AJLHR 5(2) 2021

Page | 1

MECHANISMS FOR ACCESS TO ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IN NIGERIA:

CHALLENGES AND PROSPECTS

Abstract

Environmental justice which has gained greater prominence at the turn of the century

throughout the world implies that citizens of a country have access to the judicial and

administrative mechanisms to obtain effective remedies for the violation of their

environmental rights. This is so because it has become fashionable that the right to a safe

and healthy environment has become a fundamental right that must be protected if

mankind must remain on the surface of the earth. Experience has shown that much as this

is the case, most of the people who are affected by different types of environmental

pollution including oil spillage, water and air pollution are either not aware of their right

to a healthy environment or lack the capacity to enforce them. In other cases, victims of

environmental degradation are inhibited by the high burden of proof required to prove

negligence arising from environmental infractions. As a result, citizens’ access to

environmental justice is greatly hampered. This paper discusses the challenges as well as

the prospects of the mechanisms for environmental justice in Nigeria. The findings made

showed that access to environmental justice is almost non existent in Nigeria due mainly

to a number of obstacles existing in the polity including the problem of locus standi, poor

judicial attitude, the high cost of environmental litigation amongst others. The paper

concludes that the present position is not palatable and recommends that the only way

forward is a total change of attitude towards environmental justice issues as well as

amendment of our laws to include environmental rights as fundamental rights.

Keywords: Environmental justice, Fundamental rights, Mechanisms for Access to

Environmental Justice.

1. Introduction

Environmental justice is a corollary to citizens of a country having access to the judicial

and administrative mechanisms to obtain effective remedies for the violation of their

environmental rights. This is necessary so that the citizens can have a basis to enjoy a

healthy environment. However, experience has shown that there are many factors that

militate against public access to environmental justice in Nigeria. These include the

absence of express provision of environmental rights in the Constitution, absence of

recognition of environmental rights in Nigerian statutes, the conservative attitude of

Nigerian courts towards enforcement of environmental rights, non-deterrent criminal

*By C E IBE, PhD, Professor of Law, Faculty of Law, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Anambra, State

Nigeria; and

*Efiong Okon AKWA, PhD Candidate, Faculty of Law, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Anambra, State

Nigeria

IBE & AKWA: Mechanisms for Access to Environmental Justice in Nigeria: Challenges and

Prospects

Page | 2

provisions for environmental infractions, the requirement of locus standi, the problem of

proof in action founded on the tort of negligence, lack of access to environmental

information as well as poverty, and illiteracy and ignorance. These factors are discussed

under five headings, namely, poorly developed legal framework, poor judicial attitude,

poor attitude to environmental rights advocacy, poor enforcement attitude, and poor

attitude of the citizenry in the following paragraphs.

2. Factors Militating against Public Access to Environmental Justice in Nigeria

Poorly Developed Legal Framework It would almost amount to stating the obvious to posit that the Nigerian legal framework

on public access to environmental justice is poorly developed. This can be seen from the

fact that the right to a clean and healthy environment falls under non-justiciable rights in

Chapter II of the 1999Constitution despite the fact that environmental right is fast

becoming a global trend.1 At present, about 130 countries have made provisions for the

right to a clean and healthy environment in their Constitutions. Out of this number, 60

constitutions expressly make the right to a clean and healthy environment a fundamental

and enforceable right. The authors posit that this is what Nigeria needs to adopt urgently

considering the quantum of pollution going on in the Nigerian environment. This is what

will make Nigeria to be counted amongst the forward- looking countries with regard to

provision for environmental rights.

Apart from enacting environmental rights as part of fundamental rights in the

Constitution, there is the gravitation towards enacting statutory environmental rights as

enforceable rights in accordance with global practice. Some countries provide for the

environmental rights of their citizens in their environmental protection statutes, in addition

to constitutional provisions. Others make the provision exclusive in their environmental

protection statutes. Kenya is a classic example of countries that provide for environmental

rights of their citizens both in their constitution and in their environmental protection

legislation. It is the authors’ view that if Nigeria adopts Kenya’s attitude in this regard, it

will go a long way in not only enhancing the protection of her environment but also in

enhancing public access to environmental justice. This will have the same effect as the

enactment to the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights (Ratification and

Enforcement) Act2which will assist the courts in the interpretation and enforcement of

environmental rights as it does with fundamental rights provisions.

1B A Oloworaran, ‘The Right to a Clean and Healthy Environment and the Fundamental Rights Provisions of

the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999’ [2009] (1) (2) Petroleum, Natural Resources and

Environmental Law Journal 1, 53. 21983, Cap A9, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria [LFN] 2004 [ACHPR Ratification Act 2004], art 24.

AJLHR 5(2) 2021

Page | 3

Further on poorly developed legal framework with regard to public access to

environmental justice, it is trite that Nigerian environmental statutes and regulations are

replete with provisions criminalising violations of environmental standards, regulations

and guidelines. Violations of these provisions attract punishment in the form of

imprisonment, fine or both. Criminal sanctions are provided for environmental

degradation and infractions under the following legislation: Criminal Code,3 National

Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (Establishment) Act,4

National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (Establishment)

(Amendment) Act,5National Oil Spill Detection and Response Agency Act,6

Environmental Impact Assessment Act,7 Oil in Navigable Waters Act (ONWA),8 Harmful

Wastes (Special Criminal Provisions, Etc) Act,9 Oil Terminal Dues Act, (OTDA)10

Associated Gas Re Injection Act,11 Associated Gas (Continued Flaring of Gas)

Regulations12the Nigeria Minerals and Mining Act13 and the NMMA Regulations14

amongst others. It is the opinion of the authors that the criminal sanctions provided under

these statutes are weak, ineffective and does not possess the deterrent character to make a

real impact on those prepared to violate the public’s environmental rights. This explains

why the laws are violated with impunity by oil and gas companies in Nigeria.

Another obstacle towards enhancing public access to environmental justice is the clear

absence of effective administrative remedies in our laws. This is so because the Nigerian

legislative framework for environmental protection lacks administrative platforms for

accessing remedies in the event of the violation or threatened violation of environmental

standards and regulations. This lacuna makes access to remedy which is an inextricable

cornerstone of environmental justice unrealisable except through the court system with

the concomitant delays. The establishment of an agency charged with the investigation

of complaints bordering on violation or threatened violation of environmental standards

and regulations and which is imbued with power to issue or dispense with administrative

remedies such as, injunction, cancellation/revocation of approvals and permits,

compensation and sanctions will greatly enhance public access to environmental justice.

3Criminal Code 2004. 4No. 25 of 2007 [NESREA Act 2007]. 5NESREA Amendment Act 2018. 6No. 15 of 2006 (as Amended by the National Oil Spill Detection and Response Agency (Amendment) Act

2010) [NOSDRA Act 2006]. 71992, Cap E12, LFN 2004 [EIA Act 2004]. 81988, Cap O6, LFN 2004 [ONWA 2004]. 91988, Cap H14, LFN 2004 [Harmful Waste Act 2004]. 101988, Cap O8, LFN 2004 OTDA 2004]. 111979, Cap A10, LFN 2004 [AGRA 2004]. 12Regulation No. 43 of 1984. 13No. 20 of 2007 [NMMA 2007]. 14Regulation No. of 2011.

IBE & AKWA: Mechanisms for Access to Environmental Justice in Nigeria: Challenges and

Prospects

Page | 4

The benefits of such administrative mechanisms to the enhancement of public access to

justice cannot be over-emphasised. The procedures for initiation of complaints should be

simple and conducted in an informal style, and the cost of obtaining justice is likely going

to be cheap. Kenya has this kind of arrangement under the Environmental Management

Coordination Act15 as amended by the Environmental Management Coordination

(Amendment) Act.16 The EMCA established the Public Complaints Committee at the

centre and across the Counties of Kenya. This has been replaced with the National

Environmental Complaints Committee with similar geographical and country-wide

spread. The main function of the Committee is to receive and investigate complaints

bordering on violations or threatened breach of environmental standards, guidelines and

regulations. The Committee also dispenses appropriate remedy, including compensation.

The authors believes that if such powers are given to the NESREA, NOSDRA, DPR and

related institutions, it will accord those institutions with proper administrative powers to

settle issues of public access to environmental justice in Nigeria rather than through the

courts.

Poor Judicial Attitude towards Enforcement of Environmental Rights

Apart from the issue of poorly developed legal framework, the poor attitude of the courts

to enforcement of environmental rights also accounts for the lack of public access to

environmental justice in Nigeria. Granted that the right to a clean and healthy environment

is not expressly constitutionalized as a fundamental right but as a fundamental objective

and directive principle of State policy, the courts in Nigeria have shown consistent and

abiding reluctance to implement environmental right as an inextricable component of

other enforceable human rights under the 1999 Constitution. Such rights that can be used

to enforce the right to a clean and healthy environment in Nigeria include: right to life17

right to dignity of the human person,18 right to personal liberty19, right to family and

private life20 and rights to property.21 In contrast, courts in India,22 Pakistan23 the

Philippines24 and Bangladesh25 have, in the face of absence of explicit recognition of an

enforceable right to clean and healthy environment in their countries’ respective

Constitutions, creatively expanded the scope of the fundamental rights to life and dignity

to include the right to a clean, safe and healthy environment.

15Cap 387, Revised Laws of Kenya 2012 [EMCA 1999], s 31(1). 16 EMCA (Amendment) Act No. 5 of 2015, s 20(a). 171999 Constitution, s 33(1) 18Ibid, s 34(i). 19Ibid, s 35(i). 20Ibid, s 37(i). 21Ibid, s 43. 22Gaur v State of Haryana (1995) 2 AIR 577 SC; MC Mehta v Union of India (1988). 23Zia v WAPDA PLD (1994) SC 693. 24Minors Oposa v Secretary of the Department of Environmental and Natural Resources 33 ILM 173 (1994). 25Farooque v Bangladesh (1997) 49 Dhaka Law Reports 1.

AJLHR 5(2) 2021

Page | 5

In Nigeria, attempts to get the courts to read environmental right into the civil and political

rights enshrined in Chapter IV of the 1999 Constitution, particularly the right to life, has

not yielded positive results yet. The only reported case in Nigeria in which the court has

mustered enormous courage and displayed uncommon creativity to hold that the right to

a healthy environment in Nigeria is enforceable as inextricable element of the rights to

life and dignity of the human person, and that it will be a contradiction in terms to protect

the these rights while neglecting the protection of the environment is the case of Gbemrev

SPDC26. However, since 2005 when this landmark decision was delivered, there appears

to be nothing cheering about the triumph of environmental rights. This has slowed down

the development of environmental rights jurisprudence in Nigeria as it is the trend in other

jurisdictions.

Another major obstacle to the realisation of public access to environmental justice in

Nigeria is the high cost of environmental litigation. By its nature, environmental litigation

requires scientific evidence to prove the cause of the pollution as well as the damage on

the environment. The cost of engaging the services of professionals, such as legal

practitioners, valuers and environmental scientists to prepare damage assessment reports

and undertake prosecution of claims in court is high and not many people can afford it.

This costs a lot of money which may not be available to poor vulnerable communities

which are victims of environmental pollution. Thus, it is this factor that is responsible for

the very low number of pollution cases.

Added to the above is the congestion of the cause lists and the protracted nature

environmental rights claims. It is a well-known fact in Nigeria that the cause lists has been

blamed as one of the reasons for the slow pace of justice dispensation in Nigeria. This is

especially true in environmental pollution claims. Usually, claims for compensation for

environmental pollution in Nigeria are made against Multinational Oil Corporations

(MNOCs) like Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC) which have limitless

financial war-chests to defend the claim up the appeal ladder in a back and forth

movement. Sometimes, and this is always the case, the defendant takes up preliminary

points on appeal as a way of slowing down the progress of the proceedings. The net result

is that a single matter may last in court for between 20-30 years before it is finally

resolved. In most cases, the original claimants would have died and vital pieces of

evidence would have been lost with the passage of time. More sadly, the claimants may

abandon the claim due to frustration with the twists and turns associated with contested

litigation. A case in point is Agbara v SPDC27 which is still in court over enforcement of

the judgment as at the time of writing of this paper. This case was first filed in 1976 at the

26(Unreported) Suit No. PHC/CS/B/153/2005 (Unreported judgment of the Federal High Court Benin

Division delivered on 14 November 2005); (2005) AHRLR 151 (NGHC 2005). 27Suit No: FHC/PH/CS/231/2001 later renumbered as Suit No: FHC/ASB/57/2010.

IBE & AKWA: Mechanisms for Access to Environmental Justice in Nigeria: Challenges and

Prospects

Page | 6

High Court of Rivers State holden in Nchia. As a result of the vesting of exclusive

jurisdiction in oil and gas matters in the Federal High Court by the Federal High Court

(Amendment) Decree,28the matter was re-filed and heard in the Federal High Court, Port

Harcourt in 2001 and heard de novo. Judgment was given in 2010 and judgment on final

appeal to the Supreme Court of Nigeria was delivered in 2019 – spanning 44 years of legal

battle. The case is still not yet over as SPDC (the defendant) has refused to pay the

judgment sum and accumulated interests. The claimants are currently in the High Court

of Rivers State holden in Port Harcourt to enforce the judgment.29 It is not yet certain

when the appeals which are expected to proceed out of the enforcement proceedings

before the High Court will be resolved up to the Supreme Court for the claimants to reap

the fruits of their victory.

Part of the problem emanating from poor judicial attitude is the absence of a court

specifically established to deal with environmental issues and claims. It has been

established that the delay in the conclusion of environmental pollution claims in Nigeria

is caused by the crowded nature of courts’ cause lists. Therefore, to enhance greater public

access to environmental justice, a special court with jurisdiction to hear and determine

matters relating to violations or threats of violations of environmental standards needs to

be established. The establishment of this specialised court made up of experts in

environmental science and environmental law will ensure that environmental justice is

dispensed expeditiously, justly, proportionately and in an accessible manner. Other

jurisdictions, such as Kenya and India, have established special courts to handle

environmental claims. The court in Kenya is called the Environment and Land Court while

India designates its environmental court as the National Green Tribunal. This has greatly

reduced the burden on the conventional courts with the additional benefit of this

innovation being the expeditious conclusion of cases. In Nigeria, sadly, there is no such

court. This has forced seekers of justice for breaches of environmental regulation to

navigate the tortuous route to justice through the regular courts with the attendant delays,

such as the notorious case of Agbara v SPDC30where the quest for justice is still dragging

on 44 years after the matter was first filed.

Poor Attitude to Environmental Rights Advocacy Public access to environmental justice in Nigeria has been tempered by issues relating to

environmental advocacy. This includes inadequate environmental rights advocacy. It is

said that information is power and the people perish for lack of knowledge.31. The local

communities and individuals who are victims of environmental injustice are likely to

assert their rights if they are enlightened about the activities taking place in their

28No. 60 of 1991 [FHC Amendment Decree 1991], s 7(b), 7(3) and 7(5). 29 Suit No: PHC/1696/2019. 30(n 87). 31Holy Bible, Hosea 4:6 (King James Version).

AJLHR 5(2) 2021

Page | 7

communities and how those activities impact adversely on their health, livelihood and

ecosystem. Though there is a preponderance of environmental rights NGOs in Nigeria,

majority of them are mushroom organisations without clear-cut and visible structure, solid

financial base, and credible leadership. These limitations make them invisible in the fields

where they are desperately needed in terms of enlightenment and education of the local

people. The result of this insufficient environmental rights advocacy is that the local

people do not possess sufficient information necessary to assert their environmental rights.

Akin to the foregoing problem is the limited public-spirited environmental rights litigation

regime. One factor that has sparked off the development of environmental rights

jurisprudence in other jurisdictions is the increased involvement of environmental

protection-focused NGOs in environmental litigation. Leveraging on the expanded locus

standi provisions in the laws of such countries, the NGOs have embarked on public

interest litigations as a means of defending the right of the poor and vulnerable

communities who are continuously subjected to environmental degradation, and to hold

both the regulators and polluters to a high standard of environmental consciousness and

accountability. In Nigeria, this is not the case. Apart from the Socio-Economic Rights

and Accountability Project (SERAP), the Social and Economic Rights Action Centre

(SERAC) and the Centre for Economic and Social Rights (CESR), and a few foreign

NGOs such as Friends of the Earth and Amnesty International which have successfully

prosecuted claims for environmental pollution on behalf of vulnerable communities in the

Niger Delta region of Nigeria both in the African human rights courts and foreign courts,

not much has been done by environmental-focused NGOs in this regard. It could be argued

that two factors are responsible for this dearth of public interest litigations spearheaded

by NGOs in Nigeria. The first is the issue of locus standi and the second factor is the

failure of Nigerian courts to give expansive interpretation to the civil and political right

contained in Chapter IV of the 1999 Constitution. This could explain why SERAC and

SERAP have prosecuted their environmental claims mainly before the African Court of

Justice and Human Rights (ACJHR) and the ECOWAS Community Court of Justice

(ECCJ) where legal standing is expressly accorded to environmental-focused NGOs.

Poor Enforcement Attitude Another major hindrance to the attainment of acceptable public access to environmental

justice in Nigeria is absence of effective enforcement regime. Poor attitude to enforcement

of environmental laws and regulations is one of the factors militating against public access

to environmental justice in Nigeria and it is manifested in two main ways namely

ineffectiveness of monitoring and regulatory authorities and corruption of regulatory

authorities and politicization of environmental issues. This section discusses how this poor

enforcement attitude impinges on public access to environmental justice in Nigeria. One

of the banes of diminished public access to environmental justice in Nigeria is the absence

of effective enforcement of the extant environmental laws and regulations by regulatory

IBE & AKWA: Mechanisms for Access to Environmental Justice in Nigeria: Challenges and

Prospects

Page | 8

institutions. The relevant enforcement authorities in Nigeria saddled with the

responsibility of specification of environmental standards, monitoring and enforcement

are NESREA, NOSDRA, DPR, and the Minister of Petroleum Resources. These

enforcement authorities are required to enforce the FOI Act,32 NESREA Act,33 Harmful

Waste Act34, ONWA,35 OTDA36 and the regulations made under the NESREA Act. The

Ministry of Environment has responsibility for formulation of the policy framework for

the protection of the environment. The NOSDRA is charged with the functions of

detecting and co-ordinating responses to oil spillage, including the enforcement of clean

up by the polluters. On his part, the Minister of Petroleum Resources is saddled with the

task of making regulations governing oil and gas operations in Nigeria while the DPR has

responsibility for setting and enforcement of environmental standards in the petroleum

industry. Implementation activities include monitoring, supervision, granting or denial of

approvals, suspension or revocation of licences or operations permits, inspection and

search of premises, as well as the arrest and prosecution of offenders. These agencies and

institutions require adequate financial resources, trained personnel, logistics and up-to-

date technology to function at their optimal levels. Sadly, these implementation resources

are not always provided, and where they exist, they are not in sufficient proportion. The

inadequate operational capabilities of enforcement agencies in turn culminate in little or

no implementation of regulations and environmental guidelines.

The other part of poor enforcement attitude militating against public access to

environmental justice is with regard to corruption of the regulatory authorities and the

politics played with issues concerning the environment. It has been claimed that

corruption has eaten deep into the fabric of the Nigerian society. Nowhere is this

cankerworm more visible than in the enforcement of environmental standards, especially

in the oil and gas industry.37 Under the NESREA Act, officers of NESREA are authorised

to enter any premises of any individual or corporate body to search, detain, arrest and

prosecute any person who violates environmental standards. Similar powers are given to

the NOSDRA, DPR and other authorities. Ladan has suggested that the failure of the

regulatory agencies to discharge their duties could be due to corruption.38In Gbemre v

SPDC,39 the manner in which the trial judge was hurriedly transferred out of jurisdiction

32(n 44). 33(n 11). 34 (n 16). 35(n 15). 36(n 17). 37H Ijaiya and O.T Joseph, ‘Rethinking Environmental Law Enforcement in Nigeria’ (2014) (5) Beijing Law

Review 306-321,315. 38S I Ladan, ‘The Environment and Environmental Law in Nigeria’ (2007) (1) Environmental Watch Journal

323-242, 239 39United Nations Environment Programme, Environmental Assessment of Ogoniland (Nairobi: United

Nations Environment Programme 2011)

AJLHR 5(2) 2021

Page | 9

while still supervising the enforcement of the order he made in the case and the miraculous

disappearance of the case file to make it difficult for the orders made against the

respondent (SPDC) to be implemented, are facts that suggest that corruption is a major

bane of failure of public access to environmental justice in Nigeria. Apart from corruption,

politicisation of environmental issues is also another factor impeding public access to

environmental justice in Nigeria. Successive administrations in Nigeria have politicised

environmental decision-making and policies instead of addressing environmental

challenges facing the country the way it should be done. For instance, despite the report

of studies of the deleterious impact of oil pollution on the health, economy and

environment of Niger Delta communities, gas flaring is still permitted under Nigerian

laws.

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) undertook an environmental

assessment of Ogoniland in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria. The report of the study

which was submitted to the Federal Government of Nigeria in 2011 made damning

findings on the public health issues. The UNEP team indicted SPDC in its findings and

based on the findings, the UNEP recommended certain emergency measures to be

implemented by the Federal Government of Nigeria before the formal commencement of

clean-up activities. The most pressing of these emergency measures is that the Ogoni

Restoration Authority (ORA) which is recommended to undertake the clean-up should

ensure that ‘all drinking water wells where hydrocarbons were detected are marked and

that people are warned of the danger’.40 Similarly, the UNEP recommended that ORA

should ‘provide adequate sources of drinking water to households whose drinking water

supply is impacted’.41 Most importantly, UNEP recommended that the ‘[P]eople in

Nsisioken Ogale who have been consuming water with benzene over 900 times WHO

guideline are recorded on a medical registry and their health status assessed and followed

up’.42 It is sad that the implementation of the clean-up of Ogoniland more than 11 years

after the submission of the report by UNEP in 2011 is still being politicized by successive

administrations in Nigeria. In June 2016, the Federal Government of Nigeria announced

the flag off of the implementation of the report. However, from June 2016 till date, the

emergency measures recommended by the report are yet to be implemented despite

pressures from the Ogoni people. The implication is that Ogoni people have suffered and

will continue to suffer the public health issues intended to be averted through the

implementation of the emergency measures.43To date, the implementation of the report

<https://www.postconflict.unep.ch/publications/OEA/UNEP_CEApdf> accessed 28 March 2020 [UNEP

Report 2011]. 40 (n 100) 205. 41Ibid. 42Ibid. 43C UKpong, ‘Cleanup Project: Ogoni People Threaten to Protest against Federal Government’, Premium

Times (Port Harcourt, 16 January2019) <https://www.premiumtimesng.com/regional/south-south-

IBE & AKWA: Mechanisms for Access to Environmental Justice in Nigeria: Challenges and

Prospects

Page | 10

has been heavily politicised. The result is that that recommendation has not been

implemented as the government is still playing politics with the lives of its people.

Poor Attitude of the Citizenry While it is true that the government shares the bulk of the blame as to the lack of public

access to environmental justice in Nigeria, it has to be admitted that the citizenry has its

own share of the blame. Several factors contribute to this state of affairs. They include

the literacy level and ignorance of majority of citizens to the existence of environmental

rights and the high cost of environmental litigation amongst others. It will amount to

stating the obvious to assert that the literacy level in Nigeria is pretty high. Majority of

these illiterate persons are not even aware of their environmental rights. For this reason,

it is difficult if not impossible for them to engage the authorities when confronted with

environmental issues or to enforce such rights. This explains why villagers continue to

drink from contaminated water sources, scoop crude oil spilled from oil facilities or even

contribute to environmental pollution through activities such as bush burning,

deforestation, burning of wastes at dump sites, sabotage of oil facilities and artisanal crude

oil refining which is popularly called kpo fire or oil bunkering. These activities carried

out in ignorance have caused catastrophic environmental degradation in most

communities, especially in the Niger Delta region. Another factor responsible for

restricted public access to environmental justice in Nigeria is poverty. Majority of the

people in Nigeria live below the poverty line and the cost of successfully undertaking

environmental pollution claims is extremely high. The cost of engaging the services of

professionals such as legal practitioners, valuers and environmental scientists is high and

not many people can afford it. This lack of financial muscle to undertake pollution

litigations against wealthy oil and gas companies usually forces the victims into accepting

crumbs in the guise of out-of-court settlement.

3. Prospects

The preceding part of this paper has discussed the challenges of public access to

environmental justice in Nigeria. But it is not all gloom as the prospect of attaining the

high standard required by best practices in this area is very bright. All that is required is

the willingness on the part of the government to take the appropriate steps required to

make it work. In order to lay to rest with finality the raging argument and confusion about

the justiciability or otherwise of environmental rights in Nigeria, the 1999 Constitution

should be amended to make express provisions for the right to a clean and healthy

environment as an enforceable fundamental right. In the proposed amendment, Section 20

of the Constitution should be transposed to Chapter IV of the Constitution with detailed

provisions on its breadth. In the alternative or in addition, several relevant conventions

regional/306022-cleanup-project-ogoni-people-threaten-to-protest-against-federal-government.html>

accessed 23 March 2020.

AJLHR 5(2) 2021

Page | 11

and treaties to which Nigeria is signatory should be domesticated in order to give them

the force of law as a basis to enforce and implement environmental rights of the people.

In this regard also, apart from making environmental right a constitutional right.

The right to a clean and healthy environment should be made an enforceable right in a

further amended NESREA Act or in a fresh Environmental Act consolidating some of the

various pieces of environmental legislation in Nigeria into a single Act. In order to further

enhance public access to environmental justice, the criminal sanctions provided under the

environmental protection laws in Nigeria should be made stiffer in order to deter the

violations of environmental standards and regulations with impunity. It will also do the

system a lot of good if we can liberalize the requirement of locus standi in environmental

litigation. In this regard, the 1999 Constitution should be amended to expressly provide

that a person alleging the violation of the right to clean and healthy environment shall

have the capacity to bring the action notwithstanding that such a person cannot show that

the defendant’s act or omission has caused or is likely to cause him any personal loss or

injury. In other words, a person bringing an application for the enforcement of

environmental right should not be required to demonstrate that he/she possesses locus

standi. The only caveat should be that such action should not be frivolous or vexatious or

an abuse of the court process.

In addition, public access to environmental justice will be greatly enhanced if there is a

liberal judicial construction of environmental rights. In the absence of explicit recognition

of an enforceable right to a clean and healthy environment in the 1999 Constitution,

Nigerian courts can expand the scope of the fundamental rights to life and dignity to

include the right to a clean, safe and healthy environment. This is called judicial activism

and it is part of our judicial jurisprudence. Furthermore, to ensure that environmental

justice is dispensed expeditiously, justly, proportionately and in an accessible manner, the

1999 Constitution should be amended to make provisions for the establishment of an

environmental court with jurisdiction to hear and determine matters relating to violations

or threaten violations of environmental standards. In addition, the establishment,

composition, jurisdiction and personnel of the court should be set out in an Environmental

Court Act. The personnel of this specialised court should be made up of experts drawn

from environmental science and environmental law with profound knowledge in the area.

4. Conclusion It has been shown in this work that there is a dire need of a conducive atmosphere for the

attainment of public access to environmental justice in Nigeria. For this to be achieved,

the challenges discussed in this work have to be overcome. It is true that the present

situation leaves much to be desired but that is not the end of the world for environmental

justice in this country. The prospects exist for a revitalized and a turnaround of the

situation if the points raised in this paper are adhered to by the powers that be. Government

IBE & AKWA: Mechanisms for Access to Environmental Justice in Nigeria: Challenges and

Prospects

Page | 12

should show a willingness to not only put in place necessary statutory provisions but also

to give effect to such laws in order to boost public access to environmental justice. To

complement this effort by the government, local and international NGOs should leverage

on an expanded locus standi provisions of our laws to embark on public interest litigations

as a means of defending the rights of the poor and vulnerable communities who are

continuously subjected to environmental degradations, and to hold both the regulatory

authorities and polluters to a high standard of environmental consciousness and

accountability. Furthermore, NGOs and civil society groups should intensify

environmental rights advocacies as a means of enlightening the communities and

individuals of their rights to clean, safe and healthy environment under Nigerian law. Such

awareness campaigns which should be taken to all nooks and crannies of the country

should enlighten the people on the dangers of activities that are detrimental to the

environment. When this is done, we can dare to say that we are on the right part to

enhancing public access to environmental justice in Nigeria.