1.1       Background of the Study
            Nigeria (surface area: 923 sq kilometers; population: 140 million) is an immensely rich country with every state liberally endowed. Who is not blessed in Nigeria? This seeming innocuous question begs for an answer because not since the Europeans discovered the wealth of Africa has such greed drew wickedness as has been visited on the people of people of Niger Delta because of the discovery of crude oil in their lands and waters. Why these laser beams focus and fixation on a single resource? Is it because neither the government nor the people know that there are resources in every nook and cranny of the country which is properly exploited are capable of generating much revenue as crude oil?[1]

            After many years of military dictatorship which witnessed monumental profligacy and widespread corruption in the policy, Nigeria heaved a sign of relief when the 1999 constitution[2], ushered in democratically elected Government on   the 20th May, 1999[3] this government was headed by Chief Olusegum Obasanjo, who was the president and commander- in- chief of the Armed forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. When the government came with the issue of who should be in charge of exploration of mineral and solid deposits arose, also, the lateral State[4] (Nigeria Delta States) with rich oil deposits commenced their agitation for the resources control. The concept of “resources control” denotes the control of the gift of nature or natural resources.           Expropriation of mineral and solid deposit in the taking over of the natural resources by the federal government for public use as any material in its native state which when extracted has economic values. Examples of natural resources are crude oil, gas wells, iron ore, Coal and other mineral deposits.           Among these mineral deposit mentioned above, Crude oil generates about 95% of our foreign exchange earnings. It occupies a strategic position in the world political economy. Because of it high level of demand in the international market[5], other natural resources have suffered. neglect in terms of extraction, exploration and processing. The littoral states are richly endowed with this crude oil deposit, which is the bedrock of our national economy. The demand for the expropriation of these mineral and solid deposits by the littoral states and indeed all other states where other solid deposits other than crude were discovered is the demand for the control of mineral resources. The states in the vanguard of this call are in the south -south geo-political zone[6] of the country. It is believed that some of these states have about 65% of their land fully endowed with mineral deposits.             Mineral and solid deposits are not in the direct control the control and regulation of how it will be explored are under the direct supervision of the federal government. This is provided in the 1999 constitution as (amended) as follows:
“Notwithstanding the foregoing provision for this section, the entire property in the control of all mineral oil and natural gas in, under, or upon any land in Nigeria, under or upon the territorial water and the exclusive economic zone of Nigeria shall vested in the government and federation and shall be managed in such manner as may be prescribed by the national assembly”[7]
The section expressly makes known that the control of mineral and oil deposits is vested in the government of the federation, and not the state governments or the individuals. It is no surprise then, that the states governments have teamed up in the present Niger Delta to request that control of resources should be ceded to them, even though not in an absolute capacity. The federal government grants oil prospecting license to oil companies to explore mineral oil for terms of years. The federal ministry of natural resources is responsible for the granting of these license and lease to oil companies.
It should be noted that the land use Act[8] did not vest ownership of land on the federal Government, but it vested all land in the urban areas in the territory of the a state in the government of that state (except land vested in the federal government or its agencies) to hold in trust for the people and allocate residential, agricultural, commercial and other purpose (with similar powers conferred in the local government in respect of lands in non-urban areas)[9]. What to note here, is that this provision only vest surface right on the state government and does not recognize those rights below the surface of the earth.-Where mineral are found under these lands, the right to the minerals is vested upon the federal government. The act can be criticized to project alienation of the people from their land, by giving them only surface rights.
The interest of the geese that lay the golden egg is not adequately accommodated. They are not always parties to any contract negotiation bordering on oil between federal government and multinational oil companies, neither are they consulted before the formulation of legal rules bordering on how oil exploration and expropriation should be regulated. Therefore, the oil companies, owe the communities no duty or obligation in the  course of their operation, the communities in which these companies carry their operations suffer grave ecological devastation, environmental degradation and other health hazard, from uncontrolled exploration of mineral and soled deposits. Economically, the effect of oil exploration when there is oil spillages impair farm lands and unexhausted improvement thereon. More often than not it invades the Greeks, sea and Tributary River killing sea foods in quantum and destroying aquatic life.
            Compensation for these, are not adequate in the estimation. The oil producing states for instance, become “master of their faith by joining forces to press for resources control. The demand culminated into a legal battle in the celebrated case of Attorney General of the Federation V Attorney General of Abia State & 35 Ors[10].
This case which was instituted in the Supreme Court with Original Jurisdiction as regards the interpretation of statue was resolved in favour of the federal government. This decision has not deterred the oil producing states from further sustaining the tempo and pressure in their demand for the control of their resources.
Nigerians are dreaming of an era in which relevant regulation on expropriation of  minerals and deposits that will adequately compensate the affected communities will be made and observed, an era of which social responsibly is according prominence in management decision and activities, where vital needs of host communities receive due attention of prospecting companies. In their own little way, the indigenous firms must show how much of local content could reasonably be injected into oil production operations, in fact, how much Nigeria could save is the multinational adopted the appropriate attitude to sourcing of inputs.
Today, our constitution[11] provides 13 percent of such revenue according of natural resource to the derived source while 87percent goes to the federation account. This is regardless of how, or by whom the mineral is mined. Obnoxious as some of the law that govern expropriation of minerals are solid deposits, the fact remains today, all minerals upon or under all Nigerians soil and waters belong to the federal government.

1.2             Statement of Problem       
As noted earlier in the background of this work, the expropriation of mineral and solid deposits by the federal government and implication under the land Use Act has also been an area of conflict between the federal government and some of the state government in Nigeria with these natural resources. This conflict arises as a result of the demand for resources by these states. This is because; they discover the compensation from the federal government to term is not adequate, as 87 percent of the revenue generated goes directly into the federation account. It therefore follows that the issue of compensation is a problem.
Also, even when this 13 percent of the revenue is paid to the state coffers, they are not adequately utilized by the state to bring grass root development to the rural dwellers who suffer the decimation of their entire ecosystem occasioned by mineral and solid deposit exploration.          Another problem in this area is section 162(2) of the 1999 constitution (as amended) which relates to the derivation principle in that it did not expressly provide that the 13percent derivation principle reflect the entire oil drilled in both on-share and offshore oil fields incase of states that produce oil. The provision of the constitution is destitute of clear expression thereby making its interpretation a subject of controversy. The federal government harped on this and unilaterally interpreted, declared and implemented the thirteen percents derivation principle on the exploration of mineral and solid deposit. This has provoked deep thought in the minds of the states with these mineral and solid deposits in Nigeria. It becomes Obvious that they are not getting enough from the natural resources which they are endowed with.          Finally, the power of the federal government in the expropriation of mineral and solid deposit has divested the state Governor of power to exercise legislative power over areas of land with mineral and solid deposit. In other word, those areas of land would no long be subject to insurance of certificate of occupancy. In consequence, it robs section 1 of the land Use Act its legal content and thereby rendering it destitute of meaning. Because of the monopoly of mineral and solid deposits by the federal government, it has prevented the vesting of the entire land Comprised in the state in the Governor of the state.

1.3       Research Questions
The following are questions are what this study aims to give answers
i.          What is the reason behind federal government monopoly of mineral and solid deposits?
ii.         Does the federal government own mineral and solid deposits in Nigeria?
ii.         What is the revenue accruing to the federal government and the state endowed with mineral and solid deposits.
iv.        Whether the compensation paid to the state endowed with mineral and solid deposit is enough to take of the mines?
v.         Who has the monopoly of mineral oil and solid deposit under the Land Use Act?
vi.        What is the implication of the expropriation of mineral and solid deposit by the federal government of the Land Use Act?
vii.      What is the way forward?

1.4       Objectives of the Study
            The Objectives of this study is to critically analyze the expropriation of mineral and mineral deposits by the federal Government and implications on the Land Use Act in Nigeria and to specifically do the following:
(i)        Determined the idea behind the federal government monopoly of mineral and solid mineral deposits in Nigeria.
(ii)       Determine who owns mineral and solid mineral deposit in Nigeria
(iii)     Determine the revenue accusing to the federation account and to that of states endowed with these minerals and solid mineral deposits in Nigeria
(iv)      Ascertain if the compensation paid to the state or community question is adequate enough to take care of the damages caused by exploration of minerals and solid mineral deposits.
(v)       Determine who has the monopoly of the expropriation of minerals and solid mineral deposits under the Land Use Act in Nigeria  
(vi)      Determine the implication of the expropriation of mineral and solid mineral deposits by the federal government on the Land Use Act in Nigeria.
(vii)    Suggest the way forward in this area.

1.5       Research Methodology
            The expropriation of mineral and solid mineral deposits by the federal government is statute based. Hence, in writing this work, much reliance will be placed on primary source of data in sourcing information. Such of data include. Statute, delegated legislatives and decided case or judicial authorities.
            Also, in order to clarify some knotty issues reference will be made to secondary source of data. However, in this age of information technology (IT), we can do nothing but exploit the opportunist presented by the internet in order to achieve the objectives of this study and also to ascertain the position of law in order jurisdictions in this area of law.

1.6       The Significance of the Study
            A critical analysis of the expropriation of mineral and solid mineral deposits by the federal government and implications on the Land Use Act has been a controversial area in law, over the years. In respect of resources control, this writer has critically examined and resolved the issues raised in this area of land to serve as a guide to the general public.
            However, this study will be of immense help to the following institution and people.
(a)       Government: The Government (both at the state and federal level) will find this study as a useful guide in policy formation and implementation. Since this area has been the subject of debate, the new approach adopted in this work will be of immense help especially of the issue of compensation.
(b)       States/communities endowed with natural resources: Those states and communities endowed with mineral and solid mineral deposits will find this study handy as a guide whenever they are demanding for resources control. It will also help them to understand the reason of federal government monopoly of mineral oil in Nigeria if they adopt the new approach in this study the controversy in this area will be a history.
(c)       Student and Researcher: As stated earlier in this work, the expropriation of mineral and solid mineral deposit by the federal government is controversial area, so, students and subsequent researchers will find this work as a useful guide whenever they are faced with a problem in this area. This is because this study has been designed in such a way that it will resolve the problems associated with this area of law and problems associated with this area of law and this aimed at contributing to scholarship.
1.7       The Scope of the Study:
The expropriation of mineral and solid deposits by national government of any country is a fact, but for a better understanding of the expropriation of mineral and solid mineral deposit by the federal government and implication on the land Use Act. We shall restrict the scope of this work in Nigeria in order to achieve its objectives.
            Also, much emphasis will be place on those states that are richly endowed with mineral and solid mineral deposits in generally and particularly to their respective communities. This is because not every state in Nigeria is endowed with these mineral and solid mineral deposits
1.8       Limitations of the Study
            A critical analysis of the expropriation of mineral and solid mineral deposits by the federal government and implication on the land Use Act in Nigeria like any other discussion on law and humanity has its own interest limitations for instance, such exploration is not usually channeled towards the development of the communities endowed with such natural resources.
            However, in writing this work, the following constituted limitation.
Time: The time given for the completion of this work is short. This is coupled with the fact that the writer is combining this research with his other class assignments which is also consuming part of the short time available. The writer also lack time to do enough research with respect to this topic.
Lack of Material: In writing this work, the researcher lacked materials in this area of law. This is coupled with fact that the writer was unable to go beyond the vicinity of this university to embark on voyage of discovery in search of materials also, the issue of subsidy removal has not been favorable due to high cost of transportation and materials.
Finance: The writer also lack finance in the course of writing this work. This includes the money to conduct research, typing of the work printing photocopying and indeed binding both the soft and hard copy of this work. However, in all thank the Almighty God.

[1] C. IRpatt and N.H. Ibanga: Nigeria’s Mineral Resources; A case for resource Control, 2003. WWW.nigerdeltCongress.Com visited on 18/06/2012.
[2] The 1999 constitution which is the highest law of the Land. The  supreme source of Laws, which guess validity to any other law of the present government. See Hans Kolsins  Hierarchy of law in Jurisprudence
[3]This day marks the day democratic dispensation came into existence
[4] The states living along the coastal region are known as the litoral state
[5] The international market as regulated by OPEC was instituted in Bughad meeting of Sept. 10-14, 1960
[6] South-South is one of the six geo- political zone in Nigeria. The country is divided for political and administrative convenience.
[7] Section 44(3) of the 1999 constitution (as amended).
[8] Section (1) of the Land Use Act, Cap L5, LFN 2004; Nkwocha V Anambara State Government
[9]  1997 Land Law, Law of the Federation of Nigeria Cap. 202.
[10] (2002) FWLR (P+ 102) second edition
[11] Section 162 of the 1999 constitution (as amended)
Share on Google Plus


The publications and/or documents on this website are provided for general information purposes only. Your use of any of these sample documents is subjected to your own decision NB: Join our Social Media Network on Google Plus | Facebook | Twitter | Linkedin