Court Voids Federal Govt’s Acquisition Of Igbaniko Ancestral Land Over Due Process Violation

Justice Abdulfattah Lawal of the Lagos State High Court, Ikeja, has declared that the acquisition of over 292 hectares of ancestral land belonging to the Igbaniko community on Lagos-Badagry Expressway by the federal government is null and void.

Justice Lawal held that the acquisition did not meet the legal standards of due process, payment of compensation and acquisition for a genuine public purpose. She also dismissed all preliminary objections raised by Nasco Investment & Property Company Limited.

The case, marked ID/5709/2025, was brought by Oba Sheriff Adesina Bello and other representatives of the Igbaniko community against Nasco Investment & Property Company Limited and the Attorney-General of the Federation.

In his judgment, Justice Lawal agreed with the plaintiff’s lawyer, Moyosore Onigbanjo (SAN), that the defendants failed to prove that statutory acquisition notices were ever served on the community, describing this omission as fatal to the acquisition’s validity.

The court also held that there was no evidence indicating when, or even whether, notices were served on the landowners. Furthermore, neither the notice of acquisition nor the relevant government gazette was presented as evidence.

The judge further stated that, without proof of the service of statutory notices, the acquisition could not lawfully extinguish the community’s rights to the land.

He also dismissed the defendants’ argument that the claim was statute-barred, noting that the limitation period could not commence without evidence of when the acquisition notice was served on the claimants.

Justice Lawal further rejected objections questioning the claimants’ legal standing and alleging abuse of court process, ruling that the defendants had failed to prove that the acquisition was validly completed in a manner that extinguished the community’s rights.

Regarding compensation, the judge found that the defendants did not demonstrate that the community was compensated as required by law.

He clarified that excising a portion of land does not constitute compensation and rejected the defendants’ claim that the community had waived its entitlement, describing this alleged waiver as unsupported by evidence.

The court also pointed out that the land, originally acquired for use by the Nigerian Navy, was ultimately transferred for private commercial purposes rather than the public purpose for which it was acquired.

Justice Lawal held that documents before the court, including lease and sublease agreements, indicated that the land was used to compensate Nasco rather than to serve the stated public purpose.

He stated that such diversion rendered the acquisition unlawful, emphasising that a private venture does not automatically become a public purpose merely because it may offer incidental benefits to the public.

As a result, the court declared the acquisition unconstitutional, illegal, null and void, and set it aside, restraining the defendants from further occupying or developing the land.

The court also awarded damages for trespass and illegal occupation and ordered the defendants to pay N12 million as costs to the claimants.