Okoro accused the state governor, Peter Mbah, of “hiding behind the Land Use Act 2004 to forcefully evict the traders, but failed to adhere to the procedures provided by the Act.
By Jeffrey Agbo
An Abuja-based lawyer, Osita Okoro, has accused the Enugu State Government of contravening legal procedures in its plans to demolish the Ogige Market in Nsukka Local Government Area of the state.
Okoro petitioned the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) to weigh in on the matter. He also made copies of his petition available to the Enugu State Government, Nigerian Bar Association, Amnesty International and the Nigerian Police, and major churches in the area, among others.
The lawyer expressed concern about the planned demolition of the market by agents of the state government, saying it would have adverse socio-economic implication on the lives of the people of Nsukka.
Pointing to the prevailing socio-economic situation in the country, the petitioner who petitioned on behalf of a non-governmental organisation, Law Hub Development & Advocacy Centre, Abuja, said the planned demolition was inhuman, ill-timed, and capable of driving the people into greater poverty and economic deprivation and called on the human rights body to intervene and prevent the state government from going ahead with the plan to demolish the market.
“Law Hub is deeply concerned about the planned demolition of Nsukka Ogige Market in Nsukka LGA of Enugu State by agents of the Enugu State Government (ENSG) and the negative socio-economic implication on the lives of the people of Nsukka in light of the present economic and social challenges being experienced by the people,” the petition stated.
Okoro lamented that in its plan to demolish the market, the state government did not take into account the plight of the more than 10,000 traders alleged to be displaced by the planned government exercise and also regretted that the government gave the occupants of the market an inadequate 72 hours notice to quit and relocate.
READ ALSO:
Court set for judgment in Onyeama, ex-sister-in-law’s defamation case
Okoro accused the state governor, Peter Mbah, of “hiding behind the Land Use Act 2004 to forcefully evict the traders, but failed to adhere to the procedures provided by the Act.”
“This executive move by the state government is an arbitrary abuse of power and against the tenets of the Constitution, the Land Use Act, national and international human rights standards for three reasons. The Land Use Act 2004 is a significant piece of legislation in Nigeria that regulates the tenure and administration of land. Although the Land Use Act grants the governor of a state significant authority to administer and control land within its borders, it does not explicitly authorise the demolition of buildings,” the petition read.
Continuing, he said: “It is pertinent to state the powers of the Governor to revoke rights of occupancy are not left unchecked. A revocation of rights of occupancy must comply with certain laid down requirements before such revocation can be clothed with validity. These requirements include purpose, valid notice to occupiers of intention to revoke, and adequate compensation and resettlement of occupiers.”
Okoro, in the petition, also questioned the purpose of the planned revocation and demolition of the market, arguing that the stated reason for the demotion by the state government did not comply with the conventional law for the overriding interest of the public.
“Section 28 (2) and (3) of the Act provides that revocation of a right of occupancy for public purposes, mining, or hydrocarbon pipelines, among other things, are considered overriding public interests. The Supreme court in the case of Messrs Singoz & Co. (Nig.) Ltd. v. U.M. Co. Ltd. (2022) 18 NWLR (Pt. 1862) 203 held :“… overriding public interest in the case of a statutory right of occupancy means the alienation by the occupier by assignment, mortgage, transfer of possession, sub-lease, or otherwise of any right of occupancy or part thereof contrary to the provisions of the Act or of any regulations made thereunder; or the requirement of the land by the Government of the State or by a Local Government in the State, in either case for public purposes within the State, or the requirement of the land by the Government of the Federation for public purposes of the Federation.”
He also contended that the state government erred in law by failing to pay compensations to the affected traders and prayed that the NHRC should take all necessary legal and policy steps to prevent the Enugu State Government from its threat to demolish Nsukka Ogige Main Market.
He also urged the human rights body to adopt and issue guidelines to help or assist state governors understand the legal, social, and economic implications of demolitions and forceful evictions.
