WorldStage– The Ogun State Government has denied reports that safety, operational, or infrastructural challenges at the Gateway International Airport were responsible for the relocation of the second batch of pilgrims from the new airport.
Specifically, in a statement, the gateway state dismissed as false a media report alleging that Saudi airline, Flynas, rejected the airport at Iperu, the hometown of Governor Dapo Abiodun, for the transportation of Ogun pilgrims to Saudi Arabia for the 2026 Hajj exercise.
In a statement said the relocation of the second batch of pilgrims from the airport was due to the inability of Saudi aviation authorities to secure a landing slot for Nigeria’s designated carrier, Max Air, which had been engaged by the National Hajj Commission of Nigeria (NAHCON) for Gateway International Airport (GIA) operations, necessitating an adjustment in flight arrangements.
The statement explained that the notice of the scheduling challenge came barely two weeks before the planned operations, compelling NAHCON to redirect the affected pilgrims to the Murtala Muhammed International Airport, Lagos, as the most practical alternative.
The government stressed that Flynas did not reject the Gateway International Airport on grounds of safety, infrastructure deficiency, or operational limitation, contrary to claims in the report.
It added that the first batch of pilgrims had earlier departed successfully from the Gateway International Airport without incident, describing the operation as a historic milestone in Nigeria’s aviation and Hajj logistics.
The government noted that the airport has undergone multiple technical and safety audits since 2025 and is equipped with advanced infrastructure, including a CAT II Instrument Landing System, precision navigation systems, and modern weather monitoring equipment.
It further emphasized that the airport’s runway is capable of accommodating wide-body aircraft such as the Boeing 777, Boeing 747, and Airbus A380, underscoring its readiness for international operations.
The statement also argued that no aviation authority would have approved the airport for use if there were any safety or operational concerns, noting that even presidential flights have been received at the facility.
