Methods of Assessment and Processes of Revocation of Rights of Occupancy and Compensation in Ebonyi State, Nigeria

Land is universally recognized as one of the most critical resources for human survival, socio-economic development, and cultural identity. In Nigeria, land ownership and administration have historically been complex, shaped by customary tenure systems, colonial legislation, and post-independence reforms. The enactment of the Land Use Act of 1978 marked a watershed moment in the evolution of Nigerian land tenure, giving the governor of each state the authority to hold all land in trust for the people. While the Act was intended to ensure equitable access to land, facilitate agricultural and industrial development, and curb speculative landholding, it has generated sustained controversy due to its far-reaching implications for land rights, compulsory acquisition, and compensation. Central to the Act is the concept of statutory and customary rights of occupancy, which may be revoked by the Governor for overriding public interest. Section 28 of the Land Use Act empowers the Governor to revoke such interests for purposes ranging from urban development and mining to infrastructural expansion. In theory, revocation is accompanied by compensation for unexhausted improvements as provided under Section 29 of the Act, as well as Section 44 of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees the right to “prompt payment of compensation” where property is compulsorily acquired. However, in practice, the processes of revocation and compensation remain among the most contested aspects of land governance in Nigeria. In Ebonyi State, the stakes are particularly high. Created in 1996, Ebonyi is predominantly agrarian, with the majority of its population depending on land for rice cultivation, yam farming, cassava production, and palm produce. Beyond agriculture, the state is also endowed with solid minerals such as lead, zinc, and granite, which have attracted mining investments. These economic activities, coupled with rapid urbanization and infrastructural expansion, have intensified government acquisitions of land through revocation of rights of occupancy. Yet, for rural farmers and communities, land represents not just an economic resource but also a cultural heritage tied to lineage and identity. The compulsory takeover of such land without adequate compensation has often been perceived as an act of dispossession, giving rise to grievances, litigation, and sometimes violent resistance. Several challenges characterize revocation and compensation practices in Ebonyi State. First, inadequacy of compensation is a recurrent issue, since the Land Use Act excludes land value from compensation, limiting payment to unexhausted improvements such as crops and structures. Second, delays in payment undermine the effectiveness of compensation, as inflation diminishes the value of pay-outs. Third, lack of transparency in the assessment process fuels suspicion among affected communities. Fourth, there is a disconnect between statutory provisions and customary practices, as traditional landholders often contest the legitimacy of revocation orders issued without their consent. Finally, the judiciary, though constitutionally empowered to adjudicate disputes, is often inaccessible due to high costs and delays, leaving many affected persons without effective redress. The study aimed at examining the methods of assessment and processes of revocation of rights of occupancy and compensation in Ebonyi State, Nigeria. In order to achieve this aim, the following specific objectives are derived: (i) to ascertain how Ebonyi State's rights of occupation are revoked; (ii) to investigate the process used to determine the amount of compensation paid to the claimants; (iii) to determine the difficulties in resolving compensation claims; (iv) to ascertain the best ways to enhance Ebonyi State's revocation of occupancy rights and compensation procedures. Besides, several scholars have examined compulsory acquisition and compensation in Nigeria, yet relatively few studies have focused on the specific experiences of Ebonyi State. Umezurike (1988), Okonkwo (2019), and Nwabueze (2020) have explored the general inadequacies of the Land Use Act, they do not fully capture the peculiar dynamics of land acquisition in Ebonyi, where dependence on land for subsistence farming is particularly pronounced. Moreover, existing literature often emphasizes the legal framework without adequately engaging the perspectives of displaced communities or evaluating the actual methods of valuation employed by government authorities. This study, therefore, seeks to fill these gaps by critically examining the methods of assessment and processes of revocation of rights of occupancy and compensation in Ebonyi State. Specifically, it interrogates the adequacy of existing assessment techniques, the transparency of revocation procedures, and the socio-economic implications of compensation practices. By doing so, the study not only contributes to academic debates on land law and policy in Nigeria but also offers practical recommendations for enhancing fairness, transparency, and efficiency in land governance within Ebonyi State and beyond. This study reviews existing literature on three key areas which is very relevant: (i) the Land Use Act and its implications; (iii) Compensation practices; and (iv) empirical findings specific to Ebonyi State and the wider South-East region. Nigeria's most comprehensive land tenure reform is the Land Use Act of 1978. Umezulike (1988) claims that the Act was passed in order to curb speculative property transactions, harmonize land tenure systems, and increase the amount of land accessible for government led development. The Act radically changed the relationship between landowners and the state by giving the governor of each state ownership of all land. The Land Use Act of 1978, which centralized property ownership under state administration, is a key piece of legislation governing land tenure in Nigeria. According to Olawale (2018), this legal structure has led to ambiguities in the way land rights are administered, especially when it comes to compensation.  Kejiofor (1999) noted that the Act created dual tenure systems, statutory and customary, which often overlap and cause confusion in implementation. In practice, customary landholders still perceive themselves as true owners of land, even when holding only a statutory certificate of occupancy. In Ebonyi State, where the majority of land is held under customary tenure, this contradiction is particularly acute. The Act gives the government the authority to revoke land rights for public use while mandating compensation, but lack of clarity in terms and conditions frequently results in disputes (Fagbohun, 2005). Okorie (2018) notes, land in rural areas continues to be allocated by traditional leaders and family heads, even though legally, it vests in the governor. This dissonance between law and practice fuels resistance to government revocation orders and disputes over compensation. One of the most contentious elements of the Land Use Act is the revocation of land rights. The Land Use Act Section 28 gives the governor the authority to cancel occupancy rights in cases of overriding public interest. Landowners have frequently suffered as a result of the expansive interpretation of the term public interest. Nwabueze (2020) argues that the term "overriding public interest" is ambiguous and has been used by state governments to defend revocation for non-public objectives, such as allocations to private investors under the pretense of development. Legal authorities have stressed that revocation must be for a legitimate public purpose and must adhere to due process, as demonstrated in cases such as Olatunji v. Military Governor of Oyo State (1994). However, misuse of discretion has tarnished many revocations in practice. According to empirical data from all around Nigeria, proper consultation is rarely a part of revocation procedures. In their research on forcible acquisition in Northern Nigeria, Aliyu and Ahmad (2014) discovered that revocation notices were frequently delivered to landowners without first consulting them. Also many communities in the South-East felt disenfranchised when their land was taken for urban growth projects without their consent. Meanwhile the revocation of rights of occupancy in Nigeria, particularly in states like Ebonyi, raises significant questions regarding land ownership, individual rights, and government authority. This literature review examines existing scholarship on the processes and methodologies involved in the assessment of compensation following the revocation of land rights, highlighting key themes, challenges, and recommendations.  Nwogbaga (2010) criticizes the revocation processes detailed in the Land Use Act. He contends that the notification and hearing processes are often inadequately implemented. Notably, the requirement for formal notification appears muddled by inefficiencies, where landowners are frequently not duly informed about revocations, leading to feelings of disenfranchisement. The inherent lack of transparency undermines public trust as emphasized in studies by Otu (2015), who asserts that it is essential for affected individuals to have access to legal counsel and a clear understanding of their rights during these proceedings. Several challenges inhibit effective revocation and compensation processes. Corruption and bureaucratic inefficiencies are significant barriers, as noted by Akintola (2019). This study outlines how these issues can lead to disputes that prolong the resolution process and ultimately result in injustices for landowners. Additionally, there is a noticeable disparity in compensation levels, often reflecting socio-economic biases, with those from less affluent backgrounds receiving disproportionately lower compensation than wealthier landowners (Adeyemi, 2021). The perspectives of various stakeholders, including government officials, legal practitioners, and affected landowners, play a vital role in understanding the dynamics of land revocation and compensation.  Ibe (2022) indicates that landowners often feel marginalized in the decision-making process. Government officials, while tasked with enforcing land policies, report facing pressures that compromise their ability to adhere strictly to legal frameworks. The methods of assessing compensation traditionally, is calculated using the market value of the land (Olaoye, 2019). However, this method often fails to account for the socio-economic value attached to the land by its owners. According to Balogun (2020), the Replacement Cost Method and the Income Approach should be considered to provide a more accurate representation of potential losses experienced by landowners. Furthermore, the assessment often lacks consistency, leading to inadequate compensation outcomes which have been documented in various case studies across the region (Ekong, 2017). Several researchers advocate improvements to enhance the fairness and effectiveness of the revocation and compensation processes. Otu (2015) suggests implementing standardized procedures for compensation assessments and establishing independent review boards to handle grievances effectively. Balogun (2020) posits that training programs for government officials on ethical land management practices can improve processes and enhance public confidence in the system. The Land Use Act restricts compensation to the value of “unexhausted improvements” on land (Section 29), excluding the land value itself. This has been one of the most criticized aspects of the Act. Okonkwo (2019) argues that this provision contradicts the spirit of Section 44 of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees prompt and adequate compensation for compulsory acquisition. Many Scholars highlight several valuation methods used in Nigeria:

• Replacement Cost Method: Recommended by Ogedengbe and Ayoola (2016) as the most equitable approach for rural structures and crops.
• Depreciated Replacement Cost: Used for older or dilapidated buildings.
• Market Value Approach: Favoured for crops and economic trees, based on prevailing market prices.
• Capitalization of Income: Applied to income-generating properties, such as commercial farms.

Despite these techniques, assessments often fall short. Omirin and Nubi (2013) found that valuation data in Nigeria are often outdated, leading to under compensation.  Adejumo (2020) noted that valuation officers sometimes face political pressure to minimize compensation costs. The inadequacy of compensation has wider socio-economic consequences. Aluko (2012) observes that displacement without fair compensation can lead to impoverishment, social unrest, and loss of trust in government. This aligns with global findings, such as World Bank (2001), which emphasize that compensation should aim not only to indemnify loss but also to restore livelihoods. Ebonyi State, created in 1996, is predominantly agrarian, with rice, yam, cassava, and palm produce as major crops. Land is central to livelihoods, making revocation and compensation particularly sensitive. Several studies have examined land acquisition in the state. Eze (2021) found that most affected farmers perceived government compensation as inadequate, particularly when agricultural land was acquired for mining and road projects. Nwali (2019) reported that delays in compensation payments often exacerbated grievances, with inflation eroding the real value of pay-outs. Also, studies have noted that revocation procedures in Ebonyi often lack transparency. Okorie (2018) observed that many affected communities receive revocation notices without sufficient explanation of the public purpose. In some cases, land acquired for “public interest” was later allocated to private investors, raising suspicions of abuse. These findings are consistent with regional studies in the Nigeria. Onwuchekwa (2020) reported similar experiences in Anambra State, where compulsory acquisition for urban projects triggered prolonged legal disputes. This study seeks to fill these gaps by examining in detail the methods of assessment and revocation processes in Ebonyi State, drawing on both statutory provisions and practical realities.

METHODOLOGY

The techniques of evaluating land and improvements for compensation, as well as the legal administrative procedures for revoking the rights of occupancy in Ebonyi State, Nigeria, were examined using a survey research approach. To get a scientific conclusion, the gathered data was analyzed using the proper statistical methods. The study focused on rural and peri-urban areas of Ebonyi State between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2024, where government acquisitions for public uses such as roads, schools, and health facilities took place. The revocations of customary or statutory rights of possession by state authorities and Local Government Councils, as well as any related compensation processes, were the main focus of this study. The targeted population are the affected persons/households whose rights of occupancy (customary or statutory) were revoked within the study period, institutional actors involved in revocation and compensation, State Ministry of Lands & Survey, State Valuation Office, Local Government Lands Units, State Ministry of Justice, Surveyors, Valuers, representatives from traditional institutions and the documentary corpus like acquisition and revocation instruments for example notices, gazettes, parcel plans, valuation reports, payment vouchers, and relevant court judgments/tribunal decisions. In order to investigate the procedures for revocation of rights of occupancy and ways of determining compensation, the study was conducted in the thirteen local government area of Ebonyi State, Nigeria. The study area is bordered with Benue to the North, Cross River State to the East, Abia and Imo State to the South and Enugu State to the West. The capital of the study area is Abakaliki. Ebonyi State is one of the smallest state in Nigeria having 5935 square kilometers of the land mass. There are thirteen (13) local government area in the state which include Ohaukwu, Ebonyi, Ikwo, Ezza North, Ezza West, Afikpo North, Afikpo South, Ohaozara, Abakaliki, Izzi, Ishielu, Onicha and Ivo. The majority of government infrastructure development and renovation takes place in these local government regions, which results in the revocation of occupation rights and compensation payments. Buildings and other structural improvements of various kinds, including kitchens, yam bans, earth roads, ponds, grave yards, xshrines, groves, woodlands, economic trees, and seasonal farm crops of various species at various stages of growth and maturity, are found on the affected parcels of land. The population for the study was chosen using stratified random sampling techniques. Nwana (2008) observes that “elements in every group are sampled; this assured the full representation of the present population by the sample”.

Table 1 Pattern of Selection of Respondents

Source: Field Survey 2025

Data Analysis Techniques: The data was analyzed using descriptive statistical methods, which quantify percentages, mean scores, variances, and standard deviations. The findings were then displayed in tables.

Data Presentation, Analysis and Discussions 

Tables 2 and 3 show the respondents' greatest levels of education and years of public service.

Table 2: Distribution of Highest Academic Qualifications of the Respondents

Source: Field Survey 2025

The respondents in Table 2 possess adequate academic training, enabling them to understand and confidently respond to the questionnaire's questions. They all possess a first degree or its equivalent in education.

Table 3: Respondents’ Years of Service

Source:  Field Survey202

More than 56% of the respondents have served in the Ministries for more than ten years. As a result, they were aware of how the system worked. The respondents' distributions by professional affiliations, qualifications, and public service are displayed in Tables 4 and 5.

4: Professional Qualifications/Affiliations Respondents