By ESV RT. Hon. Remmy Hazzan
Modern governance offers a crucial insight: countries thrive not because of charismatic leaders, but due to robust institutions that operate under the rule of law, established procedures, and accountability. In places where institutions are strong, individuals act as responsible stewards, adhering to the rules; conversely, in weak institutions, individuals often overstep their bounds, pushing authority beyond legal limits.
Nigeria’s ongoing development issues clearly illustrate that when personal judgment takes precedence over institutional discipline, particularly in areas like land management and urban development, systemic instability is the result.
The recent initiative by the Office of the Surveyor General of the Federation (OSGOF) to set up a “Land Use and Allocation Committee for Land Projects” highlights this risk. While it’s presented as a step towards reform, modernization, and efficiency, this move raises serious constitutional, legal, and professional concerns. True reform cannot ignore legal standards; instead, it risks becoming administrative overreach disguised as innovation, which could ultimately undermine institutions rather than bolster them.
Administrative overreach doesn’t usually kick off with a blatant disregard for the law; instead, it often sneaks in under the guise of good intentions and bureaucratic jargon. Yet, Nigerian law is quite clear: good intentions can’t make up for a lack of authority. In the case of Military Governor of Lagos State v. Ojukwu (1986) 1 NWLR (Pt. 18) 621, the Supreme Court emphasized that the rule of law demands strict compliance with legal processes, rather than bending the rules for administrative ease or convenience.
When it comes to land administration in Nigeria, it’s not just a free-for-all. It’s regulated by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) and the Land Use Act, Cap L5, LFN 2004, which intentionally divides powers among federal, state, and local authorities. This division is crucial to avoid a concentration of power and to ensure clarity in land governance, property rights, and investment decisions.
Urban and regional planning is primarily a matter left to the states, except for the Federal Capital Territory. This has been clearly established by the Supreme Court in landmark cases like Attorney-General of Ogun State v. Aberuagba (1985) 1 NWLR (Pt. 3) 395 and Attorney-General of Lagos State v. Attorney-General of the Federation (2003) 12 NWLR (Pt. 833) 1. Beyond the FCT, the Federal Government doesn’t have the authority to legislate on physical planning and development control.
According to Section 1 of the Land Use Act, all land in each state is under the jurisdiction of the Governor. Sections 2, 5, and 6 set up Land Use and Allocation Committees, with their makeup, appointment, and oversight solely in the hands of the Governor. The Act does not grant any land allocation or land-use planning powers to the Surveyor General of the Federation. Therefore, any attempt to take on such powers would be beyond legal authority and not valid.
Strong institutions must operate strictly within the boundaries set by their enabling statutes; any actions taken outside of this statutory authority are considered null and void. This principle was firmly established in the case of A.G. Bendel State v. A.G. Federation (1981) 10 SC 1, where the Supreme Court ruled that public authorities are required to act strictly within the powers granted to them by law. The makeup of the so-called committee, which is heavily skewed towards surveyors while leaving out estate surveyors, town planners, and legal practitioners, further highlights this institutional flaw and goes against the clear intent of the Land Use Act.
Moreover, beyond the Land Use Act, Nigeria’s Urban and Regional Planning Law acknowledges the importance of various built-environment professionals because land-use decisions are complex and involve legal, economic, environmental, and social factors. A land surveyor’s expertise, as defined by the SURCON Act, is primarily focused on measurement and mapping, while land-use planning falls under the exclusive regulation of the TOPREC Act. Blurring the lines between technical competence and statutory authority can lead to chaos in the profession.
When we look at Nigeria’s history through the lens of institutional governance, it becomes clear that relying on individuals to act as institutions can lead to significant pitfalls. When authority is tied to specific personalities, we lose continuity; once those individuals change, policies often get left behind and investments can end up in limbo. This is particularly critical in land administration, which is essential for economic stability—there’s simply no room for instability or haphazard regulations here.
Property rights are the backbone of housing delivery, infrastructure financing, mortgage systems, and capital formation. If there’s any uncertainty about who has the authority to approve things, it can throw real estate markets into chaos. For instance, Section 26 of the Land Use Act invalidates any transaction or development approval made by an authority that lacks competence, putting developers, investors, and financial institutions at serious legal and financial risk. NIESV advocacy consistently highlights that investor confidence hinges on certainty, predictability, and legality. When regulatory overlaps occur, they drive up transaction costs, insurance premiums, and the risk of litigation. A real estate sector muddled by unclear mandates simply can’t foster sustainable development or economic growth.
Professional ethics are not just optional niceties; they are statutory obligations. Regulatory councils are here to safeguard the public interest and uphold standards, not to assert professional dominance. Genuine collaboration between professions respects boundaries, functioning through lawful coordination instead of overstepping. Just because one owns federal land outside the FCT doesn’t grant them federal planning authority; that power comes from the law, not ownership, as underscored in the case of A.G. Federation v. A.G. Lagos State (2003).
Nigeria’s dreams for development, whether we call it “Renewed Hope” or something else, will stay out of reach without a solid foundation of institutional discipline. Institutions don’t just fall apart overnight; they crumble slowly through small, tolerated violations that shift our understanding of what’s acceptable.
Nigeria faces a clear choice: to be governed by robust institutions that operate under the law, or to be led by powerful individuals who act on their own judgment. NIESV firmly believes that only strong institutions can create cities, markets, and investments that last beyond individual leaders.
CLOSING REMARKS
The path ahead isn’t about confrontation; it’s about achieving clarity in our constitution and maintaining discipline within our institutions. Nigeria needs to urgently restore land governance to its rightful framework by stopping any administrative actions that go beyond what’s legally allowed.
The Office of the Surveyor General of the Federation should refocus on its primary role of managing geospatial data and providing cadastral support, while responsibilities for land use planning, allocation, and development control should stay with the authorities that the law specifically empowers. Any reforms should aim to strengthen our institutions rather than blur their lines.
Equally important is fostering structured collaboration among professionals, grounded in law and mutual respect.
Effective land administration relies on teamwork among surveyors, town planners, estate surveyors and valuers, engineers, environmental specialists, and legal experts; each working within their clearly defined legal boundaries.
The Federal Government should promote this collaboration through well-established inter-agency platforms, rather than through one-sided committees that undermine existing laws and regulatory bodies.
Lastly, oversight institutions need to take decisive action. The National Assembly, the Attorney-General of the Federation, the Head of Service of the Federation, and relevant professional regulatory bodies must step in to prevent any overreach that could set a troubling precedent.
Nigeria’s economic recovery, housing delivery, and investment security hinge on predictable governance and robust institutions, not on arbitrary authority. The future of our cities, property markets and investments, professional integrity demands nothing less.
ESV Rt. Hon. Remmy Hazzan, PhD, FNIVS, FCIArb, RSV, writes from Yenagoa, Bayelsa State.
31st January, 2026.
'
'Do you want to share a story with us? Do you want to advertise with us? Do you need publicity for a product, service, or event? Contact us on WhatsApp +2348183319097 Email: platformtimes@gmail.com
We are committed to impactful investigative journalism for human interest and social justice. Your donation will help us tell more stories. Kindly donate any amount HERE
