The Supreme Court on January 5, 2024 held that the control of activities on the nation’s inland waterways, including levying and licensing of operators in the sector, belongs exclusively to the Federal Government.
The apex court in a judgement authored by Justice John Inyang Okoro and read by Justice Emmanuel Akomaye Agim, therefore restored the judgment delivered on March 28, 2014, by Justice John Tsoho of the Federal High Court, Lagos and accordingly, reversed the July 18, 2017, judgment of the Court of Appeal (Lagos Division), which set aside the Federal High Court judgment.
It particularly held that it was wrong, unlawful and illegal for states to seek to control the sector and impose levies on businesses operating in the nation’s inland waterways.
The Supreme Court specifically held that existing laws give exclusive control of activities in the nation’s inland waterways to the Federal Government through its agencies namely; the National Inland Waterways Authority (NIWA), and the Nigerian Maritime Standard and Safety Agency, (NIMASSA) and no other tiers of government.
The judgment was anchored on the appeal marked SC/CV/17/2018, filed by the NIWA, NIMASSA, the Minister of Mines and Steel Development and the Minister of Transport and filed in 2018 by a team of lawyers led by Prince Lateef Fagbemi SAN, who is presently the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice.
The appellants represented by Fagbemi SAN, had argued that the activities of the Lagos State Waterways Authority (LASWA), created by the Lagos Government, through the enactment of LASWA Law No. 14 of 2008 (LASWA 2008) by the state’s House of Assembly to regulate, develop and manage all aspects of the waterways in Lagos State was unconstitutional.
The apex Court agreed with Fagbemi’s argument that NIWA was the only agency saddled with the responsibility to impose levy and charge rates of utilization along the declared waters of the Nigerian Inland Waterways Authority, adding that NIWA is the rightful and legal agency of the Federal Government with the powers to exclusively manage, direct and control all activities on the navigable waters and its right of way throughout the country for inland navigation, pursuant to Sections 8 and 9 of NIWA Act.
The Supreme Court also agreed with Fagbemi that the activities of the Lagos Government and its agencies constitute a flagrant usurpation and an illegal encroachment on the statutory functions of NIWA since the waterways of Lagos State among others in Nigeria, fall under the Exclusive Legislative List set out in Part 1 of the Second Schedule to the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
The apex court also held that it was only the Federal Government through the National Assembly that can legislate on Maritime Shipping and Navigation, saying that the power to legislate on any subject in the Exclusive Legislative List does not lie with the Lagos State Government.
Respondents to the appeal were the Lagos State Waterways, the state’s Commissioner for Waterfront Infrastructure Development, the state’s Attorney-General, the Governor of Lagos State, the Incorporated Trustees of Association of Tourist Boat Operators and Water Transportation of Nigeria, ATBOWTN, and the Incorporated Trustees of Dredgers Association of Nigeria (DAN).
At the Federal High Court, Justice Tsoho in his judgement held that NIWA and NMSSA were the lawful agencies with authority in matters relating to the commercial activities of ATBOWTN and DAN, who are involved in water tourism, water transportation and sand dredging within the national inland waterways.
Justice Tsoho therefore restrained the Lagos State Waterways Authority and the state’s Commissioner for Waterfront Infrastructural Development from further seeking to control the commercial activities of the plaintiffs – ATBOWTN and DAN.
However, the decision of Federal High Court was set aside by the Court of Appeal in its July 18, 2017 judgment based on the appeal marked CA/L/886/2014, filed by the Governor of Lagos State and three others.
The Court of Appeal held that the Inland Waterways within Lagos State, not captured by the National Inland Waterways Act, are within the legislative competence of the state’s Legislature and that the state could collect taxes/levies on businesses on waterways which start and terminate in the state.
Confronted with a regime of multiple charges by the agencies of both the Federal and Lagos governments, ATBOWTN and DAN in 2012 filed a suit, marked FHC/L/CS/543/2012, at the Federal High Court, Lagos, to determine which tier of government was empowered by extant laws to license and levy business operators on the nation’s inland waterways.
NIWA and three others challenged the Court of Appeal’s decision at the Supreme Court which judgment reversed the decision of the Court of Appeal and affirmed the March 28, 2014 judgment by Justice Tsoho of the Federal High Court.
