Supreme Court Voids Key Sections of NIWA Act in Landmark Waterfront Land Ruling

Lagos Secures Partial Victory as Supreme Court Limits NIWA Land Control Powers

Nigeria’s Supreme Court has declared parts of the National Inland Waterways Authority (NIWA) Act unconstitutional, ruling that the Federal Government cannot exercise control over lands adjoining waterways within states for purposes unrelated to navigation and maritime activities.

The landmark judgment, delivered in Suit No. SC/CV/541/2025, represents a significant constitutional clarification on the balance of powers between the Federal Government and state governments regarding land administration and waterfront development. The case, instituted by Lagos State, challenged provisions of the NIWA Act that granted federal authorities extensive powers over waterfront lands across the federation.

/ You Might Also Like /

The ruling is expected to have broad implications for urban planning, real estate investment, environmental regulation, and infrastructure development, particularly in coastal and riverine states where waterfront properties remain commercially strategic.

Supreme Court Declares Sections 12 and 13 Invalid

In its decision, the apex court held that Sections 12 and 13 of the NIWA Act exceeded the constitutional powers granted to the National Assembly because they attempted to regulate lands adjoining waterways beyond navigation-related purposes.

The court ruled that while the Federal Government retains authority over navigation, maritime activities, fishing, and declared federal waterways, those powers do not extend to general control of adjoining lands located within states. According to the judgment, any attempt to regulate waterfront lands for non-navigational purposes falls outside federal constitutional authority.

Consequently, the Supreme Court declared the disputed sections unconstitutional to the extent of their inconsistency with the Constitution and issued orders restraining the Federal Government from exercising such powers over state waterfront lands.

Lagos State Challenged Federal Land Control

Lagos State argued before the court that the National Assembly exceeded its legislative powers by enacting provisions that effectively transferred control of waterfront lands from states to federal agencies. The state maintained that the provisions conflicted with the Land Use Act and constitutional provisions defining state territorial authority.

The legal challenge focused on whether federal authority over inland waterways automatically extended to adjoining lands within state territories. Lagos contended that land administration remains constitutionally vested in states through the Land Use Act, except in areas specifically reserved for federal purposes.

Senior legal practitioners representing Lagos State argued that the disputed provisions created uncertainty around property ownership, land allocation, and development approvals in waterfront areas, particularly in rapidly expanding urban centres such as Lagos.

Court Maintains Federal Control Over Navigation

Despite voiding parts of the NIWA Act, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that the Federal Government retains exclusive authority over inland waterways relating to navigation and maritime operations.

The judgment aligns partially with an earlier Supreme Court decision delivered in January 2024 involving the National Inland Waterways Authority and the Lagos State Waterways Authority (LASWA). In that ruling, the court affirmed federal control over navigable inland waterways and related commercial activities, including licensing and levies.

Legal analysts note that the latest judgment narrows the scope of federal authority by drawing a clearer distinction between waterway regulation and land administration. While NIWA retains oversight of navigational activities, states now possess stronger constitutional backing regarding adjoining land development and management.

Implications for Waterfront Development and Real Estate

The ruling is likely to influence investment decisions across Nigeria’s waterfront property market, particularly in Lagos, Rivers, Bayelsa, Delta, and other coastal states where land reclamation and waterfront development projects continue to expand.

Developers and investors have long faced regulatory uncertainty arising from overlapping federal and state claims over waterfront territories. Analysts say the judgment could improve clarity around development approvals, land ownership, and revenue collection linked to waterfront projects.

The decision may also reshape future urban planning policies involving coastal infrastructure, tourism zones, industrial corridors, and residential developments located near waterways. State governments are expected to strengthen their regulatory frameworks in response to the expanded legal certainty provided by the judgment.

However, maritime stakeholders caution that operational coordination between federal and state authorities will remain necessary to avoid conflicts involving dredging, environmental compliance, flood control, and transport infrastructure.

Constitutional Significance of the Judgment

Beyond its immediate implications for waterfront land administration, the judgment represents another major judicial interpretation of Nigeria’s federal structure and constitutional allocation of powers.

The Supreme Court’s decision reinforces the constitutional relevance of the Land Use Act and affirms the territorial authority of states under Section 3 and the First Schedule of the 1999 Constitution.

Legal experts believe the ruling may influence future disputes involving federal agencies and state governments over resource control, infrastructure regulation, and land administration. It also highlights the judiciary’s growing role in defining the constitutional boundaries between federal and state authority in strategic economic sectors.

For the housing and real estate sector, the judgment provides greater legal clarity in a market where land disputes and overlapping regulatory mandates have historically slowed project execution and discouraged long-term investment.

As waterfront development continues to play a critical role in Nigeria’s urban expansion strategy, the Supreme Court’s ruling is expected to shape future policy discussions around land governance, infrastructure planning, and intergovernmental coordination.

READ MORE