CHAPTER ONE
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
1.1 Historical Background
Before the advent of British rule, communities in present day Nigeria
utilized customary methods in the settlement of environmental disputes. Thus,
the management of the environment in most Nigerian communities is based on
customary law concept where this has been modified or repealed by statute. The
number of customary laws may be as many as the number of ethnic-groups. There
are about 300 ethnic groups in Nigeria.1 Thus in the same state or among the same tribe there exist numerous
customary laws.2 The various customs of different ethnic groups and communities in
Nigeria contain remedies for environmental pollution. For example, in the Iroko
community bush burning under customary law is prohibited. A violation of this
law will lead to the arrest of the offender who is taken before the village
head who imposes fine on the offender.3 Bush burning has a negative effect on the environment as it pollutes
the air, and the fire spreads uncontrollable and on several instances destroyed
large areas of land and also causes serious damage to other valuables. For
example, in the case of Busari Adediga
V. Abati.4 The plaintiff wrote the defendant requesting that he be informed when
thedefendant would set fire to his
farm to enable the plaintiff protect his property. The defendant claimed to
have informed the plaintiff although the plaintiff denied. The
- Adewale, O. Customary Environmental Law.
In Ajomo and Adewale (eds) Environmental
Law and Sustainable Development in
Nigeria NIALS Lagos and The British Council 1994 p 158.
- Obilade, A.O Nigeria Legal System, Sweet
and Maxwell London 1979 p.83.
- Ake ‘A’ Native Court 50/1934.
1
defendant set fire to him farm and went fishing while the farm was
burning. The fire went out of control and destroyed the plaintiff’s farm. The
customary court held that although bush burning is an acceptable customary
practice, the defendant was liable for damage to the plaintiff‟s property.
Similarly, among the Egbas there exists customary law governing the
general use of the stream and pollution. This practice, Adewale5 opined is uniform to some extent
amongst various communities and state further that it is also the general
practice in the eastern part of Nigeria. Customary law in most part of Nigeria
prohibits trespassing, for example, in the north where Nomads move from one
place to another for the purpose of grazing their animals. Often animals
trespass into farm land and victims claim damages arising from their act6. These customary laws of various
communities have been enforced long before the advent of colonial rule. Thus
Amokaye7 refers to this period as the first stage of development of
environmental law in Nigeria.
The introduction of common law principles and statutory laws by the
colonial administration to regulate pollution activities marked the beginning
of the second era. Under the common law principles, which forms part of
Nigerian legal system it provides means for the institution of legal action for
pollution under spheres of nuisance, negligence, trespass to land and the rule
in Rylands
v. Fletcher8. It should be noted that, nuisance are two types, private and public
nuisance which by definition is said to be:
- Amokaye, G.O. Environmental Law and practice in Nigeria, University of Lagos
Press, Akoka 2004. Pg.2
- Nwosu, L.E. Appropriate Mechanism for Enforcement Claim Juriscope, 1st
Edition, Corporate Design Consult, Ikeja, Lagos, 2001 pg.187.
2
‘Unlawful interference with a person’s use or enjoyment of land or some
right over or connected with it’9
While on negligence this is one of the most frequently entrusted common law means of instituting legal action by the victims of environmental pollution. Negligence may be an ingredient of another tort. For example Nuisance in common law, under which victims of environmental pollution may seek remedies of damage for trespass to land. This is said to be unjustifiable introduction by a person upon the land by another. Here defendant conduct must be intentional and not careless and to succeed the damage which results most be direct consequence of defendant’s act10. Furthermore on common law victims of pollution must invoke duty of care which the defendant has breached that entitles the plaintiff to damages. For example, in the case of Onojoke v. Seismograph Services Company Limited11. Also victims of environmental pollution rely on the rulein Rylands v. Fletcher for none natural rule of land and the principle of strict liability in environmental claims.
LEGAL REMEDIES FOR VICTIMS OF ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION IN NIGERIA