The Federal Government’s notice to enforce setback regulations along the Lagos-Calabar coastal highway is causing concern in the real estate sector as experts highlight the critical need for due diligence, and that short-term disruption like property demolitions may erode investors’ confidence, particularly among foreign investors in the property market, CHINEDUM UWAEGBULAM reports.
The Federal Government’s warning to enforce right-of-way and setback regulations along the Lagos-Calabar coastal highway has triggered fresh anxiety among real estate investors and developers operating along the corridor.
Stakeholders in the real estate and construction sectors say the threat could stall ongoing projects, disrupt investment plans, and erode confidence in coastal property development if not handled transparently.
While the principle of caveat emptor was the guideline for the courts and the point was that the buyer had the chance to use his knowledge to be careful or accept the cost of his inattention. No warranties were implied to assure the quality of the goods he was going to buy and only a seller making a false statement could be sued in tort for deceit.
However, considering the possibility of state governments issuing approvals for property which they had hitherto thought was under their jurisdiction, the latest pronouncement by President Bola Tinubu reminds us of the principle of caveat venditor, which imposes a strict liability on the seller or holds the seller accountable for the quality and reliability of the goods or services they offer. This shift in responsibility is designed to protect consumers and ensure that sellers are held responsible for their actions, particularly regarding the quality of goods or services.
Under the Land Use Act of 1978, only State Governors have the authority to grant and revoke rights of occupancy over land within their states. However, Section 49 of the Act, exempts Land vested in the Federal Government or its agencies; or occupied by the Federal Government or any of its agencies before the commencement of the Act from the control of state governors. This means federal lands remain under the Federal Government or its agencies’ control.
According to the Lands (Title Vesting) Act of 1993, which remains in force, all land within 100 metres of the 1967 shorelines, as well as reclaimed land near the sea, lagoon, or ocean, is vested in the Federal Government.
This position was affirmed by the Supreme Court in Attorney-General of the Federation v. Attorney-General of Abia State & 35 Ors., where the court held that the Federal Government has sovereignty and jurisdictional control over offshore resources and adjacent lands.
Professionals, mostly estate surveyors and valuers told The Guardian that if the corridor in question falls within the defined coastal zone, the Federal Government has the legal right to revoke interests in the land for overriding public interest, provided it follows due process, including proper notice and compensation.
They advised investors to exercise caution and take proactive steps to safeguard their investments given the government’s enforcement stance on the Lagos-Calabar coastal highway axis.
The experts disclosed that investors with properties within the designated setbacks face the possibility of demolition without compensation, especially if their developments lack proper approvals, enforcement of setbacks may lead to legal disputes, particularly for investors who believe they have obtained the necessary approvals, while uncertainty can affect financial planning and investment strategies.
They also said that the situation highlights the critical need for thorough due diligence before investing in real estate projects, including verifying land titles and understanding local regulations.
The experts said the potential for property demolitions without compensation may affect overall investor confidence, particularly among foreign investors who may perceive increased risks in the Nigerian real estate market.
According to a Senior lecturer at the Department of Estate Management, Obafemi Awolowo University, Dr Daramola Olapade, the affected property owners might have to seek for fair and adequate compensation based on the existing laws, which includes titled and untitled interests, depending on the circumstances.
“For properties within the axis that might not be affected by the road construction, they have to face dual regulatory hurdles. They have to contend with double consent from both the Federal and State Government in line with the Regularisation Policy of Lagos State.
They might also seek planning approval from the Lagos State Government in line with the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Attorney-General of Lagos State v. Attorney-General of the Federation &Ors (2003) that emphasised that states have the power to legislate on urban and regional planning within their jurisdictions.
“This dual oversight often reduces property value, which is why properties with Federal Certificates of Occupancy tend to be valued lower than those with Lagos State titles in the same area. The implication is that despite short-term disruptions, the construction of the coastal road is likely to boost property values in the long run.
“For investors, who lose part of their land, the remaining portion may become more valuable due to improved infrastructure and accessibility is constructed.”
Olapade, who is an expert in land governance and property valuation said, given that both the federal and Lagos State governments are controlled by the same political party, and that a political resolution is likely.
“Interestingly, President Bola Tinubu, a former Governor of Lagos State, was instrumental in securing the landmark 2003 Supreme Court judgment affirming state powers over urban planning. Now, as president, he is in a position to balance federal interests with state sensitivities.”
Olapade urged government adhere to due process in revoking land rights, including issuing proper notices, providing fair and adequate compensation and ensuring a human-centered approach to resettlement and compensation. “Those with or without formal title, approval should also be compensated.”
He further called on the investors to organise themselves into a pressure group or association and engage a coalition of professionals comprising estate surveyors and valuers, legal practitioners, land surveyors, urban planners, environmentalist, administrators, and advocacy group to pursue constructive dialogue with government agencies and avoid relying solely on protests or media campaigns.
Chairman, Association of Capital Market Valuers (ACMV), Chudi Ubosi canvassed the similar position. He said those who have built without approvals will lose their investments, adding “The Federal Government is the highest authority in the land and their powers supersede that of the states.
“I don’t foresee any clashes. Besides, many of these conversations are held behind closed doors at top levels. I believe that the various governors understand and appreciate that the coastal road project, despite all the opposition is beneficial to the economic development of any state. Proper communication at all times will reduce the volume of negative issues and controversies that have followed the development.”
NIESV’s Second Vice President, Dr Emmanuel Mark, said the Federal Government has the right to revoke properties along federal highways, especially if they were allocated or built upon without proper authorisation or in violation of existing regulations.
Mark, who was a former president, International Right of Ways (IRWA) Nigeria, said the government’s recent statement addresses unauthorised developments along Lagos’ coastline, which have led to community displacement, increased risk of coastal erosion, flooding, and biodiversity loss.
He said, “Despite state governors controlling land under the Land Use Act of 1978, the environment falls under the Concurrent Legislative List, which allows federal agencies like National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA), National Inland Waterways Authority (NIWA), and the Ministry of Environment to regulate through measures like Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs).
He disclosed that the implications of such revocation on real estate investors along the affected axis could be significant, including but not limited to, loss of investment, decreased property value, including increased uncertainty, which may deter potential investors from investing in properties along federal highways.
“No investor will want to invest in an uncertain situation.”
Mark predicts potential conflicts between states and the Federal Government over issues like compensation, land allocation, and project implementation. “States may resist or delay land allocation for federal projects, leading to delays or cancellation.”
He urged investors in the affected axis to conduct proper due diligence before investing to ensure that they are not located within setback areas or other restricted zones; and seek advice from professionals such as estate surveyors to ensure compliance with relevant regulations.
The Board Chairman of the Real Estate Professionals Association of Nigeria (REPAN), Mr Olusola Enitan, differs in his contribution. He said the federal directive may not be purely about environmental or infrastructural protection, but rather a strategic use of administrative and legal powers to undermine a political opponent.
He said, legally, the Federal Government may have limited authority to revoke properties within the setback zone, but such power must be exercised in strict compliance with the Land Use Act, the Constitution, and judicial precedents like Oba Elegushi & 3 Ors v AGF & 5 Ors.
“However, given the obvious political winter between President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the Governor of Lagos State, the threat of revocation appears selective and targeted, especially given that similar developments exist along the coast in other states without federal intervention.
“The Lagos-Calabar highway corridor spans multiple states, yet only Lagos has drawn this level of executive ire. The Lagos governor is widely seen as a rival to the established interests of Mr President and therefore out of the good books with perception as a potential future contender.”
Enitan, a lawyer and estate surveyor pointed out that the implications remain severe, with an added layer of political risk and instability. “Investors in Lagos may feel more vulnerable than those in other coastal states due to the targeted nature of the federal threat. Banks and investors may interpret this as a sign of unpredictable governance, leading to capital flight from Lagos-based coastal projects.
“There is a real danger of unequal enforcement; where Lagos faces aggressive demolition campaigns, while similar structures elsewhere are left untouched. This could lead to constitutional challenges on grounds of unequal treatment before the law. Political targeting erodes trust in the rule of law, making Lagos appear less attractive for long-term investment unless strong legal protections are reaffirmed.
Given the political undertones, Enitan said several scenarios are possible. Lagos State may file a suit challenging the legality and constitutionality of the Federal Government’s directive. The matter may reach the Supreme Court, potentially triggering a landmark decision on federal-state relations in land use and infrastructure development.
He said federal agencies like NESREA, NIWA, or Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC) may be weaponised and deployed disproportionately in Lagos, under the guise of enforcement, to exert pressure on the state government. “Lagos might explore international arbitration, human rights litigation, or even invoke the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights if it perceives systematic violations of property rights.”
He recommended the establishment of a neutral technical panel, comprising independent urban planners, environmental scientists, legal experts, and engineers to objectively assess the setback boundaries and propose science-based solutions.
Enitan also advocated convening a joint committee of the National Assembly on Environment, Works, and Federal-State Relations to mediate in the dispute and clarify legal responsibilities or pass a National Coastal Zone Management Act to establish uniform rules for setbacks, erosion control, and development along the entire Nigerian coastline.
