TRACE THE LAND STRUCTURE IN YOUR LOCALITY BEFORE AND AFTER THE PROMULGATION OF THE LAND USE ACT
ABSTRACT
In most of the
Northern States of Nigeria Muslim law has so much ascendancy that it is
difficult to separate customary law from Muslim doctrine. This situation
confuses our understanding of the basis of the land tenure practices found in
the area. The land
tenure system shows ambivalent features and seems to have had its origin in the
traditional African concepts of communal ownership as well as in Islamic
concepts which favour individual ownership. This paper reviews the trace the
land structure in Zaria in Kaduna state, northern Nigeria before after the promulgation of the
Land Use Act.
INTRODUCTION
Land structure is the relationship, whether legally or customarily
defined, among people, as individuals or groups, with respect to land. For
convenience, “land” is used here to include other natural resources such as
water and trees.) Land structure is an institution, i.e., rules invented by societies to
regulate behaviour. Rules of tenure define how property rights to land are to
be allocated within societies. They define how access is granted to rights to
use, control, and transfer land, as well as associated responsibilities and restraints. In simple
terms, land tenure systems determine who can use what resources for how long,
and under what conditions.
Zaria is a major
city in Kaduna State in Northern Nigeria, as well as being a Local
Government Area. Formerly known as Zazzau, it was one of the original seven Hausa city-states. The 2006
Census population was
estimated as 408,198. the town is home to Zazzau Emirate.
The land system
of a given society is the manner in which land is owned and possessed. It is an
institutional framework
within which decisions are taken about the use of land, embodying that legal or
customary arrangement whereby individuals or groups or organizations gain
access to economic and social opportunities through land (Udo, 2003).
The land system
is also constituted
by the rules and procedures which govern the right and responsibilities of both
individuals and groups in the acquisition, use and control of land. They are
inferior in quality and include leaseholds, life interests, kola tenancy,
mortgage, borrowed
interests, pledges, among others (Nwabueze, 1972). The land ownership
structure in Nigeria and Niger state in
particular is based on the absolute
and derivative interests. The structure of ownership of these interests in the
country has evolved through
three major periods.
Land Ownership
in Zaria Before Land Use Act
The predominant
land structure in Zaria a local
government in Kaduna before the enactment of Land Use Act was the customary land tenancy where land holdings
were owned by villages, towns, communities and families. Land was deemed not owned by
individuals but by communities and families in trust for all the family members
(Omuojine, 1999).
The legal
estate under customary land tenancy is vested in the family or community as a
unit. During this
period, land belonged to the community or a vast family of which many are dead,
few are living and countless members yet unborn. Thus
individuals had no such interest as the fee simple absolute in possession as
the actual ownership of land or absolute interest was vested in the community itself. Interests or rights
of individuals in community land were derivative interests.
The following
are the major land structure in zaria before the promulgation of the Land Use
Act:
1. Communal Lands:
The community lands
comprised lands which the entire community has an individual or proprietary
interest. Such community lands were supervised and administered by the chiefs
and traditional rulers.
2. Stool or Chieftaincy lands: The stool or
chieftaincy lands were found mostly among the ruling families and comprised the emir’s palace and the surrounding
lands.
3. Family lands: The family lands were lands
that were vested in the members of the family as a corporate group.
4.
Individual or
Separate property: The family lands were lands that were
vested in the members of the family as a corporate group. Individual
property comprised lands whose title was vested on individuals and was obtained
by partitioning of the family land to individual members of the family.
LAND STRUCTURE AFTER THE LAND USE
ACT
The Land Use Act of 1978 is made up of eight parts of
fifty-one sections. It addresses four important issues arising from the former
land tenure systems in Nigeria: The problem of
lack of uniformity in the laws governing land-use and ownership; the issue of uncontrolled
speculation in urban land; the question of access to land rights by Nigerians
on equal legal basis; and the issue of fragmentation of rural lands arising
from either the application of traditional principles of inheritance and/or population growth and the
consequent pressure on land. It approaches these issues via three related
strategies: the vesting of proprietary rights in land in the State; the
granting of usufructuary rights in land to individuals; and the use of an administrative
system rather than market forces in the allocation of rights in land(Uchendu
1979:71; Francis 1978:12).
In the discussion that follows, the structure of the
Act will be followed. The General principles of the Act state that: subject to
the provisions of this Decree, all land comprised in the territory of each
State in the Federation are hereby vested in the Military Governor of the State and such land shall
be held in trust and administered for the use and common benefit of all
Nigerians. (Nigeria Land Use Act 1978: Part 1: A. 49).
By this provision, the Act altered the existing land
laws (particularly in the Southern part of the country) in three fundamental ways: it removed
corporate .groups, families and chiefs from the trusteeship of land and
replaced them with the State governor; individual interests in land which have
expanded with economic development arising from the 'oil boom' are now one of occupancy and
therefore fall short of the plenary. Consequently, the community's alloidal
interests in land are denied or frozen: and the Act broke up local
sovereignties and merged them into a single sovereign (Uchendu 1979). In part I
titled 'General,' apart from the vesting of all land in the State, the Act also
distinguishes between two types of land - urban and other lands (presumably
rural lands).
While urban lands were placed under the control and
management of the
Governor of the State with a 'Land Use and Allocation Committee' as an advisory
body, on the other hand, 'other lands' were placed under the control and
management of the Local Government in which the land is situated with 'the Land
Allocation Advisory
Committee' (Land Use Act 1978: Sections 2(1 )a and b). Two radical changes flow
from Part 1 of the Act. The legal
status of the Nigerian land user becomes that of statutory occu-pancy, not one of ownership'; and the economic
interests and benefits of 'statutory rights of occupancy are severely limited by law since
proprietary interests in land are lost and claims are restricted to
improvements made on the land.
For the interim management of land, the Act provides
that the land tenure law of Northern Nigeria or the State law of Southern Nigeria shall have
effect with modifications as will bring these laws in conformity with the Act
under review. Furthermore, in Part II of the Act, which introduces the new land
tenure law, distinctions are made between statutory and customary rights of occupancy leading to the
changing of the traditional system or rules of inheritance to land.
Finally, the new tenure system introduced is not only contractual but also a dependent type of tenure. While the Governor is empowered to grant statutory
rights of occupancy within his State, the Local Governments may grant customary
rights of occupancy essentially for agricultural purposes. The grant, however,
may not exceed 500 hectares if used for agricultural purposes or 5,000 hectares if used for grazing.
Part III of the Act deals with rents, its provisions being dictated by two
important policy issues: the political necessity to remove land from market
speculation and the economic imperative of ensuring that available land is 'not banked but used
productively' (Uchendu 1979:79).
Conclusion
It is clear from the foregoing analysis that land structure under the Land Use Act has provided an appropriate enabling environment
for prospective investors, private individuals and other corporate bodies. The various
criticisms of the Land Use Act have provided elements that can move the nation
forward. They clarify options to deal with the issues of the complexity of
rights now streamlined in the Act. This can lead to efficient system of land management. The legal,
institutional and technical frameworks for land management should be linked. It
must be noted however that such legal, institutional and technical frameworks alone do not determine the policy choices. Rather, the choices
define the framework
with which to design an appropriate system of land management.
REFERENCES
No comments:
Post a Comment