Tipo de Abastecimiento de Agua

173. During the interim regime of General Abubakar from May 1998 to May 1999, violence in the oil-producing Niger Delta region assumed alarming proportions. The inhabitants of the region were beginning to demand a greater share of the wealth from petroleum revenues derived from the region. From the advent of the new democratic Government the violence increased unabated and the governors of some of the Niger Delta states began to agitate for greater control of petroleum resources produced from the region, and ‘resource control’ entered the new Nigerian political lexicon. It was perhaps the increasing intensity of these demands, especially by the littoral states, that persuaded the Federal Government to seek adjudication of the issue in the Supreme Court. 174. The issue centred on the states’ entitlement as provided under section 162 (2) of the 1999 Constitution, which stipulated how federal

revenue shall be distributed among the three tiers of government. The texts of the relevant provisions are reproduced below.

“162 (1) The Federation shall maintain a special account to be called the ‘Federation Account’, into which shall be paid all revenues collected by the Government of the Federation, except the proceeds from the personal income tax of the personnel of the armed forces of the Federation, the Nigeria Police Force, the Ministry or department of government charged with responsibility for Foreign Affairs and the residents of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja. “(2) The President, upon the receipt of advice from the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission, shall table before the National Assembly proposals for revenue allocation from the Federation Account, and in determining the formula, the National Assembly shall take into account the allocation principles, especially those of population, equality of States, internal revenue generation, land mass, terrain as well as population density, provided

that the principle of derivation shall be constantly reflected in any approved formula as being not less than thirteen percent of the revenue accruing to the Federation account directly from any natural resources.”

175. This last provision, it should be noted, contains no mention of either ‘offshore’ or ‘continental shelf’. This was the root of the famous onshore/offshore dichotomy that put the Federal Government and governments of the littoral states on a confrontation path for about two years. The dispute was about revenue accruable to the littoral states from offshore as against onshore resources. This dichotomy become important given the migration of oil production in Nigeria from onshore to offshore for a variety of reasons, including the need to reduce disruptions caused by community disturbances.

176. Nigeria’s Constitution at the time of independence in 1960 provided in Section 134 (1) that 50 per cent of the proceeds from the royalty and annual mining rent received in respect of any minerals (not natural resources) by the Federation must go to the region from

which such minerals were derived. Section 134 (6) stipulated that for the purpose of section 134 a region’s continental shelf was to be regarded as part of that region.

177. However, in 1971 the Offshore Oil Revenue Act, enacted in that year, stipulated that the proceeds of all royalties, rents and other revenue in respect of petroleum from the territorial waters and the continental shelf of Nigeria shall accrue to the Federal Government. This Act, which was incorporated into the 1979 Constitution, remained in force until 29 May 1999, when the 1999 Constitution came into effect; that is the Section 162 (2) of the 1999 Constitution cited above, especially the part in italics.

178. In the subject suit A.G Federation v A.G Abia State (No.2) the Attorney General of the Federation (the plaintiff), representing the Federal Government in the case against the attorneys general of the 36 states (the defendants) contended that the southern boundary of the littoral states is the low-water mark of the shore of each state. The littoral states for their part claimed that the territory of each littoral state extended offshore as far as the continental self and even beyond. The states relied in their defence on Section 4A (6) (as amended) of Cap 16 and on Section 1 (1) of the Offshore Oil Revenues (Registration of Grants) Act, Cap 336, as evidence of the Federal Government’s acknowledgement or acceptance that the continental shelf forms part of the littoral states to which it is contiguous. The relevant Section 1 (1) of Cap 336 states that registrable instruments and documents by which the Federal Government makes grants covering interest in offshore areas (e.g. oil prospecting licenses, oil mining leases etc.) shall be registered in the Deeds or Land Registry of the State to which such offshore area is contiguous. 179. The Federal Government (the plaintiff) based its case on the constitutional powers of the Federal Government as the only authority in Nigeria empowered to legislate on external matters, its sovereign powers as a Nation State recognized by international law, and on the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the

Sea and 1958 the General Convention on Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone.

180. The Supreme Court held that the southern boundary of each of the littoral states (except Cross River State) end at the low-water mark along the coast. It was also held with respect to the boundary of Cross River State, which has an archipelago of islands constituting part of its territory, that the boundary is the seaward limits of its inland waters.

181. This decision raised a storm of unending protest from the littoral states and increased the level of political and violent agitation there. It meant that revenues derivable from the areas southward of or beyond these boundaries belonged exclusively to the Federal Government, and that the littoral states were no longer entitled even to the minimum of 13 per cent provided in the 1999 Constitution. It spelled financial disaster for states like Akwa Ibom, whose share of oil revenue from the Federation account was derived entirely from offshore production.

182. But a political compromise was reached when the National Assembly passed a bill early in 2004 ending the onshore/offshore dichotomy. The consensus reached was that the offshore area for the purpose of Section 162 (2) of the Constitution was put at ‘200 metres water depth isobar’ instead of the ‘contiguous zone’ or the ‘continental shelf’, which the President and the legislature had respectively wanted inserted in the bill.