Justice Hyeladzira Nganjiwa of the Federal High Court, Warri Judicial Division, on Tuesday reserved judgment in a constitutional suit filed by the Incorporated Trustees of the Centre for Human Rights and Anti-Corruption Crusade (CHURAC), representing oil-producing host communities in Nigeria.
The suit contests the constitutionality of Sections 257(2) and (3) of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA), 2021, arguing that these provisions conflict with the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).
The Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, the Senate President, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives are named as defendants in the suit.
Justice Nganjiwa reserved judgment after all parties adopted their final written addresses.
Mrs. B.E. Oghenekaro represented the plaintiff, while K.K. Akpule appeared for the 1st defendant. Dr. Abiodun Adesanya, alongside A.A. Affe, represented the 2nd defendant. There was no appearance for the 3rd defendant.
The plaintiff is seeking a declaration that Sections 257(2) and (3) of the PIA — which hold host communities liable for vandalism, sabotage, or civil unrest that damages petroleum facilities — violate the constitutional rights to fair hearing and presumption of innocence.
The suit argues that these provisions amount to “a bill of attainder” by imposing collective punishment without trial, representing an unconstitutional usurpation of judicial powers by the legislature.
CHURAC also challenges the fairness of allocating only 3% of oil companies’ actual annual operating expenditures to host community development, while 30% is allocated for frontier exploration. The group contends that this disparity is discriminatory and violates Section 42 of the Constitution.
The constitutional questions raised include:
-
“Whether any person or community can be punished or held liable for an offence without trial.”
-
“Whether the National Assembly can enact laws that oust or undermine the jurisdiction of courts.”
-
“Whether holding host communities responsible for sabotage without judicial process violates their constitutional rights.”
-
“Whether host communities have any control over the security or management of petroleum facilities in their areas.”
-
“Whether the PIA’s revenue-sharing formula unfairly discriminates against host communities.”
CHURAC further argues that the PIA provisions deny host communities their right to a fair hearing, as guaranteed under Sections 36(1), (2), (3), and (5) of the Constitution, and that Section 257(2) effectively convicts host communities in advance, bypassing judicial processes.
The reliefs sought include:
-
A declaration that Sections 257(2) and (3) of the PIA are unconstitutional and void.
-
An order compelling the defendants to amend the PIA to include host communities in NNPC Limited’s profit oil and profit gas, with not less than 10% of the production sharing quota allocated to them.
-
A declaration that holding host communities responsible for sabotage or unrest amounts to unconstitutional discrimination.
The case highlights long-standing grievances over the marginalization of oil-producing communities, who suffer the environmental consequences of extraction but receive minimal benefits from oil revenues.
Justice Nganjiwa is expected to deliver judgment on a date to be communicated to the parties.
