THE POWERS OF THE GOVERNORS IS A PROBLEM IN THE REVIEW OF THE LAND USE ACT

SURCON QUESTION: THE POWERS OF THE GOVERNORS IS A PROBLEM IN THE REVIEW OF THE LAND USE ACT.

Land is the part of the earth surface projecting out of water, on which human existence depends. Almost all of man’s socio-economic activities take place on land. Man’s food, shelter, clothing, medication and other necessities come from land. In fact, man was taken from land and at his demise shall be committed to land. Without land man cannot have livelihood.

Land use is a term indicating the use to which a portion of land is put. Land is used for all of man’s economic activities, and so the use of a portion of land determines the economic productivity of the land. Therefore, it is necessary to regulate and coordinate land use for optimum productivity and benefit of all people whose livelihood depends on the land.

That was the premise upon which the military government of Nigeria enacted the land use decree of 1978, which later became an act and was enshrined in the constitution. Specifically, the objectives of the act include: the unification of all tenure systems that existed before the act, to remove the controversies generated by land, to simplify management and ownership of land, to assist all citizens to own land, and to enable government to have access to land for public good, plan and zone land for particular reasons.

The enactment of the act is commendable in view of its objectives and the checking of activities of land speculators especially in the southern part of the country. However, as soon as it became operational, the act was found to have taken away people’s right to land and given ti to the governors. In the following sections an attempt shall be made to explain the need to review the land use act, and that such review will be resisted by the governors.

The act introduced the Certificate of Occupancy (C of O) as the singular most important document that assures a holder the right to land. The act however does not make provision for renewal of an expired C of O. This omission makes the C of O fragile, not conclusive an evidence of the right a holder has to a piece of land. And a time will come when the document will become weak as collateral for loans. At that time the holder will lose the right to his land.

Contrary to its claims, the act does not guarantee equitable distribution of land. A forensic analysis of the act reveals dual land administrative system. Sections 5 and 6 of the act empower the governor and local government to grant statutory right of occupancy and customary right of occupancy respectively for a definite period of 99 years. Section 34 and 36 section make provision for land held before the commencement of the act as if the holder were a holder of statutory right of occupancy or customary right of occupancy as the case may be, with an indefinite period. Thus, the act does not guarantee equitable administration of land.

Another reason the land use act should be reviewed is that it actually succeeded in turning landlords to tenants and impoverished Nigerians. The act takes away citizens’ right to own land they can call their own since the land can be revoked anytime by the state. Under the act, Nigerians do not have perpetual right to land any more than a tenant has right to perpetually occupy a rented space. Moreover, the act removes economic wealth-creation attributes of land by removing right of families and individuals to develop private layouts without the consent of the governor.

Furthermore, the inconveniences and delay in securing C of O makes acquisition of land expensive and arduous. How many Nigerians can afford the fees state governments place on acquisition of C of O? Thus, owning a house is almost impossible for average Nigerians.

The act gives enormous powers to the governors. It opens by saying, “All land in a state is vested in the governor who shall hold such land in trust for the people”, and so transfers ownership of all land to the governors. The governors decide who to grant right to land, and there is no provision for anybody whose right to land is denied to seek justice in a court of law.

The act declares that a governor can designate parts of the state as urban area under general conditions specified by the National Council of State which is made up of the governors themselves. So a governor can declare all the land in the state urban land. Thus, the powers of the governors overshadow and make nonsense of the powers of management of non-urban land vested in the local government.

Section 28 of the act gives powers to the governors to revoke at will any right of occupancy – both statutory and customary – “for overriding public interest.” Who determines what constitute “overriding public interest”? The governors, of course. And that power cannot be questioned even by a court of law! The best the governor can do is pay compensation, which is paid for development on the land. If the land is not developed, no compensation shall be paid, the owner loses all. What an unfortunate law is the land use act!

The act provides for the establishment of the so-called “Land use allocation committee.” The governor determines members of the committee. A case of “he who plays the pipe dictates the tunes.” Moreover, as a land surveyor, this author finds it shocking that the act does not mention that a land surveyor shall be a member of the committee, rather it states that the members shall be “estate surveyors and land officers.” It simply means that, while the act recognizes estate surveyors, the act does not recognize land surveyors, the most important profession in the distribution and administration of land. So, a governor does not have to appoint a land surveyor as a member of the committee, thereby relegating the profession to the background. The act does not respect surveying profession and therefore should be questioned.

The act also empowers governors to impose rent for a breach of any covenant in a C of O.  A paragraph also empowers the governors to waive wholly or partially any conditions stated in the C of O. The governors also has powers to grant right of occupancy free of rent or at a reduced rent in any case in which he is satisfied that it would be “in the public interest” to do so. The implication of this is simple: the governor can grant right of occupancy to his cronies and waive the rents as he deems fit.

The powers of the governors relating to land under the act are enormous. Having enjoyed so much powers under the act, it would be difficult for any governor to support its review. Ostensibly, the military government intended the act will be a blessing to Nigerians but it has become a clog in the wheel of progress and impoverished the people. The governors, who enjoy so much powers under the act, will definitely oppose any move to reduce their powers. However, all hope is not lost since in a democracy the will of the people will always prevail. But it will take a sustained period of mass protests and high-level consultations to get the act reviewed.

DISCLAIMER: This material is only an attempt to answer an examination question, though written from a background of solid knowledge and practical experience in Surveying and Geoinformatics. It has not gone through peer review. Therefore, all views and opinions expressed therein remain the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent that of any institution.  Feedback on corrections and constructive criticisms are welcome. Thank you.