Supreme Court Strikes Down Portions of NIWA Act, Preventing Federal Government from Controlling Non‑Navigational Lands Adjacent to Waterways in Lagos and Other States

Alex Enumah in Abuja

The Supreme Court has declared certain provisions of the National Inland Waterways Authority (NIWA) Act null and void for being inconsistent with the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

A seven‑man panel of the apex court also issued a perpetual injunction preventing the federal government from dealing in any way with lands adjoining waterways within Lagos State and other states for non‑navigational purposes.

The order was issued while the court delivered judgment in the suit SC/CV/541/2025, filed by Lagos State.

Senior Advocates of Nigeria representing Lagos State included Babatunde Raji Fashola, Olasupo Shasore and Muiz Banire, while the Federal Government was represented by Akin Olujimi SAN.

In its submission, the plaintiff argued that Sections 10, 11, 12 and 13 of the NIWA Act exceeded the legislative competence of the National Assembly under the Constitution and Items 36 and 64 of the Exclusive Legislative List.

The plaintiff sought the court’s determination on several points, including whether the provisions of Sections 12 and 13 of the NIWA Act are inconsistent with the Constitution in a way that affects the territories of the plaintiff and all states of the federation, and whether the federation’s powers over inland waterways are limited by Items 36 and 64 of the Exclusive Legislative List, thereby rendering the NIWA Act unconstitutional to the extent of its inconsistency.

Should the court answer these questions affirmatively, the plaintiff requested that the reliefs sought be granted.

In delivering judgment, the seven‑man panel largely concurred with the lead judgment by Justice Mohammed Lawal Garba, except regarding certain reliefs and the interpretation of Sections 10 and 11 of the NIWA Act. Justice Emmanuel Akomaye Agim and Justice Mohammed Baba Idris dissented, arguing that the outstanding reliefs should have been granted.

The lead judgment held that Sections 12 and 13 of the NIWA Act, which confer powers over lands adjoining waterways, are unconstitutional to the extent that they extend beyond matters related to navigation, maritime activities and fishing. The court also found that the National Assembly acted ultra vires by attempting to regulate and control adjoining lands for purposes outside its constitutional powers.

Consequently, Sections 12 and 13 of the NIWA Act were declared null and void to the extent of their inconsistency with the Constitution.

The court declined to declare Sections 10 and 11 of the NIWA Act unconstitutional, upholding its earlier decision in NIWA v. LSWA. It also refused to invalidate the entire NIWA Act, affirming that the National Assembly retains legislative competence over navigation, maritime activities, fishing and the declaration of international waterways.

Subsequently, the court declared that, under Sections 4(2), 4(3) and 4(4), 315(1), 315(5) and 315(6), and Items 36 and 64 of the Exclusive Legislative List in the Second Schedule to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as altered), Sections 1 and 49 of the Land Use Act, the provisions of Sections 12 and 13 of the NIWA Act are inconsistent with the Constitution and therefore invalid, null and void to the extent of their inconsistencies.

“An Order of Perpetual Injunction restraining the Federal Republic of Nigeria from dealing in any manner whatsoever with the right of way of waterways within the territory of Lagos State or any other state for non‑navigable purposes.”