End recurring military-civilian land disputes

The dispute between the communities of Ungwan Yohanna, Ungwan Aboki, Sabon Ungwan Loya, Ungwan Railway, and Ungwan Alhassan, Igabi Local Government Area (LGA) of Kaduna State and the Nigerian Army over the land housing Jaji Military Cantonment has brought to fore, issues surrounding ownership and occupation of lands around the nation’s military bases. The communities […]

The dispute between the communities of Ungwan Yohanna, Ungwan Aboki, Sabon Ungwan Loya, Ungwan Railway, and Ungwan Alhassan, Igabi Local Government Area (LGA) of Kaduna State and the Nigerian Army over the land housing Jaji Military Cantonment has brought to fore, issues surrounding ownership and occupation of lands around the nation’s military bases. The communities have been locked in land dispute with the Army since 2020 over the construction of perimeter fence around the cantonment. The residents protested, stating that the fence encroached on their farmlands and ancestral homes, accusing the Army of unlawful occupation and seizure of their land without due process and legal compensation.

The cantonment is a critical hub for Armed Forces of Nigeria, housing strategic institutions including the Armed Forces Command and Staff College (AFCSC); Headquarters, Infantry Corps Centre (ICC); Martin Luther Agwai International Leadership and Peacekeeping Centre (MLAILPC), the Warrant Officers’ Academy, and the Nigerian Army School of Infantry (NASI). The cantonment also hosts key operational units, including the four Demonstration and 601 Aviation Battalions.

In June 2023, Justice Hannatu Balogun of Kaduna State High Court ordered the Army to allow host communities of the Jaji Cantonment access to their farmlands.  She also ordered the Army to pay each of the 260 members of the communities N1, 000 cost, adding that they should present evidence of the payment to the court. The plaintiffs had in November 2020 dragged the Army High Command to court, alleging they were blocked from access to their farmland, villages and communities. The Army have allegedly refused to obey the court order and it is not clear whether they have appealed the case or not.

Even the Kaduna branch of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) had penultimate Tuesday led the communities on a peaceful protest against “illegal demolitions, human rights violations, and brazen disobedience of subsisting court orders.” Carrying placards with inscriptions such as “Obey Court Orders Now”, “Military is Not Above the Law”, and “Stop Illegal Demolitions in Igabi”, they also chanted slogans calling for the protection of their ancestral homes and farmlands.

• PoS agents react to fraud allegations, move against unscrupulous agents
• Security agencies urged to probe threats against NNPCL boss

But the Jaji dispute is not an isolated issue. In June, Headquarters 4 Brigade Benin City warned residents of Oghede, Iyanomo, and adjoining communities in Ovia North-East Local Government Area of Edo State, to immediately desist from encroaching on legally acquired military land within the Army’s Cantonment in Ekehuan. Earlier, the Brigade had threatened to demolish buildings on the ‘encroached’ land.

In Lagos, landlords and residents of Iraye, Lenuwa, Ayeni and Adeyoruwa areas in Eredo Local Council Development Area lamented the continued presence of soldiers in the community who stormed there in September 2022 and started notifying them of their intention to demolish property in their encroached land.

Last year, the Army’s 81 Base Ordinance Corp commenced the construction of a perimeter fence, which the host Ebute-Afuye Community said posed a grave threat to their existence. On Tuesday February 6, 2024, Army authorities met with the community, instructing residents to submit passport photographs and personal information for access passes to their property. But the community accused the Army of encroachment on lands beyond the earlier agreed boundaries.

There is also dispute between Uvwie kingdom in Effurun, Delta State and the Army over the location of the 5,076 acres of land housing the 3 Battalion Barracks, Effurun which was acquired in 1975 by the Army from the then Midwestern State government. The Effurun leaders accuse the Army of selling portions of the barracks’ land to private developers, meaning they have no need for them.

The Mgbirichi/Abakuru community in Ohaji/Egbema LGA, Imo State is in dispute over the land they donated for the establishment of 34 Artillery Brigade, Obinze, accusing the Brigade of encroaching beyond what was originally donated by the community.

Generally, the dispute is rooted in the fact that most of Nigeria’s military bases were allocated in the 1960s and 1970s when there were sparse population and the military deliberately left large expanse of land around them as buffer zones for military training, firing ranges, and security purposes. However, with rapid population growth, civilian houses, shops, schools, and even worship centres started springing up in these sparse of lands and other spaces originally earmarked for military use.

To compound issues, unscrupulous community leaders started selling parcels of land within military reserve areas, especially in areas without any perimeter fences demarcating them. The military high command ought to have acted swiftly and stop the encroachments, but, sadly, things were allowed to degenerate. Most of the people that bought the lands were peasants, who see their community leaders as the highest authority.

Fortunately, in Nigeria, land ownership is primarily governed by the Land Use Act of 1978, which vests all lands in the state. Therefore, we at Daily Trust call on affected state governments to intervene urgently. First, they should interface with the military and work out arrangements to allow residents remain in their present location within the bases. This will entail new delineation of boundaries alongside another commensurate land allocation elsewhere as compensation.

But, if the military insists on taking possession of the lands, the state governments should relocate the residents to new areas and help them rebuild their lives with ease.

While the interface is on, we urge the military to lead by example as defenders of the constitution by obeying court orders pertaining to the disputes. After all, they are also subject to the constitution and the law.

But it must be admitted that the military made grievous errors in the first place. They should have had clear boundaries and dissuaded communities from sprouting from their land areas in the first place. This is clear negligence. Moreover, it is now imperative for all military formations to have clear delineation and fencing of their lands.