Much Ado About Demolitions in Nigeria: Legal Realities and the Way Forward

---

By Oluwaseyi fadoro 

 The recent wave of demolitions across parts of Nigeria, particularly in Lagos State, has reignited nationwide debate over urban planning, property rights, and governance. While many residents have expressed outrage over the loss of homes and businesses, experts and government officials insist that the actions are rooted in law and necessary to ensure public safety.

In recent weeks, structures deemed illegal or unsafe have been pulled down in several Lagos communities, including Oko Oba, Agege, Lekki, Ajah, Festac Town and Oworonshoki. Authorities also recently cleared illegal constructions within the Trade Fair Complex, citing violations of building regulations and encroachment on public infrastructure.

However, the demolitions have sparked political and ethnic controversy, with some politicians accusing the Lagos State Government of bias. Legal experts and civic commentators have dismissed such claims as misplaced, arguing that enforcement of urban development laws transcends politics and ethnicity.

Under Section 1 of the Land Use Act, ownership of land within a state is vested in the governor, who holds it in trust for the people. A 2003 Supreme Court ruling — Attorney-General of Lagos State v. Attorney-General of the Federation — further affirmed that land use and physical planning fall under concurrent jurisdiction, giving states the authority to regulate development within their territories, except in designated federal areas.

Observers have described attempts to politicize the demolitions as “irresponsible and condemnable,” noting that Lagos has long been a hub of religious and ethnic coexistence. “When buildings are constructed on canals, drainages, or government-acquired land without approval, the law must take its course,” a town planning consultant told reporters.

While many affected residents lament the financial and emotional toll of losing properties built with years of savings, government officials emphasize that the demolitions serve the larger public interest — to prevent building collapse, flooding, and other hazards.

Stakeholders, however, agree that systemic reforms are needed to prevent future violations. Urban planners and legal practitioners have called for stronger oversight of professionals who facilitate illegal developments, including architects, surveyors, and lawyers who prepare documents for encumbered lands without proper verification.

Experts also recommend that governments deploy technology to simplify land searches and title verification, reducing human contact that fosters corruption in land administration. Additionally, there are calls for sustained public education on land rights, building approvals, and environmental regulations.

“Citizens must take responsibility by verifying the status of any land before construction, while the government must make this process transparent and accessible,” an urban policy analyst said.

As the debate continues, analysts stress that public reaction to demolitions should be guided by facts, not emotions or politics. “Demolitions are painful, but they remind us that we live under the rule of law,” one observer noted. “We are often the architects of our own misfortune when we ignore the rules.”

---