Shangisha-Magodo: 42 Years After, Why Is Land Dispute Still Unresolved?

 

 

By Steven Dan-Asabe Aya 

For more than four decades, a land dispute involving the Lagos State Government and members of the Shangisha Landlords Association has moved through Nigeria's judicial system, survived several changes of government and reached the Supreme Court more than once, yet the controversy remains far from settled.

The dispute, which dates back to the mid-1980s, has produced judgments from the Lagos State High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, including a 2012 apex court decision affirming the lower courts. Yet, nearly 15 years after that Supreme Court judgment, questions surrounding its practical implementation continue to generate disagreement between the original claimants, the Lagos State Government and other occupants of the Magodo area.

The latest development is a fresh attempt by the Shangisha/Magodo Landlords Association to draw public attention to what it describes as the continued failure of the Lagos State Government to implement the judgments in its favour. In a press conference statement prepared by the Association, the group said the dispute had lasted for over 40 years and accused the government of failing to comply with subsisting judicial decisions.

According to the Association, the trouble began between 1984 and 1985 when the Lagos State Government compulsorily acquired land occupied by its members and demolished their houses. The Association said the government had represented that the land was required for an international-standard hospital, but that the land was subsequently subdivided and allocated to private individuals instead. It said an agreement was later reached for affected members to receive alternative plots in what became known as Magodo Scheme II, but that the arrangement was never implemented.

The affected landowners eventually went to court. In June 1988, Chief Adebayo Adeyiga and six others instituted Suit No. ID/795/88 against the Lagos State Government. During the proceedings, the claimants obtained an interlocutory injunction restraining further allocation and development pending determination of the case, although the Association alleges that development continued.

On December 31, 1993, the Lagos State High Court delivered judgment in favour of the plaintiffs. Among other things, the court declared that members of the Shangisha Landlords Association whose lands or buildings had been demolished between June 1984 and May 1985 were entitled to first-choice preferential treatment in the allocation or re-allocation of plots in Shangisha Village. The court also made a mandatory injunction directing the allocation of 549 plots to the plaintiffs.

The Lagos State Government appealed, but the Court of Appeal, Lagos Division, affirmed the High Court judgment on September 25, 2001. The matter subsequently reached the Supreme Court, which on February 10, 2012, affirmed the judgments of the lower courts. The legal battle had therefore travelled through the three principal levels of Nigeria's judicial hierarchy.

Yet, the 2012 judgment did not bring the dispute to an end. Instead, it exposed another and perhaps more difficult question: how should the judgment be implemented in a place where land had already been allocated and developed?

The Lagos State Government's position became particularly clear in December 2021, following a dramatic attempt by members of the Association to enforce what they regarded as the Supreme Court judgment at Magodo. In an official statement, the State Ministry of Justice said the judgment recognised the claimants' entitlement to preferential allocation of 549 plots but did not grant them possession of existing properties. The government also said it had made several attempts at an amicable settlement and had proposed alternative locations, including schemes in Badagry and Ibeju-Lekki, although those proposals did not resolve the disagreement.

The December 2021 confrontation demonstrated just how combustible the dispute had become. The Association's representatives arrived at parts of Magodo with police personnel in an attempt to enforce the judgment, alarming residents and property owners. The Lagos State Government condemned the action as an unlawful execution and maintained that the judgment did not authorise the seizure of occupied properties. Contemporary reports also showed that some residents claimed to have acquired their properties from the state and possessed certificates of occupancy, thereby introducing another layer of complexity into the dispute.

Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu subsequently intervened, and the immediate confrontation was suspended. The Association expressed optimism that the governor's intervention would produce a resolution. But the underlying disagreement remained.

The Lagos State Government subsequently returned to the Supreme Court seeking clarification or further directions concerning the 2012 judgment. In proceedings reported in April 2024, however, the Supreme Court made it clear that it could not review its concluded judgment. A five-member panel led by Justice Inyang Okoro advised the parties to study the earlier decision, agree on appropriate terms of settlement and work towards an amicable resolution. The applications before the court were subsequently withdrawn and struck out.

That development leaves the central question largely unanswered: if the Supreme Court has spoken, why has implementation remained so difficult?

Part of the answer appears to lie in the difference between a judicial declaration and the practical realities on the ground. The courts established the claimants' entitlement to preferential allocation and ordered the allocation of 549 plots. But the government has maintained that the judgment did not award possession of already occupied homes. Meanwhile, people who currently occupy properties in Magodo have their own interests, some saying they acquired their properties legitimately from government and obtained official documentation.

There is also the question of trust. The Association believes that decades of delay have frustrated the purpose of the judgments, while the government's repeated attempts at alternative settlements have not been accepted by all the judgment creditors. The government's own 2021 statement acknowledged divisions among the judgment creditors and said some accepted alternative proposals while others rejected them.

This is perhaps where the dispute has become larger than the original land itself. It now raises fundamental questions about the enforcement of judgments, the protection of people who subsequently acquire property from government, the responsibility of an executive authority when it is a judgment debtor, and the ability of the Nigerian justice system to translate a judicial pronouncement into a practical resolution.

After 42 years, therefore, another court judgment alone may not be enough. What appears necessary is a transparent implementation process involving the Lagos State Government, the legitimate judgment creditors, representatives of affected occupants and independent legal or land experts. Such a process could begin by establishing precisely what the subsisting judgments require, identifying the 549 plots or the appropriate land to satisfy the judgment, determining the legitimate beneficiaries and addressing the interests of existing occupants without resorting to confrontation.

A time-bound framework could also be established, with the government publicly accounting for the steps being taken towards implementation. If alternative land is proposed, the basis for determining its equivalence and suitability should be transparent, while the judgment creditors should also be prepared to consider workable solutions that preserve the substance of the court's decision without creating a fresh cycle of displacement and litigation.

Ultimately, the Shangisha-Magodo saga should not be allowed to become another example of justice that exists on paper but remains elusive in practice. The courts have spent decades adjudicating the dispute. The litigants have spent generations pursuing it. Governments have changed, but the controversy has remained.

The question before Lagos State and all the parties is therefore no longer simply who should occupy which parcel of land. It is whether, after more than four decades of litigation, the parties can finally find a lawful, transparent and humane way to turn judicial decisions into a lasting settlement.

For a country that repeatedly speaks of respect for the rule of law, the eventual resolution of the Shangisha-Magodo dispute could become an important test of whether justice in Nigeria ends with the pronouncement of a judgment—or with its fair and practical implementation.