Introduction
Self-help is the act of taking personal steps to protect your rights or address a given situation affecting you without recourse to court or any authority. It has become a cliché that self-help is unlawful. But this sweeping statement is less than accurate. We are familiar with certain exercise of rights such as right of lien, right to set-off a debt against a payment, and abatement of nuisance. For example, in exercising the right of lien, you may seize an asset belonging to your debtor which is in your possession until the debtor pays the debt owed to you. In set-off (where there are mutual debts), you have the right to deduct any amount owed to you before paying over what you owe to the other. Also, if a branch of your neighbour’s tree grows into your compound, you can cut off the branch from your end to stop the nuisance. In the old case of Umeobi v. Otukoya, the Supreme Court held that:
[A] person who has taken action to abate a nuisance may act lawfully even though his action is extra-judicial.
Each of these instances represents a form of resort to self-remedy in protecting one’s interest and it is a lawful exercise. In support of this view, renowned professor of real property law, Prof. Emeka Chianu, holds the view that indeed, self-remedy is not repugnant to our legal system. Prof. Chianu came to this inevitable conclusion after plumbing and probing through myriads of cases decided by the courts.
Of course, there are some instances where resorting to self-help is deemed unlawful and discouraged. One major example is in a situation where a matter is already pending in court. In such instances, parties are expected to await the court’s decision and abide by it.
Watch Out
Nevertheless, when certain situations leave your destiny in your own hands, you may need to take the law into your own hands too. The law is portable and flexible to hold.
More so, in a society where court cases last for tens of years and the phrase “Go to court” has fast become a taunting statement, it is important to watch out. Thus, there is a need for us to clarify a few legal issues relating to self-help, especially in land matters.
The position as succinctly stated by Prof. Chianu in his book, Law of Trespass to Land and Nuisance, is that “[a] landowner is at liberty to use reasonable force to recover his land from a squatter without being liable for trespass to land.”
Wike and Yerima Faceoff
Note, if you are in possession of a land or landed property which you reasonably believe legally belongs to you, by all reasonable means, protect your possession from the activities of adversaries who do not approach you with any valid court order. This was what seems to have played out in the trending story involving the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike, and a Navy Lieutenant, A. M. Yerima, over the development of a plot of land in Abuja.
Details of the controversy are still sketchy. But from available information, it was reported that the issue relates to a piece of land being developed on behalf of the former Chief of Naval Staff, Vice Admiral Awwal Zubairu Gambo (Rtd), who is said to own the property. However, the FCT Administration was of the position that the land was being illegally occupied and developed, as the allocation over the land had been revoked.
In a classic case of self-help, the former Naval Chief mobilised military men to protect his alleged property from an attempted demolition exercise by the FCT Administration. Leading the team was Lt. A. M. Yerima.
Upon being informed of the development, the FCT Minister, armed with the weapon of vituperative missiles, and in company of armed policemen, approached the site for a showdown. The high-point of the faceoff was captured in a viral video published by Channels Television. The video showed the Minister challenging Yerima in a heat of rage. But with wit, discipline, and bold composure, Yerima respectfully held his ground, while his men, who were armed to the teeth, stood beside him to prevent the demolition.
After the interesting encounter, the Minister and his entourage returned to their offices while booking a session with the press. Subsequently, it was reported that officials of the FCT Administration Development Control Department withdrew the bulldozer earlier deployed for the demolition. The matter is now under full investigation.
Power of the FCT Minister to enter Land
It is important to note that by virtue of Section 11 of the Land Use Act, the FCT Minister is empowered to enter and inspect land (including any improvements on it) within the FCT at any reasonable hours in the day time.
However, this power does not automatically include the power to facilitate a demotion exercise unless there is satisfactory proof that due process was followed which would necessarily involve the service of relevant notices to the affected persons.
From the reports and available information, it was doubtful if the FCT Minister was on a mission to merely enter and inspect the disputed land and the ongoing improvements being carried out by the ex Naval Chief.
Conclusion
Therefore, while there are arguments regarding the conduct of both sides, that is the FCT Administration (led by the FCT Minister) and Yerima (on behalf of the former Naval Chief), the point remains that it is difficult to conclude that the self-help action of the Military Chief in protection of his alleged legal rights over the property is illegal. In my opinion, if the retired Naval Chief has no right over the property, the FCT Administration must ensure that it follows due process in dealing with the matter decisively and possibly approach the court for a declaration in that regard, and to obtain coercive orders of court including claim for damages.
