REVERSION OF INTEREST IN LAND TO THE GOVERNOR AFTER EXPIRATION OF TERM GRANTED: A CALL FOR AMENDMENT OF THE LAND USE ACT.

My attention was drawn to the conversation that ensued on the X platform concerning the reversion of land to the Governor of a state after the expiration of term granted.

The conversation streamed from the Instagram post of my very good friend Mr. Timi Agbaje where he analysed the comment of an unidentified lady who posited that upon the expiration of the 99 years term granted, land will revert back to the Governor because no one has absolute ownership of land in Nigeria.

Mr. Agbaje disagreed with the lady by asserting to the contrary that no such reversion would occur. But that after the expiration, the owner of the land can apply for renewal.

In addresing the controversy arising from the polarised submission, I must foremost state that the controversy on reversion of land or otherwise, goes beyond the walls of X platform and Instagram because, it is an issue that every land holder in Nigeria should be concerned about.

On a personal note, I have had the opportunity of engaging the conversation as far back as 2011 as a law student and I am not surprised that the issue is still in controversy since the Land Use Act has not undergone any amendment.

In addressing the controversy, let us take into account the following:

1.⁠ ⁠The Age of the Land Use Act vis-a-vis Term Granted for Right of Occupancy.

The Land Use Act was enacted in 1978 which means the Act is currently 48 years old. Bearings that in mind, the interest in land accorded to Nigerians under the Act by virtue of Sections 5 and 6 is a Right of Occupancy.
The Right of Occupancy is by section 8 required to be granted for a definite term. The “definite term” has by practice been usually, but not necessarily 99 years.

Juxtaposing the usual definite term with the current age of the Act goes to show that no holder of a Right of Occupancy (especially the Granted) has lived out the 99 years.

Therefore, the incidence of expiration of a term is yet to be tested as to whether the land would revert to the Governor or one would need to apply for renewal.
Mr. Agbaje did not cite an example of someone who has applied for renewal after the expiration of term granted, while the unidentified lady also did not mention someone whose land reverted to the Governor after expiration. This means that what both parties did in their submission was to permutate on what would happen in the future.

2.⁠ ⁠What Does the Law Say About Reversion of Land After Expiration of Term.

While the Land Use Act is the primary legislation regulating land tenure in Nigeria, it is instructive to note that the unidentified lady who posited in support of reversion did not cite any statutory or judicial authority which stipulates that the land would revert to the Governor.
Similarly however, Mr. Agbaje also did not cite any statutory authority which requires or stipulates that a holder of Right of Occupancy shall apply for renewal after the expiration of the term granted.

The failure to cite an authority by both side is not out of ignorance. It is simply because the law says nothing about what would happen after the expiration of term granted. In other words, there is a lacuna in the Land Use Act on the issue. Accordingly, the assertion by both sides is a mere permutation.

3.⁠ ⁠The Difference Between Reversion and Revocation.

While Mr. Agbaje was making his assertion in support of renewal, he cited Section 33 of the Land Use Act.

It is instructive to note that the said section 33 is with regards to resettlement as a remedy for a person whose subsisting Right of Occupancy was revoked. As a matter of fact, the entire section 28-33 which forms part V of the Act bears the subheading “Revocation of Rights of Occupancy and Compensation Thereof”.

Bearing this subheading in mind, it is instructive to note that it is trite that where the words of a statute are clear and unambiguous, no imputation of a secondary meaning should be made.
In addition, the word revoke is akin to cancellation of a right that is subsisting while reversion in legal parlance is mostly found in lease transactions which confers a right for definite term, and after which the interest reverts to the owner.

This difference makes it abundantly clear that the Land Use Act never contemplated what will happen at the end of the term granted.

 

“What this write up seeks to do is to expose the fact that the Land Use Act truly needs legislative review and amendment to cater to the several issues that are bedeveling the Act and land tenure in Nigeria.” 

 

4.⁠ ⁠The Semblance of a Right of Occupancy With a Lease.

The Right of Occupancy granted by a Governor has been reckoned by J.A. Omotola to be an interest that is sui generis since it is greater than a personal right but less than a proprietary right.

In the case of Savanah Bank (Nig) Ltd v Ajilo (1989) 1 NWLR (pt.97) 305 and Osho v Foreign Finance Corporation (1991) 4 NWLR (Pt. 184) 157 at 192., the courts noted to the effect that the Right of Occupancy has a semblance of a lease since the Right of Occupancy enjoys a common denomination of having definite term of years.

Bearing this semblance in mind, one can accomodate the permutation of reversion because in a lease, what happens after the expiration of the definite term is the reversion of the property to the allordial owner.

5.⁠ ⁠The Scope of Right of Occupancy.

By virtue of Section 15 of the Land Use Act, a holder of a Right of Occupancy only has sole right to, and absolute possession of all the improvement on the land. This section tends to limit the scope of what the Right of Occupancy accords a holder and it is in this regard that the unidentified lady is apt in saying that a holder of the land does not own it indefinitely. Nigerian land holding is not the freehold system.
To concretise this position, learned author I.O. Smith posited to the effect that though the Land Use Act failed to define Right of Occupancy, one can say that Right of Occupancy is a right to use and occupy land, and a right that is devoid of absolute ownership or radical title.

6.⁠ ⁠Land in Nigeria Being for all Nigerians.

Section 1 of the Land Use Act vest the land comprised in a state in the Governor for the use and benefit of all Nigerians.
However, considering the fact that land is a limited and scarce resource that is already in depletion, the question is how can all Nigerians benefit from the use of land if the land given to one does not revert back to the Governor for allocation to another in the face of the growing population? Also, where one person has enjoyed the right to use the land for 99 years, would it be equitable to renew for the same person who may not live for more than another ten years?

This is not to sound oblivious of the fact that the land allocated can be reassigned, but as long as the person to whom it is reassigned knows that what is being transferred to him is a residue, he should not be heard complaining of reversion.

7.⁠ ⁠The Idea of Aplying for Renewal is Noble.
In as much as the argument on reversion is valid, the suggestion of apllying for renewal at the end or, more appropriately, before the end of a granted term is a good one. However, the terms regulating that application must be statutorily regulated so as to eliminate administrative recklessness. For now, such terms regulating application for renewal is not available anywhere in the Act. For instance, there has to be a specific period before the expiration of the term within which to apply; the conditions to be fulfilled before a renewal will be granted including development and the nature of the development and other considerations. Untill such terms are statutory stated, no one for now, knows for certain how to go about the application.

On a general note, this writeup is not with the intent of handing a trophy to either Mr. Agbaje or the unidentified lady for their respective positions.
Moreso, neither position as I had earlier said is a position of the law.

What this write up seeks to do is to expose the fact that the Land Use Act truly needs legislative review and amendment to cater to the several issues that are bedeveling the Act and land tenure in Nigeria.
Issues including limiting land ownership to above 21years of age (with exceptions), limiting land ownership to Nigerians only, issues of revocation and compensation, and as discussed herein, what will happen upon expiration of term of years granted.

As I extend my warm regards to Mr. Agbaje and the unidentified lady for resurging the issue, I urge the authorities concerned to take the matter to the National Assembly in order to prompt the necessary legislative action.

Ajibola Bello, Esq.
Deputy Managing Partner, and Head of Corporate Department,
Law Corridor.