PDF | Human society the world over is heavily dependent on land and its resources. It is not an overstatement to say that without land there would be no human. PDF | REGULATION Preamble: The law regulating use and management of land in Nigeria was changed to the Land Use Act in 1. PDF | SYNOPSIS: The aim of this paper is to look critically at the Land Use Act No . 6 of with particular reference to compensation for revocation of rights of.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Japanese|
|ePub File Size:||26.39 MB|
|PDF File Size:||14.86 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Register to download]|
application of the Nigerian Land Use Act (the Act)1 might be asked: does a writ- evant for the similar provisions of the Land Use Act. A reasoned answer will. Land Use Act. Download the PDF This Law establishes the Land Use and Allocation Committee which is responsible for: a) advising the Governor on any. Vesting of land in the state. 2. Control and management of land advisory bodies. 3. Designation of urban areas. 4. Applicable law for the interim management of.
These people provide a real challenge to the use of the legitimate system of Nigeria. Therefore, if you want to know how they do their business, then you need to look into the problems of Land Use Act in Nigeria in details! What is Land Use Planning act? The President Olusegun Obasanjo is the main person who is responsible for the implementing the act into the body of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. It was provided during the military regime in Nigeria. After that, Shagari —Led Federal Government handled it.
It has the administra rchical system of government. Absolute power rests The Ika people operate a monarchi res in the Obis in Ika land. The Obi is the headd of the political organization. The economic mai ainstay of the Ika nifested from the fact that God blessed them with people is farming.
This is manif wi a very fertile geographical local. But to a lawyer, land means more tha than this. It includes, interest and right in land. Generally, land includes not only the surface off the earth and the subsoil but also the air space above it as well as t, tthere include building, pods, trees, stream etc.
S all appurtenances attaches to it,. Section 18 of the Interpretation Act and nd cor corresponding provision in regional laws, states tes that immovable nd eeverything attached to the earth. Thiss was wa the result of studies carried out by three differ ferent panels.
The Anti-inflation Task Force and nd the Rent Panel were set up by the Federal Gover Government in and respectively to carry out certain studies which were both directly and rememotely linked to land. They recommended thatt all al land should be vested in the state. The Governm rnment white paper on the report of the Rent Panel Pane accepted this recommendation in principle,, but called for a further study of its practical implications.
The result of these studie udies was the Land Use Act All Al these sources considered, it may be safely conc concluded that the Land Use Act was intended nded interalia to 1 provide a uniform land tenure sysystem in the country. In all, these objectives were to ensure an egali galitarian system in Nigeria. Land was either family ownedd or communally owned. The notion of individual ownership is quite f te foreign to native ideas.
Land belongs to the he community, the village or the family, y, never to the individual….. They cannot purport to alienate or otherwi head respectively that holds as trus rwise deal with the ndividual acquired land either by allotment, sale or partition. See page 5 of the report of the panel; the broadcast by the he Head of state, Gen.
He is some extent in the position of a trustee, and nd as a such holds the land for use of the community or family.
He has control of it and members who want wa a piece of it to cultivate or build upon go too hi him for it…….
However it is not uncommon on for chiefs to claim nd oof his domain. The argument of such rulers was not based on a claim of outright ownership p of the land, but on embodiment of the political society itself, they are the ground that as they are the em ar entitled to any income or benefit coming to the he society as an entity.
This however is completeetely dishonest. No doubt an Oba or Obi is vestedd with authority over the land, but is on the understanding unde that because of his pre-eminence and customary reverence in which he is held, he is in the better nd for the benefit of all.
With regards to the right of mem embers, about three patterns are discernable..
In some areas, an individual may acquire permanentnent right in community land which is equivalent nt to ownership. In Ika area it is a common practicee ffor example in Agbor-Obi and Emuhu communi unity.
This practice is also common in some Yoruba communities. In Adewoyin V Adedeye,,4 the Ooni of Ife testified that once an Ooni had allocated a portion of communal land to a native na of Ife for farming, the allocatee enjoyedd ownership rights to the exclusion of the com ommunity. Where permanent rights are recognized, d, they are not only held by the man for his life time tim but passed on ily land. Arts and Humanities 7 1 : 30 - 39, 2 In some areas, the individual mayay acquire permanent but only occupational right ghts.
In such cases, the communities hold rights too rereversion which is exercisable upon abandonme ndonment. The position of such a member is analogousous to that of a customary tenant of the community ty except that he is not required to pay rent. In somee the right acquired upon allocation is usually of limited duration say, for a season as in the casee iin many Ibo villages. One can boldly say that fa family lands predominate. This assertion is not made m intuitively, but empirically, reliance being plplaced on the number of cases that are brought ht before be our courts on.
The rights and duties of the family head are as in those of the for hearing and determination. The headd of tthe family like the chief is a trustee-beneficiary Action concerning family land nd is, as in the case of the chief in respect of community c land brought by the family heads as legal representative and trustee beneficiary. However, if the headman cannot or refuses to bribring an action, a member of the family can do so. Like the chief, the family head had the right to revoke and eject a grantee of family land who committed any misconduct.
He was also entitleded tto the reversion of the land. Individual ownership of land A feature of ownership under cuscustomary law is the communal character.
However, as a result of the early assoc or the family not to the individua sociation with the opment, the notion of Europeans the advent of moneyy aand the rapid cultural and economic developme onsiderably eroded. Taylor, F. The nature and the intended ob objective of the Act. Before the promulgation of the AcAct, Land tenure in Nigeria varied with region.
The promulgation edirect the general philosophies of pre-existing land tenure system of the Act was an exercise to redi in our society through the applica pplication of a uniform statutory regulation of ownership owner and control of land, and to stimulate easier ier access to land for greater economic developm opment as well as promote national social cohesion.
Section 1 of the Act provides thus: subject to the provision of the Decree, all land comprisedd in the territory of each state in the Federation are hereby vestedin the military governor of the state tate and each land shall be held in trust and adm dministered for use and common benefit of all Nigerierian in accordance with the provision of the decre cree.
Status of the Land Use Act The status of the Land Use Act ha has for sometimes remained unclear and this confusion conf has not helped the conflicting judicial opi opinions expressed in the matter.
The controvers oversy arose because of the provision of Sectionn of the constitution now Section of the he constitution providing as follows subsectionion 5 nothing in this constitution shall invalidat date the following enactment that is to say a …… … b ……. Two questions arose from this pr provision, whether The Land Use Act is a part of the constitution and secondly whether The Land nd Us Use Act should prevail in case of conflict. On the first questions, it was suggested in some casess tha that The Land Use Act was not an existing legis gislation but a part and parcel of the constitution.
The Court of Appeal also pronounced to the effec ffect that………. Arts and Humanities 7 1 : 30 - 39, 2 the constitution of Nigeria.
In the words of Eso J. More so, they argued, because it has terms and covenant and certainty of duration.
See generally Ilegbune op. Unilag Press Some of the controversies raised by the Act seemed to have been settled by judicial pronouncement.
Among these is the opinion that the best interest accruable under the Act is leasehold. However is this conclusion sacrosanct, particularly, in view of the nature and extent of rights vested in a deemed grantee of right of occupancy28? This and others issues shall be subjected to forensic analysis in the following discourse.
For example the issue as to nationalization or expropriation of land seemed to have been settled with the Supreme Court case of Abioye v. It has been argued that it is still possible to create freehold estate under Nigeria land law. Section 5 2 see also Smith I. O 23 JPPL p. Section 6. The pertinent question to be answered at this juncture is, what is the nature of right granted under the Act, is it a freehold, leasehold or even a license. This question becomes more poignant when the position of the deemed grantee is considered.
Many commentators have expressed diverse view on the nature of right of occupancy as to whether is a leasehold or not. Thus turning prior owners of land to tenants with limited, ascertainable, determinable and defeasible rights in the land. This conclusion is premised arguably on the provisions of section 1 of the Act.
It is however opined here that while the conclusion may be inescapable when the right of an express grantee is considered same conclusion may not be reached with respect to the right of a deemed grantee. Section 34 and See Emeka Chianu op. The bulk of the powers of the governor is evident in the certificate of occupancy which a deemed grantee is not oblige to take, for unlike express grantee he takes it at his own discretion.
Section 29 compensation is payable only for unexhausted improvement on the land and not on bare land. See the cases Dentsoho v. See also I. Smith in 23 JPPL p. See also Prof. In this respect, the position of the governor as the person in whom the land is vested can be likened to the position of the crown in England, where ownership of land is vested in the crown with the subjects owing only an interest in the land, which interest is defeasible.
It is thus an interest, which may enure in perpetuity but defeasible once there is no heir to inherit the estate upon which the land on the infinite nature of the right of a deemed grantee reverts to the grantor i. Other notable interests in land are fee tail, life estate and leasehold interest.
Such powers of the State or Community predate the Land Use Act as evident in customary family land ownership system and the various Compulsory Acquisition Laws in Nigeria. Emphasis supplied The preceding conclusion becomes inescapable for the following reason. Firstly the application of the section is not limited to land subject to customary law alone for it provides, or otherwise howsoever.
Thus the holder of other rights prior to the Act i. Secondly the Act did not define the extent and duration of the customary right of occupancy deemed granted under the section, it is thus argued that it is indeterminate.
The implication of this position vis a vis the just administration of the Land Use Act is enormous. Section 36 3 see also section 36 4 in respect of developed land in non-urban area.
Read the Amicus curie submission of Prof J. Omotola in Savanah Bank V Ajilo Banire op. With the present position of the law, it is not clear the duration and extent of a right of occupancy obtainable under the Act particularly with reference to a deemed grant. Thus while some people i. It implies that there will come a time when the security and or proprietary value of the certificate of occupancy expressly granted will diminish when compared to that of a deemed grant particularly where the deemed grantee possesses a registered conveyance prior to the Land Use Act.
This will be so because at a point in time the express grant certificate of occupancy will expire, while the registered conveyance of the deemed grantee will remain sacrosanct as same is still recognized by the Act. This conclusion is further reinforced by the fact that the Land Use Act does not make provision for the renewal of an expired certificate of occupancy, thus giving the Governor absolute discretion as to whether the express grantee will continue to hold the land after the expiration of the time stated in the certificate or not.
In practice the Governor usually grants a tenure of not beyond 99 years, but there are instances where a tenure of a lesser duration has been granted. Section 5 Land Use Act. This scenario will further increase the stock of land in Government possession and discretion at the expense of individual land ownership.
Another observable implication of the dual tenurial system under the Land Use Act is that while an express grant, evidenced by certificate of occupancy is revocable for failure of the grantee to abide by the terms of the certificate of occupancy i. Furthermore an express grantee is subject to payment of rents, penal rents and other charges over his holding as stated under the Act. See Sogunle B.
This scenario supports the argument that the land use Act nationalized all lands in country as a time may come in the future when private land holdings will be extinguished or at least drastically reduced and all lands will now become State Land Operated under the Right of Occupancy Scheme of the Land Use Act. Section 28 Land Use Act Section 10 Land Use act. Section 28 Land Use Act.
On the other hand where a right of occupancy is revoked by the state for over riding public interest of the Federal, state or local government or in connection thereto, the holder of an actual or express grant of right of occupancy, where the land is bare land gets by way of compensation a refund of an amount equal to the rent paid on the land for that year.
This is irrespective of payment of other ancillary cost land charges like capital development charges, neighbourhood development charges etc. From the foregoing it is obvious that the Land Use Act has not and cannot guarantee an equitable distribution and administration of land in Nigeria.
The Act has thus failed to provide and fulfill the philosophical aspiration of its proponents. While the philosophy behind the promulgation may be said to be laudable and commendable, particularly in view of the activities of land speculators, the drafting and implementation of the Act is fraught with countless hiccups.
Section 29 Land Use Act This position clearly contradict government policy and practice in allocation of state lands to individuals and corporate bodies. In particular the government could administratively introduce a scheme whereby it makes the possession of a certificate of occupancy over land the only recognized legal instrument evidencing title to land in Nigeria.
This is with a view to introducing a uniform tenurial system of land ownership through out the country. This will do away with the current uncertainty as to the duration of the interest of the deemed grantee vis a vis that of an express grant.