In a decisive move to enforce compliance with land administration laws, Nyesom Wike, the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), has revoked 762 land plots in Abuja. The affected properties, many located in the prestigious Maitama 1 District, belong to prominent individuals and corporate entities that failed to meet payment obligations for Certificates of Occupancy (C-of-O).
Among those impacted are former President Muhammadu Buhari, ex-Chief Justice Walter Onnoghen, Secretary to the Government of the Federation George Akume, and House Speaker Tajudeen Abbas. This crackdown highlights Wike’s commitment to upholding property management regulations and ensuring that landowners fulfill their financial responsibilities.
Revoked Land Titles: High-Profile Figures and Corporate Entities Affected
The list of affected individuals includes several former governors and key political figures, signaling that no one is above the law when it comes to compliance with statutory payments.
Notable Names on the Revoked List
| Category | Names |
|---|---|
| Former Presidents | Muhammadu Buhari |
| Ex-Chief Justices | Walter Onnoghen |
| Government Officials | George Akume (SGF), Tajudeen Abbas (House Speaker) |
| Former Governors | Rochas Okorocha, Ben Ayade, Seriake Dickson, etc. |
| Lawmakers | Enyinnaya Abaribe, Dino Melaye, Shehu Sani, etc. |
| Other Politicians | Stella Oduah, Sam Egwu, Dennis Idahosa |
The crackdown also includes corporate organizations that failed to meet their obligations, reinforcing the administration’s stance on equal enforcement of the law.
Additional Warnings Issued
Apart from the 762 revocations, the FCT Administration (FCTA) has warned 614 other landholders to clear their dues within two weeks or face similar action. This preemptive notice underscores the administration’s determination to ensure compliance across the board.
Legal Justification for the Revocations
The FCTA’s decision to revoke these land titles is backed by Section 28 of the Land Use Act of 1978, which grants the minister authority to withdraw occupancy rights under specific conditions.
Key Legal Provisions
| Legal Clause | Description |
|---|---|
| Section 28(1) | The government can revoke land titles for overriding public interest. |
| Section 28(5) | Non-compliance with land payment obligations justifies revocation. |
| Section 28(6) | Authorities can repossess land if payment terms are violated. |
By citing this legal framework, Wike’s administration reinforces the legitimacy of the revocations, ensuring that Abuja’s land policies remain transparent and enforceable.
Policy Enforcement and Its Implications
This mass revocation serves as a warning to other landholders that the FCTA will no longer tolerate prolonged non-compliance. The move is part of a broader effort to streamline property management, improve revenue collection, and prevent land hoarding.
Objectives of the Policy
- Ensure Fairness: By targeting both influential figures and corporations, the FCTA is promoting equal application of the law.
- Increase Revenue Collection: Enforcing payment of land charges helps boost government revenue for infrastructure projects.
- Curb Speculative Land Hoarding: Many revoked plots were held without development, preventing optimal land use.
Consequences for Defaulters
- Affected individuals and companies have two weeks to settle outstanding fees or permanently lose their land titles.
- Non-compliance could result in legal disputes, although the government has emphasized that the revocations are within legal rights.
- The administration is unlikely to reverse its decision, given Wike’s strong stance on law enforcement.
Broader Impact on Land Administration
| Impact Area | Expected Outcome |
|---|---|
| Land Compliance | Increased adherence to payment obligations. |
| Property Market | Potential resale of revoked plots to compliant buyers. |
| Urban Development | Encourages landowners to develop their properties. |
With this initiative, Abuja’s land administration is set to become more structured, transparent, and financially sustainable.
Public and Political Reactions
Given the high-profile nature of the revocations, reactions have been mixed. Some view it as a necessary step to enforce accountability, while others argue that more time should have been given to settle outstanding payments.
Supporters’ Arguments
- Rule of Law: Enforcing payment regulations strengthens Abuja’s land governance.
- Economic Benefits: Increased revenue collection supports urban development.
- Equal Treatment: No exemptions based on status or influence.
Critics’ Concerns
- Short Notice: Some affected individuals claim the deadline is too strict.
- Political Motivations: Opponents speculate that the move may target certain political figures.
- Risk of Legal Battles: Some landowners may challenge the decision in court.
Despite the controversy, Wike has reaffirmed his commitment to enforcing Abuja’s land laws, stating that non-compliance will no longer be tolerated.
Also Read :
- WhatsApp Security Breach: How to Protect Your Account from Spyware
- Full List of Grammy Awards 2025 Winners – A Night of Historic Wins
Conclusion: A New Era of Accountability in Abuja’s Land Management
The revocation of 762 land titles by FCT Minister Nyesom Wike marks a significant shift in Abuja’s property administration. By holding high-profile individuals and corporations accountable for unpaid land fees, the government is sending a clear message: compliance is mandatory, regardless of status.
Key Takeaways
✔ Legal Justification: The revocations are backed by the Land Use Act of 1978.
✔ High-Profile Defaulters: Prominent political figures and corporations are affected.
✔ Enforcement Deadline: Landowners have two weeks to pay or lose their titles.
✔ Policy Impact: The move is expected to increase compliance, boost revenue, and prevent land hoarding.
✔ Public Reactions: While some support the decision, others raise concerns about fairness and implementation.
As the deadline approaches, all eyes are on how affected landowners will respond. Will they comply, seek legal action, or attempt to negotiate with the FCTA? One thing is clear: Abuja’s land policies are entering a new era of accountability and enforcement.
