By Yomi Fawehinmi | Land is a crucial resource that requires effective management by governments and various institutions to ensure equitable access and utilisation. This responsibility stems from the fundamental obligation of governments to protect the right to life, libertyand property, as espoused by the 17th-century philosopher John Locke. To achieve this objective, the government is expected to facilitate the development of an effective land administration and management system.

Such a system should enableland access, ownership, and efficient land markets, reduce tensions and conflicts about land, create clear tenure, foster economic growth, enhance local and domestic productivity and investment, improve community well-being, and enable sustainable land management and land use. Proper land administration can play a significant role in enhancing citizens' access to various opportunities and overall national growth and development.

Section 43 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria guarantees the right to property by stating that "subject to the provisions of this Constitution, every citizen of Nigeria shall have the right to acquire and own immovable property anywhere in Nigeria."

The Land Use Act of 1978 (LUA) is the principal legislation that governs land tenure in Nigeria. It regulates how land is bought, sold, managed, and used.Section 1 of the Act states that "subject to the provisions of this Act, all lands comprised in the territory of each state in the Federation are hereby vested in the governor of that state, and such land shall be held in trust and administered for the use and common benefit of all Nigerians in accordance with the provisions of this Act."

However, the Act's provisions, including the requirement for governors’ consent to land dealings, have had mixed outcomes. After 45 years of the Land Use Act, there is need for urgent reform of the law to ensure that Nigeria has a land policy that aligns with the country’s developmental goals and caters to the diverse needs of its citizens.

Prior to LUA: One Country, Two Land Tenure Systems

Before the promulgation of the Land Use Act, land tenure in northern Nigeria was influenced by two major factors: Islamic law and British rule. The Islamic influence was tied to the powers of the Emirs as communal leaders and managers of communal assets. Under British colonial rule, statutory regulation of land rights was introduced through the Lands and Native Rights Ordinance of 1910, which was later amended in 1916. The Land Tenure Law of 1962 further amended and re-enacted the 1916 Ordinance. This law declared certain lands in northern Nigeria as "native lands," and vested their management and control in the Minister (later Commissioner) for Lands and Survey, who administered such lands for the use and common benefit of the natives. Section 6 of the 1962 law empowered the minister to grant rights of occupancy to natives and required the consent and approval of the minister for the occupation and enjoyment of land rights by non-natives.

In southern Nigeria, land tenure resulted from two major influences: customary law and British rule. The customary system is based on the belief that land has spiritual value and is held in trust for the benefit of the community and future generations. Therefore, land was owned by the family or community, not by the individual. All members of the group, community, village, or family had an equal right to the land, and the chief or headman of the group held the land as a trustee for the use of the group.

It is worth noting that the Land Tenure Law of 1962 established a system of state control over land in northern Nigeria, while the customary system remained prevalent in the south. The customary system was challenged by modernisation and economic development, as individual ownership of land became more common.

The Path to the Land Use Act

In 1975, the Federal Government Anti-Inflation Task Force identified the land tenure systems as one of the causes of inflation and recommended that a decree be promulgated which would vest all land in principle in the state governments. The government rejected this recommendation.

In January 1976, the Federal Government Rent Panel also identified the land tenure system as a major hindrance to rapid economic development in the country. The panel recommended that the government should investigate the question of vesting all lands in the state. This time, the government accepted the recommendation in principle and called for further study of its practical implications.

In 1977, the Federal Government appointed the Land Use Panel to study the land tenure issue. Its terms of reference were:

1. To undertake an in-depth study of the various land tenure, land use and conservation practices in the country and recommend steps to be taken to streamline them;
2. To study and analyse the implications of a uniform land policy for the country;

• To examine the feasibility of a uniform land policy for the entire country, make recommendations and propose guidelines for their implementation; and

1. To examine steps necessary for controlling future land use and opening and developing new lands for the needs of the government and Nigeria's growing population in bothurban and rural areas and make appropriate recommendations.

Although the panel's majority did not recommend nationalisation of land, the minority report did. The Federal Government acted on the minority report in the promulgation of the Land Use Decree, which was enacted in March 1978. The rationale for the law is set out this in the preamble: “Whereas it is in the public interest that the rights of all Nigerians to the land of Nigeria be asserted and preserved by law; and whereas it is also in the public interest that the rights of all Nigerians to use and enjoy land in Nigeria and the natural fruits thereof in sufficient quantity to enable them to provide for the sustenance of themselves and their families should be assured, protected and preserved."

In furtherance of these, the law seeks to accomplish the following objectives:

(a) To remove the bitter controversies, resulting at times in loss of lives and limbs, which land is known to be generating;

(b) To streamline and simplify the management and ownership of land in the country;

(c) To assist the citizenry, irrespective of his social status, to realise his ambition and aspiration of owning the place where he and his family will live a secure and peaceful life;

(d) To enable the government to bring under control the use to which land can be put in all parts of the country and thus facilitate planning and zoning programmes for uses.

Outside of this decree (which later became an Act), there are also different land laws in various states in Nigeria. Some of these laws include Instrument Registration Laws, agency laws and other laws related to land. For example, the Land Registration Law, 2015 empowers the governor of Lagos State to create land registry divisions in the state. Any transfer or charge in respect of property must be registered within 60 days after obtaining governor's consent, where applicable, else the transaction will be void.  Also on 7th February 2022, Mr. Babajide Sanwo-Olu, governor of the state, signed the Lagos State Real Estate Regulatory Authority Bill into law. The law, which introduces significant changes to the real estate landscape in Lagos State, was enacted to protect and prevent Lagos State residents from falling prey to fraudulent real estate practitioners and to create some important obligations for stakeholders in the real estate sector.

Mixed Results of the Land Use Act

The Land Use Act has achieved some of its objectives but has also fallen short in many areas.

On the positive side, the Act has made it relatively easier for the government to acquire land for publicpurposes. Second, the law created a formal process for any Nigerian to get access to land even if they are not from the state. Third and related to the second point, the lawcreated a uniform land tenure system and land rights in Nigeria therefore reducing the arguments over rights to land. The uniformity brought some forms of predictability and simplicity in the process.

Also, the law createdpublic control and management of land in Nigeria. This potentially is a fairer management system compared to the prior case where land was held and managed by individuals, families, and communities.

While it seems that the governors have excessive powers based on this law, Section 6(1) of the law states that “the National Council of States may make regulations for the purpose of carrying this Act into effect “. The sad part is that the National Council of State has failed to do this and allowed the governors to act as they wish.

The law has noble objectives, as spelt out in the preamble quoted above. What has happened, however, is that some of the provisions of the law and their application have failed to ensure that this objective is met.

The law has some problematic provisions. However, some state governments have made the best of the situation.

Some governors have been innovative in reducing the processing times for land transactions. For example, in 2020, the Ogun State Government announced that the processing of Certificates of Occupancy (C of Os) and other title documents will not take longer than 28 days. Nasarawa State also had reforms that led to applicants requiring about 14 weeks only to be presented with CofOs. These reforms lead to faster processing and increases the speed of transactions. The laws that established the Nasarawa Geographic Information System(NAGIS)and the Abuja Geographic Information System (AGIS) have become reference points for other states to understudy and replicate.

Another innovation is how some governors and the president use their delegated powers to improve the efficiency of the process. The former Minister of Works and Housing, Mr. Babatunde Fashola, SAN, speaking at the Executive Session of the 11th Meeting of the National Council on Lands, Housing and Urban Development showed the impact of delegation in land management. He said: “We must, therefore, reform the process that governs the allocation of land and issuance of title documents such as Certificates of Occupancy. Today I can tell you that since 2017, when the president delegated his power under the Land Use Act to grant consent and issue Certificates of Occupancy to the Ministry, we have issued over 5,000 Certificates of Occupancy and granted 2,738 consents to land transactions”.

State governors are the major determining factor of the effectiveness of land administration. They influence the amount of investment in the land registry, modernisation and review of land laws and the speed and efficiency of the land approval process.

The establishment of the Kaduna State Geographic Information Service (KADGIS) is another example of how governors can impact land administration in the state. KADGIS digitised the land registry, and enabled residents to get valid land titles through systematic property registration and the recertification programme. As a result, the governor was able to sign over 50,000 certificates of occupancy between 2016 and 2022.  Another example is the role of the governor in determining the cost of land transactions. In 2005, Lagos State lowered the consent fee for a transfer of land rights held for more than 10years from 16% of property value to 8%. Despite this significant reduction, this fee is still among the highest land transfer fees in the world.

While these innovations have had a significant positive effect, the Land Use Act imposes a lot of problems and constraints on the land market and thus reduces the access of Nigerians to land. In 2014, the Chairman of the Presidential Technical Committee on Land Reform (PTCLR), Prof. Peter Adeniyi, said that “The LUA is the most controversial, least understood by majority of Nigerians, very confusing and contradictory in its provisions, highly undemocratic and has woefully failed to create a right and just environment to facilitate its implementation”. He also claimed that not more than 2.5% of the land in Nigeria are registered since formal land registration began in Nigeria in 1863.

In 2016, the World Bank ranked Nigeria 185th out of 189 countries in the ease of registering property.  In 2020, Nigeria had its worst ranking in this same area in the World Bank Ease of Doing Business report for that year. In registration ofproperty, Nigeria scored 29.5 out of 100. The report also stated there were 12 procedures to register land which takes about 92 days and costs 11.3% of the property value. And Nigeria’s quality of the land administration index was 8.0 out of 30. The World Bank Annual Doing Business Report (DBR) for 2018 had Nigeria’s Subnational Doing Business Report (SDBR) where each state was assessed individually. Of the four areas of reforms, (starting a business, dealing with construction permits, enforcing contracts, and registering property), the average score for all the states was 76, 69, 55 and 26 respectively (For comparison, the average score in sub-Saharan Africa for registering property was 51.)

The Land Use Act has created a distortion to the land market and reduced the law’s capacity to effectively allocate land as expected in a normal land market. One of the results is the creation of an informal market. In the informal market for land, land documents are not genuine, there is lack of clarity about the status of the land, it is difficult to hold effective transaction, the actors (not professionals) are unregulated, and the ruleof practiceis undefined. Stephen Butler (2012) estimated that more than 70% of land transactions in Nigeria are done in the informal market. This informal land market creates distortions and therefore makes land acquisition more problematic, cumbersome, and slow.

Hernando de Soto (2001) coined the term 'dead capital' to describe assets that cannot be converted to economic capital. Lack of land titles is one of the reasons for dead capital.  In his book, ‘The Mystery of Capital,’ de Soto stated “the institutions that give life to capital — that allow one to secure the interests of third parties with work and assets do not exist here.” The “here” he mentions is Cairo, Egypt which lacked a mechanism to accurately record, securely hold, and easily transfer land title from one party to another.

De Soto, claimed that about 70% of all assets in Cairo can’t be identified through a ledger. Cairo can easily be replaced with most cities in Nigeria. De Soto argues that providing the world’s poor with titles for their land, homes, and unregistered businesses, would give them an estimated $9.3 trillion in assets. He claims that the land record system in the United States and the assurance of certainty of ownership is a major contributing factor in the success and prosperity of the United States and its citizens.

According to PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PwC), Nigeria “holds at least $300 billion or as much as $900 billion worth of dead capital in residential real estate and agricultural land alone. The high value real estate market segment holds between $230 billion and $750 billion of value, while the middle market carries between $60 billion and $170 billion in value”. This is lost value to the country.

De Soto claims that in the US the most important source of funds for new business is the mortgage on a small business owner’s house. So, where entrepreneurs lack secure property rights and have no ability to leverage their home as an asset to create more business opportunities, they remain poor.

One of the most important rights to land is the ability to use the land as collateral to raise capital. This mortgaging rights though permitted by the Land Use Act, however, requires the consent of the governor. Sadly, the governors have used this power to create complex administrative procedures. A 2010 IFC-sponsored study of the process for obtaining a governor’s consent to mortgage a certificate of occupancy in Lagos State found that the average time for issuance was 240 days, and that on average 16 government officials handled the application file. Arising from the above, lenders and borrowersrely on alternatives to legal mortgages, such as unregistered assignments of property which increases the risk of the transactions.

The abuse of the powers of the governors leads to exorbitant charges for land transactions and delay in granting consent. The result is the high cost of land transaction in Nigeria. The exploitation of the power of the governor to consent to all land transactions has made government officials impose different onerous conditions on applicants. Some state governments demand for development levies to be paid, using the application to reassess recent tax payments solely based on the value of the home purchased.

It is interesting to note that the Land Use Act and the Nigerian Minerals and Mining Act (2007) created a partnership between the Federal and state governments over the control of land and mineral resources in Nigeria. While the Federal Government may claim ownership of all land endowed with mineral resources, it still needs to rely on the state governments to access and acquire the land on its behalf.  But how well has this relationship worked? In the Second Republic, there were allegations that the governors of the Unity Party of Nigerian (UPN) refused to allocate land to the National Party of Nigeria-controlled Federal Government for its housing estates in choice areas. In 2017, former minister Babatunde Fashola accused Lagos State Government of not allocating land for housing projects in the state. He claimed that “if there is any lack of co-operation it is on the part of the state government that has refused to acknowledge not to talk of approving the ministry’s request for land of the National Housing Programme in Lagos. The ministry is not frustrated by this lack of response and remains optimistic that a response will come from Lagos State.”

Also, contrary to the intention of the law, land has been acquired by the government and allowed to go to waste. This is most pronounced in the educational institutions where vast lands were compulsorily acquired for the schools but were never used by the schools. This has been observed at the Obafemi Awolowo University, University of Calabar, University of Jos, and the University of Uyo. In all these schools, trespassers have invaded the land and illegally erected structures on the land belonging to schools.

The law has not reduced corruption in the land sector. The prevalence of bribery in 2019 was highest in relation to police officers (33%)and land registry officers (26%).While there was an overall decrease in the prevalence of bribery in Nigeria since 2016, the prevalence of bribery has decreased in relation to almost all types of public officials, except for land registry officers, members of parliament and other officials. in 2019, speeding up a procedure was the most important reason for paying a bribe to doctors, nurses and midwives, other health workers (60 – 63%), members of parliament/elected government representatives (49%) and land registry officers (48%).

Contrary to one of its objectives, the policy has also not reduced the amount of litigation and conflicts about land and land rights. In 2013, Mr. Babatunde Fashola (who was at the time the governor of Lagos State) claimed that “of the roughly 150 processes that are served from the office of the Attorney-General weekly, at least a third, that is 50, of those processes are in respect of land or property dispute in the state.”

At the core of the failure of the LUA is the law itself. Some of the provisions do not align with democratic practice, as they have allocated too much power to the governor, and created no mechanism to drive effective implementation and oversight. This makes the case for the review of the law itself.

There are other failures which are largely the way the state governors and government have implemented the policy. Rather than implement the policy for the use and benefit of all Nigerians, most state governments see land as an opportunity to generate income for the state, restrict access to land and create an ineffective administrative system. As stated above, some governors have even frustrated the Federal Government to have access to land for development.

Attempted Reform of the Land Use Act

Late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua identified some critical areas of national life that his administration considered of utmost priority which were dubbed the ‘seven-point agenda’. These were: Power and Energy, Transportation, Land Reforms, Security, Education, Food Security and Wealth Creation.  Of these seven, President Yar’Adua believed that three of them are more important than the others and chose to focus principally on them. Three were identified: Land Reform, Niger Delta, and Power.

On 2 April 2009, he inaugurated a Presidential Technical Committee on Land Reform under the chairmanship of late Professor Akin L. Mabogunje. The Committee was “to determine individuals’ ‘possessory rights’ using best practices and most appropriate technology to determine the process of identification of locations and registration of title holdings,” as a forerunner to a National Land Commission. Professor Mabogunje had done extensive work and a bill was sent to the National Assembly. Titled the Land Use Act (Amendment) Act 2009 or the Constitution (First Amendment) Act 2009), it contained 14 amendments to the LUA. Among others, the proposed bill sought to:

• Vest ownership of land in the hands of those with customary right of ownership and enable farmers to use land as collateral for loans for commercial farming to boost food production in the country.
• Restrict the requirement of the governor ‘s consent to assignment only which will render such consent unnecessary for mortgages, subleases, and other land transfer forms to make transactions in land less cumbersome and facilitate economic development.

The government also planned:

• The establishment of specialised courts to determine the terms and timing of challenge/contestation of foreclosures.
• The computerisation of all land-related records at all levels.
• To persuade state governments to convert their housing corporations into land companies with mandate to develop new towns in the states.
• Reorganising the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) to provide mortgage insurance for affordable housing.
• The passage of foreclosure and securitisation laws.
• Sustaining the Federal Mortgage Bank of Nigeria as a secondary mortgage institution refinancing mortgage loan originators.

The uniqueness of President Yar’Adua’s approach is that rather than go through the rig our of reviewing the whole Land Use Act, he used a faster approach of using another law to drive reforms. The committee was also creative, and their solution created mechanisms that states and local government areas can use to identify, demarcate, and title the land holdings of individuals.

Regrettably, the bill was not passed by the National Assembly.

Bringing land reform back on track

The Land Use Act needs to be reviewed as matter of urgency. However, a new land reform in Nigeria will likely be resisted by those who benefit from the deficient status quo. However, it is important to note the promise made by President Bola Tinubu in his election manifesto. There, he promised that:

• “Home ownership is a source of prosperity, social stability, and individual pride. A vibrant residential construction industry is essential to a healthy modern economy.
• “In conjunction with the National Assembly and state governments, we will review and revise the Land Use Act.
• “We need to streamline and rationalise the land conveyance process. In this way, we lower costs and delays and promote more efficient use of land. This more efficient allocation will bolster the housing industry and lower costs for investors and consumers.
• “Working with state governments, we will provide credits and incentives to developers of housing projects that set aside a significant portion of their projects to affordable housing.
• “With the support of state and local governments we aim to establish and implement a new social housing policy whose objective shall be to provide pathways for the poorest Nigerians to climb onto the housing ladder.
• “We will establish a coherent federal programme to provide eligible and meritorious civil servants with federal payment guarantees for fixed-rate, long term mortgages for their homes.”

It is time for the administration to walk the talk of its manifesto, and quickly too.

We need a set of land policies that meets the World Bank standards and geared towards the following:

1. Guarantee of a secure land tenure by ensuring that individuals and communities have legal recognition of their land rights, and that these rights are protected. This will reduce conflict over land issues and facilitate the land market.
2. Policies that ensure the efficient use of land by promoting the productive and sustainable use of land, while minimising waste and degradation. This will help manage the environmental concerns about land.
3. A land policy that increases land governance by ensuring that land management decisions are transparent, accountable, and participatory, and that they consider the needs and interests of all stakeholders, including local communities, smallholders, and marginalised groups. This will ensure fairness.
4. A policy that acknowledges the legitimacy of indigenous land rights systems and enforces the rights of women to land.
5. Policies that have effective supportive institutions by ensuring that land institutions are efficient, that they leverage technology and they are managed by professionals. This will help to reduce the time spent on land transactions, reduce corruption, and will promote investment in land.
6. A policy that is quick and effective in resolving land conflicts. This will reduce the time and cost of land adjudication.
7. A policy that creates an effective system that tracks land policy development and implementation and creates a feedback process to improve implementation and continual improvement.

To achieve these objectives, the following should be taken into consideration:

• Remove the Land Use Act from the constitution. This is to ensure that subsequent reviews won’t need to go through the onerous review processes of the constitution.
• Review and re-submit the proposals and bill by the Mabogunje Committee as a priority executive bill to the 10^th National Assembly. New land reform policy should have the elements defined in the bill. This will also fasten the reform process as a lot of work has been done already.
• Redefine the role of the governors as the trustees of the land to ensure this authority go along with clear responsibility.
• Remove the consent provision from most transaction and replace it with a registration after the fact.
• Persuade the President of the Court of Appeal to designate courts for land issues and make the Court of Appeal the final arbiter on land issues. The new policy should also create time limits for all land issues.
• Undertake a comprehensive review of al the state laws about land in Nigeria. Some states have used these laws to worsen the already poor state of land administration in Nigeria.
• Create a public land records system that establishes ownership, title, and transferability of property. This record should be powered with relevant technology.
• Review the process of compulsory land acquisition to become more aligned to the current international best practices of tenure, forced evictions and the use of property for public purposes. This also includes rules around the compensation of the land using market-driven valuation methods.
• Create a form of accountability mechanism so the people can understand how well the governor is managing the trust. Section 47 of the Land Use Act deals with the exclusion of certain proceedings

“(1) This Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any law or rule of law including the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 and, without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, no court shall have jurisdiction to inquire into- [Cap. C23.]

(a) any question concerning or pertaining to the vesting of all land in the Governor in accordance with the provisions of this Act; or

(b) any question concerning or pertaining to the right of the Governor to grant a statutory right of occupancy in accordance with the provisions of this Act; or

(c) any question concerning or pertaining to the right of a local government to grant a customary right of occupancy under this Act.

(2) No court shall have jurisdiction to inquire into any question concerning or pertaining to the amount or adequacy of any compensation paid or to be paid under this Act.”

To oust the jurisdiction of Nigerian courts is not consistent with the ideals of democracy. Also, while the law made the governor the trustees of the land, it created no form of accountability nor oversight on this trustee.

 Conclusion

Nigeria's current land policy, as embodied in the Land Use Act of 1978and the various laws by state governments, have had mixed outcomes.  They have failed to streamline land administration and management, and created numerous challenges and limitations that hinder equitable access and utilisation of land. As such, there is an urgent need for a new land policy that aligns with the country's developmental goals and caters to the diverse needs of Nigerians. Such a policy should be guided by principles of fairness, transparency, and efficiency, while also ensuring that land serves as a catalyst for social justice and economic growth.  The policies should promote sustainable and equitable land management practices, ensure tenure security, efficient land use, and responsible land governance, and ultimately unlock the full potential of the country's land resources for the benefit of Nigeria and all Nigerians.

*Fawehinmi, an inclusion and human resources specialist/education enthusiast, is the author of the book “The Essential Guide to Land Acquisition in Nigeria.”

References:

1. AUC-ECA-AfDB Consortium, 2010. Framework and Guideline on Land Policy in Africa
2. Adeniyi Peter. (2011) Improving Land Sector Governance in Nigeria
3. Butler Stephen (2012. Nigerian Land Markets and the Land Use Law of 1978
4. De Soto Hernando. The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere. 2003
5. Fawehinmi Yomi (2015). The Essential Guide to Land Acquisition in Nigeria.
6. Mabogunje A. Keynote address at the Land management and property tax reform in Nigeria. of Estate Management, University of Lagos, Lagos, 2003.
7. PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), Bringing Dead Capital to life. What Nigeria should be doing?

By Ejiro Joyce Otive-Igbuzor | Disability inclusion is vital for fostering equality and sustainable development. The enactment of the Discrimination Against Persons with Disabilities (Prohibition) Act (2019), the establishment of the National Commission for Persons with Disabilities (NCPWD), and the notable (though inadequate) appointments of persons with disabilities (PWDs) to leadership roles at the national level and in a few states signify unprecedented attention to inclusion of PWDs in Nigeria.

By Ayobami Ayorinde | In the last two weeks, the Federal Government unfolded some emergency measures in the agricultural sector. On July 10, the Minister of Agriculture and Food Security,

By Akinyemi Akinyugha | In the second week of September 2022, massive flooding was reported in Nigeria arising from an overflow of the River Benue, affecting states on the river path from the North East to the South East and the Niger Delta parts of the country. The flooding got worse in October and may stretch into November. Initially, discharge of excess water from the upstream Lagdo Dam in Cameroon was identified as the cause of the flooding. However, the Honourable Minister of Water Resources, Engineer Suleiman Adamu, later clarified that the flooding occurred as a result of torrential rainfall overwhelming the River Benue and its tributaries.

The number of people affected by the flood is still being documented. As at the last count, the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) reported that 2,504,095 persons are affected by the flood, with at least 500 people declared dead.¹

Enough evidence abounds that a significant portion of Nigeria is flood-prone. Though the tally is not fully in, the flooding this year will rank among the worst in Nigeria’s history, probably on the same scale with the 2012 episode. Unfortunately, this won’t be the last and future occurrences may be worse, given changing weather patterns. Finding proactive and sustainable solutions, rather than episodic and reactive responses, to Nigeria’s perennial flooding challenge is thus an urgent imperative.

 How does flooding occur?

The glossary of the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (IPCC SREX) defines a flood as “the overflowing of the normal confines of a stream or other body of water, or the accumulation of water over areas that are not normally submerged.”²

Floods occur when excess water inundates a particular watershed. As the name implies, a watershed is an entire area of land that “sheds” or drains water into a specific waterbody. Most river system are dendritic, with several streams connected as funnels to recharge water into the river. Watersheds vary in size and characteristics: they can be small or large.

When intense rain falls over a small watershed, particularly in urban areas where there are many concrete and other impervious structures, flash flood occurs. Its effect is usually exacerbated when there are poorly maintained, clogged drainages and channels.

However, in large watersheds such as River Benue, flooding occurs in two major ways. First, it occurs when significant water is discharged from an upstream dam e.g., Lagdo Dam in Cameroon. The second is the more frequent reason: flooding arises when torrential rainfall occurs in the highland areas and tributaries serving the river. The resultant effect is the inundation of the river channel and its adjoining communities. A demonstration of the scale of flooding that occurred this year is shown in the satellite image below which compares two satellite images of upstream section of River Benue in Numan, Adamawa State in January and September 2022.The images show a 2.5-times increase in the width of the river channel as a result of flooding.

A section of Benue River at Numan, Adamawa in January 2022 (about 400m wide)

Same section of Benue River at Numan in September 2002 (1020m wide)

To solve the perennial flooding crisis, Nigeria needs a big and bold visionary programme like the Netherland’s Delta Works and River Room programmes

In 1953, the Netherlands was flooded by water from the North Sea, leading to the inundation of approximately 9% of farmlands and causing 8,361 fatalities. In response, the Netherlands Government launched a massive flood protection programme, the Delta Works, whose main objectives were to protect the Netherlands from high water, ensure sufficient supply of freshwater and make the country climate-proof. The project comprised 13 dams as well as 10,250 miles of dikes, levees and barriers to protect areas within and around the Rhine-Meuse-Scheldt from flood. This ambitious $5bn works, which lasted for 24 years, ensured that Holland, despite being a low-lying country, is extensively protected from flood and has continual supply of drinking and irrigation water. The risk of flooding was reduced from the typical one in 100 years to one in 4,000 years³.

Nigeria needs its own version of the Delta Works and River Room programmes and should set out a big and bold vision for a climate-smart integrated water resources management, which seeks to turn this environmental disaster into a blessing.

Currently, the main agencies empowered by law to act on flood control and watershed management at the federal level are the River Basin Development Authorities (RBDAs). However, these RBDAs appear to focus on water resources management from the prism of agricultural utility of water and have largely played a bit-part role in flood management.  Other relevant entities of government such as NEMA (under the Federal Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs and Disaster Management, and Social Development),the Nigeria Hydrological Service Agency, and the Nigerian Meteorological Agency mainly carry out predictive and reactive activities.

To galvanise action, we need a special Presidential Committee for National Flood Risk Management, which shall draw membership from indigenous and global water resources and environmental management experts, with active support of all the ministries, departments and agencies relevant to flood risk management. The committee’s mandate will be to develop a comprehensive national flood risk assessment and management programme, which takes into cognisance predicted climate change scenarios for the country. The committee will develop specific recommendations on which combinations of natural and built flood management interventions are best suited for the major watersheds/river basins and provide a cost estimate as well as strategic execution plan for these interventions. Backing the committee’s recommendations with appropriate legislations and guaranteed funding would ensure sustainability of the proposed interventions over the febrile and sometimes unstable political and budget circles of Nigeria.

Already, in October 2022 the Federal Government has approved a National Emergency Flood Preparedness and Response Plans to mitigate and reduce the impact of flood but it is unclear if this plan contains a comprehensive flood risk assessment and management plan for the country.

The solution to the flooding crises can be found in a combination of grey and green infrastructure

Finally, in developing the interventions, we must resist the notion that we can dam away all the “damned” flood waters, based on the philosophy that only concrete and steel infrastructure – dams, levees, dykes, barriers, etc. – can effectively deliver flood risk management. A combination of grey and green infrastructure will be required to deliver sustainable, climate-proof outcomes, considering the diverse ecosystem in Nigeria.

As many have suggested, the Dadin Hausa Dam, conceptualised in the late 1970s as the recipient dam for Cameroon’s Lagdo Dam, may have mitigated the flooding experienced in these communities. While this might be true to some extent, the solutions to perennial flooding goes beyond concrete structures. In the face of threats arising from climate change, nature-based solutions or natural flood management are the most sustainable alternative due to the potential ecosystem benefits they deliver over concrete and steel structural solutions.

Water, they say, will always find its level; hence, at the minimum, it is important that natural flood plains be restored to give enough room for rivers to flow before considering the introduction of dams. This will reduce downstream river flow and inundation of low-lying communities. In addition to dredging rivers where necessary, secondary channels and lakes can also be created to divert some water off the flood paths. Watershed-based forest regeneration, particularly around hillsides, should be carried out to slow down runoff from the hills into the rivers.

At the sub-national level, state and local governments need to be more committed to climate-smart land use planning and development. A revolution in our urban development philosophy and practice to allow for ecosystem-friendly development is long overdue to accelerate mitigation of the impact of extreme weather events, predicted to happen over the next few years.

Since floods occur when excess water flows above a watershed’s drainage capacity, urban development that slows down, soaks and spreads flood waters should be encouraged. This can be achieved by encouraging the use of rain gardens and vegetation over concrete pavements in private residences. Housing developers in flood prone areas should also be made to demonstrate flood-resilient aspects of their designs before permits are issued.

Sub-national governments should prioritise restoration of wetlands whilst banning any development on them while urban greening initiatives should be encouraged. Basic flood management measures including the regular clearance and maintenance of channels and drainages should also be carried out.

More ambitious countries like China have created several sponge cities within their highly urbanised city-clusters: sponge cities are large green spaces(such as trees, gardens and parks) within main cities, acting like a sponge to soak flood water and gently releasing the water into the environment. An example of a similar space in Nigeria is the Lekki Conservation Centre, Lagos. More of such green spaces should be created in areas prone to flooding.

Whatever solutions would be adopted, there is an urgent need to act decisively to institute a robust, risk-based flood management system in Nigeria. The cost of doing otherwise is better imagined than experienced; hence, the time to act is now.

Dr. Akinyemi Akinyugha is the Ekiti State Project Coordinator for the Nigeria Erosion and Watershed Management Project (NEWMAP). He holds a PhD in Engineering (Environmental/Geo-Technical) from the University of Cambridge, UK.

Footnotes

[1]https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2022/10/17/nema-2-5-million-persons-affected-by-flooding/

[2] IPCC, 2012: Glossary of terms. In: Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation [Field, C.B., V. Barros, T.F. Stocker, D. Qin, D.J. Dokken, K.L. Ebi, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, G.-K. Plattner, S.K. Allen, M. Tignor, and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, USA, pp. 555-564

^[3]Delta Works Flood Protection, Rhine-Meuse-Scheldt Delta, Netherlands. Accessed online: https://www.water-technology.net/projects/delta-works-flood-netherlands/

By Celestine Okereke | A feature of revenue distribution in Nigeria in the past few decades is that some federal agencies receive a percentage of the revenues they collect on behalf of the Federation.

By Douglas Okonko | Nigeria is currently facing diverse threats to its national security. These threats have serious implications for social, economic, and political development. According to a report published by Agora Policy titled, Understanding and Tackling Insecurity in Nigeria, “The nation is presently facing generalised insecurity with hardly any of its six geo-political zones spared from one form of insecurity or the other…” The country, the report said, “is practically under the gun on all fronts”.^[1]  Why is Nigeria under the gun on all fronts? There are several answers to this question, but one of them is that Nigeria’s borderlines are under-protected.

According to the Nigerian Immigration Service (NIS), there are 80 supervised entry ports, compared to 1490 known illegal entry routes^[2]. The porous nature of Nigeria’s borders should get policy makers seriously worried. Through Sokoto, militia groups from Niger have been crossing the border into Nigeria unrestricted. Ambazonia rebels seeking safety from the government have also crossed the Nigerian-Cameroon border into border towns in Taraba State and Cross River State. There are occasions terrorist combatants and supplies have moved unhindered through the Nigerian-Chad and Nigerian-Cameroon borders.³ In the Southwest and Northeast regions, smuggling of contraband goods from Benin and Togo via Lagos, Kwara, Ogun, and Niger states persists.

Fig 1: Map showing Nigeria’s borders with neighbouring countries

The current state of our borderlines enables insecurity. As such, finding a durable solution is of utmost priority. This does not mean that efficient border security will resolve every security problem. Rather, it means that securing our borders by establishing a dedicated border force is a critical step towards ensuring national security. Here is why.

Rationales for a Dedicated Force

There are several reasons why we need a dedicated border force, but four of them stand out.

First, as stated above, Nigeria is currently battling generalised insecurity: none of its six geo-political zones is spared from insecurity. Although in decline, the impact of terrorist activities can still be observed in the Northeast⁴. ISWAP and Boko Haram continue to criss-cross Nigeria’s borders with Chad and Niger to perpetuate violence. According to Global Terrorism Index, 120 incidents of terrorism and 385 deaths were recorded in Nigeria in 2022.⁵Significantly, the activities of criminal gangs (bandits) in the North West and North Central regions caused more civilian deaths in 2021 than Boko Haram and ISWAP. The Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project (ACLED) also reported that, armed bandits killed more than 2,600 civilians in 2021.⁶The prevalence of insecurity in the North West and North Central zones could be linked to poorly policed borders. These porous borders have encouraged the spread of terrorist activities and weapons from Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger. South West and South South are equally burdened by issues of insecurity.

Secondly, the porous nature of Nigeria’s borders has accentuated the influx of arms into the country over the past two decades. This in turn has heightened the wave of terrorism, banditry, kidnapping, and other violent crimes. According to a report released by Small Arms Survey (SAS), civilians in Nigeria possessed more firearms than personnel of law enforcement agencies.⁷ SAS also reported that out of 100 persons, 3.21 carry firearms mostly smuggled from Sahel trafficking networks. It is also estimated that of the 500 million illegal weapons circulating in West Africa, 70% are domiciled in Nigeria.⁸

Source: https://www.smallarmssurvey.org/database/global-firearms-holdings

Relatedly, Nigeria’s porous borders and weak border security mechanisms pose a serious challenge to the fight against trafficking in illicit drugs. Unchecked entrance of illicit substances threatens public health as well as enhances criminal tendencies. The UNODC reports that14.3 million (14.4%) Nigerians aged between 15 and 64 years use illicit drugs.

The third rationale is that the current structure for securing our borders is fragmented and suboptimal. Nigeria runs a multi-agency border management arrangement spearheaded by the Nigerian Custom Service (NCS) and the Nigerian Immigration Service (NIS). Among other immigration and custom-related duties, these two agencies face the daunting task of securing West Africa’s third longest land borderline spanning 4045 km. Significantly, these agencies are under the supervision of different ministries, and they operate independently of each other. The NCS is under the Ministry of Finance, Budget and National Planning while the NIS is supervised by the Ministry of Interior. Although both agencies have a component of border security as part of their operations, the revenue-generating departments take precedence. This is at the expense of border patrol and national security. It gravely underscores the danger of diffused mandates for government agencies.

Lastly, the economic cost of a largely unprotected border is enormous. Nigeria’s porous borders have created an enabling environment for smuggling. Nigeria’s total revenue loss to smuggling activities is not clear but its impact on the economy can be felt. Millions of dollars that would have been generated through formal taxation have been lost to smuggling. According to a report by Chatham House, Oil theft in Nigeria is costing the country up to US$1 billion per month in lost revenues.⁹In 2010, 80% of Benin Republic’s domestic fuel consumption was smuggled from Nigeria, ata value in excess of US$863 million.¹⁰ This shows the level vulnerability of Nigeria’s borders. Smuggling has also distorted market prices and created unfair competition with locally produced goods. It has also led to the collapse of local manufacturing, loss of jobs and high rate of unemployment.

Recommendations for Operationalising the Border Force

Without a doubt, Nigeria needs a dedicated border force patterned after the United States Border Patrol (USBP), the Australian Border Force, the Border Security Agency of Malaysia, and Canada Border Services Agency. The impact of these dedicated agencies is well documented. For instance, the U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) apprehended 1,148,000 illegal migrants in 2019 and seized more than 112,000 pounds of assorted illegal drugs in 2022.¹¹Securing the home from the gates is becoming a favoured tactic amongst nation-states. Nigeria can, and should align, with this increasingly approach with the creation of the dedicated border force, which should be backed by law. A bill (preferably an executive bill) thus needs to be initiated to authorise the creation and set out the operational framework of the force with the sole mandate of guarding Nigeria’s borders. The proposed force should be under the Federal Ministry of Interior.

The border force will require smart recruitment and elite training beyond what presently obtains. For example, the NIS has 25,303 staff members, out of which an undisclosed number of officers is under the command of the Directorate of Border Security. It is also not clear how many officers are under the Rural Border Patrol Operation (RBPO) of the NCS. In comparison, the U.S employs approximately 5, 000 border patrol agents to patrol 388 miles (624 km) of its southwestern border alone. To have comparable number of personnel per kilometre, Nigeria therefore will need to employ 32,395 border patrol agents for its 4, 043kmland borders. The point here is that the proposed border force must have adequate personnel for the demand of its mandate.

Although numerical strength plays a key role in security, a skilled and specialized number is better. Combating transnational crime will require the expertise of different security agencies. Before fresh recruitments into the suggested border force are implemented, the initial pool of officers should be drawn from existing security agencies to minimise cost and ensure the recruitment of officers with specific expertise and field experiences. Officers should be drafted from the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA), Defence Intelligence Agency(DIA), National Intelligence Agency (NIA), Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Nigerian Custom Service (NCS), Nigerian Immigration Service (NIS), the Nigerian Police (NP) and the Nigerian Security and Civil Defence Corp (NSCDC).

The inter-agency composition of the Border Force will enable the establishment of a comprehensive operational picture in specific areas of trans-border crimes including drugs, arms and human trafficking, oil theft, piracy, and money laundering. Before take-off, however, there is the need for a plan to fully integrate and socialise the staff drafted from different agencies and presumably from different organisational cultures and orientations. This integrated approach will encourage a single chain of command and control. Qualified personnel should be trained by experts in the field of border patrol. Also, exchange programmes with countries that have successfully institutionalised a dedicated border force should be embraced. It is expected that the training and exchange programmes will build a strong and resilient border force with the required technical, tactical, and operational skills to operate and adapt to changing conditions.

Another key area is modus operandi for deploying officers of the force. Nigeria is bordered to the north by Niger, to the east by Chad and Cameroon, to the west by Benin, and the South by the Gulf of Guinea of the Atlantic Ocean. These borders vary in distance, prevalent crimes, and security threat levels. As such, the number of personnel deployed and the kind of personnel deployed (in terms of training and primary skill set) should be determined by these three factors (distance, prevalent crime, and security threat level). To maintain the high standard, professionalism, and integrity, oversight and accountability measures should be implemented to ensure that officers fully understand and abide by the operational guidelines of the force.

Securing Nigeria’s 4, 043km border requires more than just physical deployment—the force must leverage on modern technology to achieve its goals. Even for a dedicated border force, it is impossible to cover every inch of Nigeria’s borders. Advancement in modern ICT has enabled the incorporation of technology into border security possible. Technology can be used to detect, identify, classify and communicate threats in “hard-to-reach terrains”. Since 2017, the US Customs and Border Patrol received more than $700 million in funding for border technology.¹²Even though the proposed dedicated border force may find it hard to attract such a huge investment in the interim, it still needs substantial investment in modern technology for it to be effective. Before the purchase and deployment of technology, the border force should develop a clear strategy and plan that covers its technological needs, and describes the need and appropriate area of deployment. Officers should be trained on how to best use acquired equipment or facility. Acquired technology should be regularly upgraded and monitored to avoid compromise. Some of the available border technology that could be used include unmanned drones, relocatable towers, sensors, and mobile land-based radar trucks.

Advancement in technology should not take away the place of infrastructure. Border infrastructure includes not just fencing and other physical barriers, but also roads that provide access to the borders and areas along the borders for quick response. Sector stations and other operating bases of the border force should be situated at or close to key illegal entry “hotspots” to accelerate response time. Preferably, these stations and bases should be movable in anticipation of route diversion by criminals.

 Conclusion

Porous borders have been identified as a major driver of insecurity in Nigeria and if allowed to linger will cause further damage to human security and further stifle socio-economic development. Nigeria’s weak borders call for the establishment of a dedicated border force with the needed legal backing, expertise, technology, training, infrastructure, and intelligence to detect, identify, classify, prioritise, and mitigate security threats along its expansive borders.

*Okonko is a Research Officer at Agora Policy

Foototes

[1] Agora Policy, “Understanding and Tackling Insecurity in Nigeria”, Agora Policy Report, No.2, Nov, 2022, p,8

[2] AKin Akibola, “Immigration decries inability to effectively man borderlines”, Channels Television, May 24 2022,https://www.channelstv.com/2022/05/24/immigration-decriesinability-to-effectively-man-borderlines-1490-illegal-entry-points/, Accessed 22 March, 2023.

[3] Agora Policy, “Understanding and Tackling Insecurity in Nigeria

[4] The impact of terrorism continues to decline in Nigeria; with total deaths falling by 23 per cent, decreasing from 497 in 2021 to 385 in 2022. The number of terrorist attacks in Nigeria also fell considerably, with 120 incidents recorded in 2022 compared to 214 in 2021. This is the lowest number of terror attacks and deaths since 2011.

[5]Global Terrorism Index 2022, “Measuring the Impact of Terrorism”file:///C:/Users/HP/Downloads/GTI-2022-web_110522-1.pdf, Accessed, March 30, 2023.

[6] Aaron Karp“Estimating Global Civilian-held Firearms Numbers”, Small Arms Survey, Briefing Paper, 2018 p,10

[7]Tribune Online, “Insecurity: 70 percent of illegal weapons in West Africa domiciled in Nigeria”, April 19, 2021, https://tribuneonlineng.com/insecurity-70-per-cent-of-illegal-weapons-in-west-africa-domiciled-in-nigeria-%E2%80%95-unrec/, Accessed 21, March, 2023.

[8]Royal Institute of International Affairs (2013). Maritime Security in the Gulf of Guinea. Report of the conference held at Chatham House, London, 6 December 2012. Available at: https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/public/Research/Africa/0312confreport_mariti mesecurity.pdf

[9]UNODC, “Transnational Organized Crime in West Africa: A Threat Assessment. Vienna: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime”.https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-andanalysis/tocta/West_Africa_TOCTA_2013_EN.pdf,

[10]John Davis, “Border Crisis: CPB’s Reponse”, https://www.cbp.gov/frontline/border-crisis-cbp-sresponse, Accessed, 22 March, 2023.

[12]Homeland Security, “CBP has Improved Southwest Border Technology”, February 23, 2021, https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/2021-02/OIG-21-21-Feb21.pdf, p.2