Abuja; Land Availability, Challenges And Mismanagement

By AYUBA Michael

Introduction

The story of the Federal Capital of  Nigeria is not farfetched since the existence has not been a long one comparatively with other states in Nigeria, in fact the last created but has a population estimate of about 3,095,118. Abuja being the baby, yet the mother state of Nigeria have continued to suffer in many respects, the worst being on the issue of land availability within the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

The mother status of the FCT is steaming from the fact that it is the capital of Nigeria (Centre of Unity), from the phrase “Centre of Unity” anyone will easily understand that it is the expression of everything Nigeria.

Abuja, was described by Umar Shuaubu (2015) as “a hotbed for political fermentation, such that generates centripetal attraction from all corners of the country, perhaps nowhere has need for judicious use and preservation of exhuastive land resources become imperative in Nigeria today than the federal capital city.”

With that in mind, one will ask how did the federal capital territory came into being?

When General Murtala Mohammed took over power on 29th July, 1975, as Head of State, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, he formulated and announced a number of socio-economic policies that he proposed to implement before handing over to a democratically elected government on 1st October, 1979. One of such policies was the relocation of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) from Lagos.

The reasons for this policy were aptly summed up in his broadcast as follows:

“Most people consider Lagos no longer suitable as the

Capital of Nigeria because of its chronic traffic congestion,

its housing problem, its poor drainage system,

the general unwholesomeness of its climate and its

location on the sea coast which cannot be altered.”

Other reasons given were:

(i) Conflicts between Federal and Lagos State Governments

(ii) Inadequacy of land space for expansion

(iii) Lack of security of the Federal Capital

(iv) Inadequate physical resource base

(v) Inadequate infrastructural facilities

(vi) Unsuitable topography

(vii) Over-population

Thus, on 9th August, 1975, he appointed a seven-member committee, comprising Justice T. Akinola Aguda (Chairman), Dr. Tai Solarin, Mohammadu Musa Isma, Dr. Ajato Gandonu, Col. Monsignor Pedro Martins, Chief Owen Fiebai and Professor O.K. Ogan

(Members) to examine the policy

They were given the following terms of reference:

(i) To examine the dual role of Lagos as a Federal and State Capital and advise on the desirability, or otherwise of Lagos retaining that role

(ii) In the event of the Committee finding that Lagos is unsuitable for such a role, to recommend which of the two governments (Federal or State) should move to new Capital

(iii) In the event of the Committee finding that the Federal Capital should move out of Lagos, to recommend suitable alternative locations, having regard to the need for easy accessibility to and from every part of the Federation.

(iv) To examine all other relevant factors which will assist the Federal Military Government in arriving at the right decision.

The final recommendation of the committee was that the Federal Capital Territory should be moved out of Lagos to a “virgin” location. They found the centre of Nigeria, now Abuja, to be the most ideal and suitable location for this purpose. The Murtala Mohammed administration accepted this recommendation and decreed thus:

“the area contained in the Capital Territory shall, as from the commencement of this decree, cease to be a portion of the states concerned and shall henceforth be governed and administered by or under the control of the Government of the federation to the exclusion of any other person or authority whatsoever and the ownership of the lands comprised in the Capital Territory shall likewise vest absolutely in the Government of the Federation”.

­­­­

The above declaration is the exact content of Section 1(3) of the Federal Capital Territory Act which also established  Federal Capital Development Authority (FCDA). The FCDA through the chairman and 8 0ther members were given the power to oversee the proper implementation of the FCT plan.

However, I want to state here that the president is the Governor of FCT through the combine effect of Section 299 and 301 respectively which I will reproduce verbatim

Section 299:

The provisions of this Constitution shall apply to the Federal Capital Territory Abuja, as if it were one of the States of the Federation, and accordingly –

(a) all the legislative powers, the executive powers and the judicial

powers vested in the House of Assembly, the Governor of a State

and in the courts of a State shall, respectively, vest in the National

Assembly, the President of the Federation and in the courts which by virtue of the foregoing provisions are courts established for the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja;

(b) all the powers referred to in paragraph (a) of this section shall

be exercised in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution;

and (c) the provisions of this Constitution pertaining to the matters

aforesaid shall be read with such modifications and adaptations as

may be reasonably necessary to bring them into conformity with the

provisions of this section.

Section 301:

Without prejudice to the generality of the provisions of section 299 of this Constitution, in its application to the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, this Constitution shall be construed as if-

(a) references to the Governor, Deputy Governor and the executive

council of a State (howsoever called) were references to the

President, Vice-President and the executive council of the

Federation (howsoever called) respectively;

(b) references to the Chief Judge and Judges of the High Court of a State were references to the Chief Judge and Judges of the High Court, which is established for the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja by the provisions of this Constitution; and

(c) references to persons, offices and authorities of a State were

references to the persons, offices and authorities of the Federation

with like status, designations and powers, respectively; and in

particular, as if references to the Attorney-General, Commissioners

and the Auditor-General for a State were references to the Attorney-

General, Ministers and the Auditor-General of the Federation with

like status, designations and powers. 

But the President exercise these powers through the minister  of FCT Section 18 (b) FCT Act provides;

As from the 28th May, 1984, the President has delegated to the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory the following functions, that is to say‐

(b) any executive power of the Federal Government vested in the President pursuant to section 299 (a) or any other section of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and exercisable within the Federal Capital Territory;

Challenges and mismanagement

It is important to note here that the land tenure system in Nigeria as espoused in the LUA of 1978 vested the power of land ownership on the Government. In the case of FCT, the lands have been made to belong to the Federal Government for whom the Minister of the Federal Capital stands in proxy that is according to S.299 read together with S.301 of the 1999 constitution and this further enhanced by the FCT act.

Excess powers of the FCT Minister

The FCT Minister oversees the allocation and the usage of the city lands in accordance with the categorization in the Abuja Master Plan (AMP).

One of the primary reasons for accessing land by Abuja dwellers is housing; and to this effect, the government made frantic efforts at providing housing at the initial epoch of the city make up. For instance, Ukoha and Beamish (1997) report that between 1980 and 1994, the FCDA had completed construction of more than 22 000 housing units and the Federal Housing Authority had completed 1 571 units. Most of these units were not affordable to Abuja residents and annual costs were subsidized up to 98.5-99.9 percent for civil servant residents (Morah, 1993). CHRE and SERAC (2008) asserts that the sudden increases in the population of Abuja placed enormous pressure on the city’s still rudimentary infrastructure particularly its housing. The massive housing deficits that resulted from the influx of relocated civil servants, without adequate measures from the FCDA to provide access to affordable housing, gave rise to rapidly rising rents, overcrowding, large numbers of shared households, the growth of small-scale private sector housing in the outlying settlements of Abuja and homelessness. Over the years, however, successful administrations of the FCTA have done series of land allocations that have been fingered to be corruptly and politically executed thereby denying the urban poor the opportunity of owning land and increasing homelessness in the city.

The Corruption and Politics of Land and Housing Administration-Appraising the Homelessness among the Urban Poor

Corruption is a global phenomenon that has been said to be responsible for underdevelopment of many states. For instance, UNODC (2017) asserts that nine out of every 10 bribes paid to public officials in Nigeria are paid in cash and the size of the payments made, it is estimated that the total amount of bribes paid to public officials in Nigeria in the 12 months prior to the survey was around 400 billion Nigerian Naira (NGN), the equivalent

of $4.6 billion in purchasing power parity (PPP).

In land administration and housing sector in the FCT, corruption and politicization of allocation procedures have been reported to have been the order of the day. The recent ICPC comprehensive study of the corruption that characterized land administration in Abuja and identified the following as corruption red flags:

1. Forgeries and Cloning of land documents
2. Allocation of plots of land made without the FCT Minister’s approval
3. Presence (beyond regulated time of 2 years) of pockets of undeveloped plots of land in districts with engineering infrastructure
4. Missing of land documents in AGIS and Land Administration Department
5. Existence of Land Syndicates and Speculators
6. Neglect of the guideline to set up a revocation of certain Land Titles without due process
7. Fake layouts and Fraudulent Allocations in Area Councils
8. Differences in land use in the records of AGIS and Urban and Regional Planning Department
9. File scams in AGIS/ Land Administration Department
10. Delays in processing land documents
11. Complaints about ‘pressures from well-connected individuals and groups’ on staff to circumvent laid-down procedures/processes
12. Presence of touts around the premises of AGIS/Land Administration Department and similar establishments.

Through the CRR tool served on AGIS, URPD, Land Administration Department and Department of Development Control, ICPC (2015) also posits that the following negative acts have a high probability of occurrence in their operations: Abuse of power, Conflict of interest, Dishonesty, Favouritism, Bribery, Fraud, Influence peddling, Sharp practices, Insider trading and Abuse of privileged information.

The Commission then concludes that the predisposing factors for corruption in lands administration in the FCT are:

1. The huge discretionary powers given the FCT Minister under the Land Use Act of 1978 and the FCT Act of 1976.
2. Excessive discretional powers of the Director, Land Administration Department in determining which land applications are fully processed for Ministerial approval.
3. Lack of policy documents and standardized procedures regarding land administration processes (ICPC, 2015).

The above presents a context where corruption have become so endemic that it has permeated every segment of land administration of the FCT

The Land Use Act and its effects 

Omirin (2003) says that access to land in Nigeria is affected by the operation of the Land Use Act of 1978 creating more of a bottleneck. She stresses that the provisions give the government cheap control of much land, but the allocation criteria are so exclusionary as to provide access to only a very small proportion of upper income earners, particularly the educated elite, the politically influential and military personnel.Ayedun and Oluwatobi (2011) note that the Land Use Act was promulgated with the intention of streamlining the land tenure systems in the country by vesting the ownership and title to all lands in the country on the Governors of the respective states of the Federation for the purpose of easy management and accessibility by those interested in the acquisition of lands in the country. He however stressed that the contentious issues of Governor’s consent for any subsequent transaction in land and the intractable government bureaucracy and bottlenecks have made the procurement of land problematic, unnecessarily expensive and out rightly out of the reach of most of Nigerians citizens most especially in the urban centres of the country.

Poor Record system

One of the current challenge of the land availability in the FCT is the challenge of poor record system; there have been scenarios of land dispute arising as a result reallocating the same portion of land to different individuals or a situation where a land initially designated for commercial purpose is abruptly converted into residential use and in other occasions the records do not reflect the same content in the records of government agencies.Similarly, at the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja the big challenges according to the declaration made by Iro (2008), AGIS-GM, that over 6000 C. of Os from recertification are yet to be produced and conveyed. And 12,000 C.of Os from sale of Federal Government Houses, another 4,000 from Federal Authority plots, and about 150,000 from regularization of titles in the Area Councils. He further stressed the high demand of large volume of data from courts handling over 750 land-related litigations, with 2,400 cases of revocations and 1,700 double allocations

Failure of the Federal Government to honour court judgment given in favour indigenous people of the FCT

Law; since time immemorial has being one of the best means to maintain social order and cohesion, and any form of disregard to the rule of law can lead to mismanagement of systems and resources.

Chapter IV of 1999 Constitution of Nigeria as amended Section 43 and 44 confers on individuals the right to acquire both moveable and immoveable property anywhere in Nigeria and that such property cannot be compulsorily taken away without adequate compensation. And this disregard to the effect of this section by government has displaced the indigenous people and in effect made access to land difficult.

Section 44

(1) No moveable property or any interest in an immovable property shall be taken possession of compulsorily and no right over or interest in any such property shall be acquired compulsorily in any part of Nigeria except in the manner and for the purposes prescribed by a law that, among other things –

(a) requires the prompt payment of compensation therefore and

(b) gives to any person claiming such compensation a right of access for the determination of his interest in the property and the amount of compensation to a court of law or tribunal or body having jurisdiction in that part of Nigeria.

Section 45 of the same chapter further empower any individual dissatisfied to seek redress in the court of law and I want boldly state that the indigenous and peaceful people of the FCT have done that in a good number of cases see;

The case of OKOYODE vs F.C.D.A (2005) Vol. 27, Weekly Reports of Nigeria(WRN) 97 – 153 at PP 125 and 149 per Hon. Justice Raphael Rowland, JCA who in delivering the lead judgment said:

“On whether the Federal Capital Territory is in law a state”, the Court of Appeal pronounced as follows:

“By virtue of section 299 of the Constitution of the Federation, the Federal Capital Territory is in law a state. In other words the Federal Capital Territory should be treated as one of the states in the Federal Republic of Nigeria. It follows therefore that bodies like the Federal Capital development Authority are to be regarded an agency of a ‘state’

independent of the Federal Government…

Section 299 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 has clear and unambiguous provisions to the effect that the Federal Capital Territory is in law a State.

It is law that where provision of statute is clear and unambiguous only its natural meaning will suffice. There is a plethora of cases on this point.”

And the Supreme Court has also clearly stated in its judgment that Customary Land Title has not been abolished by the FCT Act via case number SC/187/2000 filed by Abaji Area Council against the Ministry of Federal Capital Territory with judgment delivered on 27th November 2000.

Solutions/Conclusion

Firstly, government should seek to protect the rule and it must not just enforce the law against the people alone but it must be being to practice the rule and all its principles this way the ongoing agitation by the people of FCT will see an end, and also government must act as a father to all, treat everybody equally and make sure everybody feels a sense of belonging in other I call on the Federal Government to obey the court order given in the favour of the people of the FCT;

In a case between Musa Baba-Panya (Appellant) vs President FRN, AGF and Danladi Jeji, (OIDA President) filed at the Court of Appeal with suit number CA/A/412/2016 and decided by a panel of four Justices led by Justice Tinuade Akomolafe-Wilson, the appellate court issued an enrolled order which reads in part as thus: “it is hereby granted as follows:

“a. A declaration that the indigenes of FCT-Abuja are entitled to ministerial   appointment into the Federal Executive Council..

“b. A declaration that the continuous refusal, failure or default by the previous and the current Presidents to appoint an indigene of the FCT-Abuja as a minister of the federation is a flagrant violation of theonstitutional right of indigenes of FCT-Abuja.

“c. An order compelling the 1st respondent (President FRN) to the immediate appointment of an indigene of FCT-Abuja as a Minister of the Federation forthwith.”

Secondly, FCT in landmass is bigger than many other states in the federation and it also have a higher population compared to some states in Nigeria hence a considarable reason FCT should be accorded a full status of a state separate from the federal government and this point is in line with the document submitted on the 16^th September,2020 by the Original Inhabitants Development Association of Abuja (OIDA) to The Senate Committee on the review of the 1999 Constitution (As Amended).   

Conclusively, it is my hope that the Federal Government will pay attention to the concerns and plight of the FCT people, so that we can have a harmonious and progressive society.

REFERENCES

Abdullahi, A. (2019) Re-planning the master plan: the corruption and politics of land allocation, housing and homelessness among the urban poor in Abuja. Available from www.uneca.org (15 November 2020)

CHRE and SERAC (2008), The Myth of the Abuja Master Plan Nigeria: Forced Eviction as Urban Planning in Abuja. The Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions & Social and EconomicRights Action Centre, Geneva.

Erasmus U. M (1993), ‘Why Nigeria obtained the new capital that it did: An analysis of officials’ disposition in housing development’, International Review of Administrative Sciences, Vol.59, 251-275.

ICPC(2015),<https://www.icpc.gov.ng/wpcontent/uploads/downloads/2015/02/summaryof-the-report-of-the-systems-study-andreview-of-land-administration-in-thefederalcapital-territory.pdf>. accessed on 10 june 2019

International Planning Associates (1979), The Master Plan for Abuja the New Federal Capitalof Nigeria, Federal Capital Development Authority, Federal Republic of Nigeria, p. 171.

Iro I. (2008), Welcome Address by the General Manager Abuja Geographic Information System (AGIS) Open-House Celebration, February 28.

Land Use Act (1978). Land Use Act 1978, The Complete 2004 Laws of Nigeria<http://.placng.org/view2.php?sn=228> accessed 12 July 2019.

Omirin, M.M (2003). Issues in Land Accessibility in Nigeria.. A Paper in Book of Proceedings of a National Workshop Organized by the Department of Estate Management University of Lagos, Akoka, Lagos, Nigeria on the theme “Land Management and property Tax Reformin Nigeria”. Pp 49-58

Nuhu M.B,(2008) Public Land Policy, New Trends: Challenges in Nigerian Insititutional Frameworks for State and Public Sector Land Management.. FIG/FAO/CNG International Seminar on State and Public Sector Land Management Verona, Italy, September 9-10, 2008

Written by Ayuba Michael, 09091233709, ayubatumu@gmail.com