-scale petroleum logistics facilities.
However, Adu-Boahene countered that while Anol may be a relatively new corporate entity, its sponsors and technical partners possess extensive industry experience.
He pointed to connections with LADOL, the well-known logistics and industrial base in Lagos, Nigeria, which has supported major international oil companies operating across West Africa.
According to Adu-Boahene, the experience of the consortium’s sponsors should have been taken into account during the evaluation process.
Site suitability raises additional concerns
Namport also rejected the consortium’s proposed Robert Harbour location within Lüderitz.
According to the authority, the site’s shallow water depth and hard-rock seabed would require costly dredging operations while limiting access for heavy-lift vessels essential to offshore oil and gas activities.
These engineering challenges, Namport argued, would significantly increase development costs and reduce the operational efficiency of the facility.
Open competition likely to follow
With Anol’s proposal now formally rejected, Namibia is expected to pursue an open competitive bidding process to identify investors capable of delivering the strategic infrastructure required to support the country’s rapidly growing offshore petroleum industry.
The decision highlights the increasingly rigorous standards being applied to large-scale energy infrastructure projects as Namibia seeks experienced international partners with proven technical capability, strong financial backing, and a successful record of delivering complex oil and gas developments.
As offshore exploration accelerates and global energy companies continue investing in Namibia’s petroleum sector, the country remains focused on building the infrastructure necessary to transform recent oil discoveries into long-term economic growth and position itself as one of Africa’s emerging energy powerhouses.
