Critics Of FCT Land Allocation Policy Are Hypocrites, Says Wike

Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike, has fired back at critics of his land allocation policy for diplomatic personnel.

He accused them of hypocrisy, noting that many of them have benefitted from similar arrangements in the past.

Responding to claims that the administration was favouring foreign diplomats over ordinary Nigerians, Wike defended land allocation as a standard government procedure aimed at attracting investment and driving urban development.

Speaking with journalists yesterday after a project inspection, the minister pointed out that media houses operate as profit-driven businesses, not charities.

He noted that these organisations charge for adverts, live coverage, and commercial news to fund their operations and salaries.

The minister specifically named major media outlets, such as Channels TV and AIT, stating they currently operate from headquarters built on land allocated by the FCT government rather than purchased from the open market.

“When you are living in a glass house, don’t throw stones. You were given land, and you are not among the poor, so why are you complaining now?” he stated.

The minister sought to dispel misconceptions regarding the ‘sale’ of land in the FCT, clarifying that the government allocates land based on developmental agreements.

“The FCT does not sell land; it allocates it based on specific conditions and investment proposals. All allottees, including diplomats, are required to pay procedural fees for the processing of their Certificate of Occupancy (C of O),” he said.

Wike noted that many of the allocations being questioned were made by previous administrations, as the government is a continuous entity.

The minister warned that land allocated for development must be used as agreed.

He cited the case of Jabi Lake where land allocated 20 years ago for entertainment and tourism hubs remained undeveloped and was reclaimed by the government for new investors.

Wike dismissed the ‘emotional’ arguments that land should only go to the poor, stating that high-value areas require significant investment to transform into world-class facilities and tourist attractions.

He concluded by vowing to always stand by the truth, maintaining that his administration would prioritise realistic urban development and investment over playing to the gallery.