News

Land Grabbing, Extractivism, And Climate Change [The Impacts On Communities]

Published

1 year ago

March 20, 2024

Editor

By Nnimmo Bassey

The challenges confronting our communities and people generally are interconnected. They are often analyzed and presented as though they operate in silos. The reality is that they operate in intricately connected webs and must be understood as such. Our lands are grabbed for extractive or exploitative purposes. Extractivism in turn drives climate change. Climate change in turn triggers more extraction, soil
degradation as well as land resource issues. The cycle goes on until we take action to break it. The purpose of this conversation is for us to unpack the components of the crises, locate the critical nodes and points of vulnerability, and act to propel transformation using cultural tools.

We will together look at three key things: Land grabbing, extractivism,
and climate change. As already noted, they are interconnected and are not necessarily hierarchical or sequential.

Land grabbing

Ownership of land in Nigeria was historically in the hands of
individuals or communities. Today, through a military decree promulgated on 29th March 1978, communities have been dispossessed of their lands
while ownership has been claimed by the state, euphemistically on behalf of the dispossessed. By virtue of the overbearing control of the military over the county’s governance structure, that Decree was inserted in the 1999 Constitution and barricaded in as inviolable. In other words, there should be no debate over its operations. The forced supremacy of the Land Use Act can be seen in its section 47 (1) which states that the Act is literally an outlaw and shall have effect notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any law including the constitution.

The Land Use Decree or Act was designed in a colonial template of
resource appropriation that deprives the colonized of the fundamental resource and ensures that it is owned and used to meet the utilitarian needs or other means of enjoyment of the colonizers. Those whose lands are grabbed may only be compensated for the loss of economic crops and improvements on the land. In practice, the compensations have been grossly inadequate, if not outrightly insulting. Consider for example a payment of N100 for a mango tree when one mango fruit could go as much and such a tree would bear hundreds of fruit for several years.

Lands may be grabbed by different means, and for diverse purposes. By the Land Use Act, the government can grab any land by declaring that it is required for the public good. The use of such land would invariably change, with dire consequences. A forest could be cleared and replaced with a plantation or cash crops for export. A poor community could be demolished, the people get displaced and then their territory could be replaced with expensive resorts, hotels, or gated estates. Wetlands can be sand-filled and taken up for infrastructural purposes. The list goes on.

The Nigerian government claims ownership of minerals and petroleum resources in the subsoil. So our lands can be grabbed for mining or oil and gas extraction, ostensibly for the common good. Because this often happens without free prior informed consent, when the people are called stakeholders what it means is that while the company and government share the profits, the communities own the pollution. This is also why such pollution is hardly ever cleaned up.

Land can also be directly grabbed through pollution. Two quick examples can show how this happens. A polluted stream by an oil spill becomes the waste dump of the polluter and usage for fishing or potable water is lost. Secondly, dumping of wastes on a parcel of land takes that land out of the control of communities. Often pollution is not an accidental exercise. It is used to dispose communities of their land and creeks and for the exploiter to assume ownership without accountability, responsibility, or a sense of respect for the owners.

Our quest for development without questions also permits lands to be
grabbed for infrastructural development. Often such lands are taken without prior informed consent.

Our culture and language are tied to our land and our liberation is
connected to both. Our culture nourishes and empowers us to stand against the commodification of Nature and of life. It helps us to defend what belongs to us. It draws boundaries that no one must cross. Our culture is our power!

Extractivism

Extractivism as a concept covers a complex of self-reinforcing
practices, mentalities, and power differentials that promote and excuse socio-ecologically destructive modes of organizing life through colonialism, militarization, depletion, and dispossession. It is a mode of capitalist exploitation…

Although extractivism is used mostly in terms of mining and oil
extraction, it is also present in farming, forestry, fishing, and in the
provision of care. According to an entry in Wikipedia, “Extractivism is
the removal of natural resources particularly for export with minimal
processing. This economic model is common throughout the Global South and the Arctic region, but also happens in some sacrifice zones in the Global North in European extractivism.”

Extractivism destroys lands, pollutes the ocean, and destroys water bodies and wetlands. It results and feeds on land grabs, and sea grabs and is aiming at sky grabs with a rise in space enterprises.

Climate change

The fact that climate change is driven by dependence on fossil fuels — oil, gas, and coal — is well known. The main challenge is that the world keeps a blind eye to what communities suffer in the oil fields and focuses mostly on chasing carbon molecules in the atmosphere. This lack of focus on both ends of the pipeline has left communities destitute by damaging their lands and water bodies and thereby destroying their food systems, economies, and cultures.

The gradual agreement to terminate the petroleum civilization, and Yasunize the world, implies that the time to remediate and restore lands damaged by oil and gas extraction has come. This remediation and restoration must be accompanied by reparation.

Our communities have suffered multiple impacts from climate change, extractivism, and land grabbing. Persistent pollution has been the lot of our communities. Studies such as the UNEP assessment of the Ogoni Environment and the recently published Bayelsa Environment and Oil Commission’s report titled Environmental Genocide all show the dire situation. Some communities have their soils contaminated with hydrocarbons to depths exceeding 10 meters. Waters are polluted with
benzene and other carcinogens. The air is grossly polluted with a
cocktail of noxious gases through gas flaring. These pollution do not
readily disappear on their own. They must be consciously tackled and cleaned up. And the time for that is now.

Other impacts of climate change include sea level rise, coastal erosion and salinization of the ocean. These affect local livelihoods and equally, provoke conflicts or displacement of communities.

Cultural resistance

Our lands are healed when extraction and land grabbing are challenged and overcome. A major tool for successful resistance is our happiness. That is the source of our power. A happy community cannot easily be defeated.

Another key tool is our love. Our love for one another and our love for our land and culture. Love reinforces solidarity. Beyond love, we must build stubborn hope as an antidote to despondency. Hope empowers action. It emboldens.

Boldness empowers the telling of truth, including the reportage of
destructive extraction and land grabbing. The oppressed must remain emboldened by the knowledge that while the rich worry about the end of the world, workers and exploited communities worry about the end of the day and have deep stakes in what happens tomorrow.

To resolutely stand against land grabbing and extractivism and also build resilience against climate change our communities need Care and Repair Teams (CARTs) as key agents for overcoming trauma, stressors, and illnesses. These teams can also be agents to press for remediation, restoration, repairing, and reparation. These demands and their attainment require the use of every tool of cultural resistance.

Nnimmo Bassey is a renowned environmental activist and Executive Director, Health of Mother Earth Foundation (HOMEF)

News

EYIF: Utilize N2m Grant Provided By The Govt, Edo Deputy Gov Urges Youths

Published

7 hours ago

June 27, 2025

Editor

…says 1,500 applicants screened, 30 met requirements

Deputy Governor of Edo State, Hon. Dennis Idahosa, has urged youths in the state to make the best use of the N2 million start-up grant provided by the state government under the Edo Youth Impact Forum (EYIF).

Idahosa added that the youths must be innovative as they tapped into the two million start-up grant.

In a statement, the Chief Press Secretary to the Deputy Governor, Friday Aghedo, said Idahosa made the remarks during an incubation class of EYIF.

The Edo number two citizen, while noting that EYIF was parts of the government’s drive to build a new generation of entrepreneurs that would impact and shape the state’s financial economy, showed them how to position themselves in the entrepreneurial space to boost the local economy.

Idahosa encouraged the youths to put behind their challenges and make the best of the opportunity provided by the Senator Monday Okpebholo-led government.

According to him,
though 1,500 applicants got screened ahead of the finale scheduled for July 2, 2025, only 30 met the requirement and thus scaled the initial process.

“This number has again been pruned to 10 participants today and will eventually be reduced further to five finalists at the end of the day.

“Irrespective of who emerges as finalists, I want you to know that you are all winners. We are here as a government to encourage the youths because any society that strives to grow must have an active youth involvement,” Idahosa reiterated.

Earlier, the Special Adviser to the Governor on Finance, Investment and Revenue Generation, Mr. Kizito Okpebholo, presented the participants to the deputy governor.

News

Things To Know About Nigeria’s New Tax Laws

Published

8 hours ago

June 27, 2025

Editor

President Bola Tinubu on Thursday signed four new tax laws aimed at modernising and streamlining the country’s tax system.

In the new tax law, the Value Added Tax rate remains at 7.5 per cent despite initial proposals to increase to 12.5 per cent, but its scope is expanded.

Essential items—such as food, education, healthcare, public transport, residential rent, and exports—are zero-rated to ease inflationary pressure.

For revenue allocation is restructured: now 30 per cent of VAT proceeds are distributed based on consumption (rather than contribution), 50 per cent equally among states, and 20 per cent to population-based allocation.

With the latest development, it is expected that state revenue streams will increase, and it will also discourage tax evasion.

Overview of the four new laws

Nigeria Tax Act: Consolidates various tax rules into a single, simplified code, eliminating over 50 small, overlapping taxes. This reduces complexity and duplication, making it easier for businesses to comply.

Tax Administration Act: Establishes uniform rules for tax collection across federal, state, and local governments, ensuring consistency and reducing administrative conflicts.

Nigeria Revenue Service Act: Replaces the Federal Inland Revenue Service with the independent Nigeria Revenue Service, aiming for greater efficiency and autonomy in tax administration.

Joint Revenue Board Act: Enhances coordination between different government levels and introduces a Tax Ombudsman and Tax Appeal Tribunal to handle disputes fairly.

Key objectives of the new tax rules

Simplify Tax System: Reduces bureaucratic hurdles and overlapping taxes to make compliance easier, especially for small businesses and informal traders.

Increase Revenue Efficiency: Aims to boost Nigeria’s tax-to-GDP ratio from 10% (below the African average of 16–18%) to 18 per cent by 2026 without raising taxes on essential goods.

Reduce Financial Burden: Provides relief for low-income households and small businesses while ensuring high-income earners and luxury consumers contribute more.

Fund Public Services: Increased revenue will support infrastructure, healthcare, and education, reducing reliance on borrowing.

Who benefits and how
Low-Income Households:
Individuals earning up to ₦1 million ($650) annually receive a ₦200,000 rent relief, reducing taxable income to ₦800,000, exempting them from income tax.

VAT exemptions on essential goods and services (food, healthcare, education, rent, power, baby products) lower living costs.

Small businesses:

Businesses with an annual turnover below ₦50 million ($32,400) are exempt from company income tax.
Simplified tax filing without requiring audited accounts reduces compliance costs.

Large businesses:

Corporate tax rates drop from 30 per cent to 27.5 per cent in 2025 and 25 per cent thereafter.
Tax credits for VAT paid on expenses and assets allow businesses to recover the 7.5 per cent VAT.

Charitable, educational, and religious organisations:

Tax incentives for non-commercial earnings, encouraging community-focused activities.
Impact on different groups
Low-Income Earners: Benefit most from income tax exemptions and lower costs for essentials, increasing disposable income.

Small Businesses and informal traders: Simplified rules and tax exemptions encourage compliance and reduce financial strain, potentially formalising more businesses.

High-income earners and luxury consumers face higher VAT on luxury goods and premium services, plus capital gains tax on large share sales.

Government: Expects increased revenue for public services without overburdening vulnerable citizens.

Why reforms were needed

Nigeria’s tax system was outdated, inefficient, and disproportionately harsh on low-income groups.
The low tax-to-GDP ratio (10%) limited funding for critical services like healthcare and infrastructure.
Overlapping taxes and complex rules deterred compliance, especially among small businesses and informal traders.
Public and expert reactions

Positive sentiment: Small business owners welcome tax exemptions but seek clarity on enforcement to avoid unexpected levies.

Low-income earners appreciate relief on essentials but remain cautious about implementation.
Taiwo Oyedele, head of the Presidential Fiscal Policy and Tax Reform Committee, claims 90% public support, emphasising that success depends on awareness and trust.

The reforms align with Tinubu’s administration’s goal to reduce economic inequality and boost fiscal capacity without overburdening citizens.

By encouraging voluntary compliance and reducing reliance on loans, Nigeria aims to strengthen its economy and fund development projects.

These reforms mark a significant step toward a fairer, more efficient tax system, with a focus on supporting vulnerable groups while fostering economic growth. However, their success hinges on transparent enforcement and public trust. For further details, you can refer to official statements from the Nigerian government or credible news sources covering the reforms.
(PUNCH)

News

US S’Court Limits Judges’ Power, Boosts Trump’s Executive Authority

Published

8 hours ago

June 27, 2025

Editor

The US Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump a major victory on Friday by curbing the power of lone federal judges to block executive actions.

In a 6-3 ruling stemming from Trump’s bid to end birthright citizenship, the court said nationwide injunctions issued by district court judges “likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has granted to federal courts.”

The top court did not immediately rule on the constitutionality of Trump’s executive order seeking to end automatic citizenship for children born on American soil.

But the broader decision on the scope of judicial rulings will remove a big roadblock to Trump’s often highly controversial orders and reaffirm the White House’s power.

“Federal courts do not exercise general oversight of the Executive Branch; they resolve cases and controversies consistent with the authority Congress has given them,” said Justice Amy Coney Barrett, author of the opinion.

“When a court concludes that the Executive Branch has acted unlawfully, the answer is not for the court to exceed its power, too,” Barrett said in an opinion joined by the other five conservative justices on the court.

The three liberal justices dissented.

The ruling has far-reaching ramifications for the ability of the judiciary to rein in Trump or future American presidents.

The case was ostensibly about Trump’s executive order signed on his first day in office ending birthright citizenship.

But it actually focused on whether a single federal district court judge has the right to issue a nationwide block to a presidential decree with a universal injunction while the matter is being challenged in the courts.

Trump’s birthright citizenship order has been deemed unconstitutional by courts in Maryland, Massachusetts and Washington state, leading the president to make an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court in an effort to get the top court to strike down the use of nationwide injunctions.

The issue has become a rallying cry for Trump and his Republican allies, who accuse the judiciary of stymying his agenda against the will of voters.

Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship is just one of a number of his agenda items that have been blocked by judges around the country — both Democratic and Republican appointees – since he took office in January.

During oral arguments in the case before the Supreme Court in May, both conservative and liberal justices had expressed concerns about the increasing use of nationwide injunctions by district courts in recent years.

– ‘Nuclear weapon’ –

Justice Samuel Alito, an arch-conservative, said nationwide injunctions pose a “practical problem” because there are hundreds of district court judges and every one of them is “convinced” they know best.

Solicitor General John Sauer compared injunctions to a “nuclear weapon,” saying they “disrupt the Constitution’s careful balancing of the separation of powers.”

The Trump administration had asked the Supreme Court to restrict the application of a district court’s injunction solely to the parties who brought the case and the district where the judge presides.

Past presidents have also complained about national injunctions shackling their agenda, but such orders have sharply risen under Trump, who has seen more in two months than Democrat Joe Biden did during his first three years in office.

Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship decrees that children born to parents in the United States illegally or on temporary visas would not automatically become citizens.

The three lower courts ruled that to be a violation of the 14th Amendment, which states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States”

AFP