By Patience Chat Moses
In a bold legislative move, the 10th National Assembly has proposed the removal of solid minerals from the Exclusive Legislative List. This motion appears to be one that could ignite nationwide debate, raising questions about the future of resource control, state development, and the drive for true federalism in Nigeria.
Understanding the Exclusive Legislative List Under Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution, the Exclusive Legislative List grants the Federal Government control over specific sectors, including solid minerals. This centralization has led to the Federal Government overseeing the licensing, exploration, and exploitation of mineral resources nationwide. While this arrangement was initially designed to streamline resource management, it has often been criticized for stifling state-level economic initiatives and creating inefficiencies. The proposed amendment by the 10th Assembly, therefore, seeks to transfer solid minerals to the Concurrent Legislative List, which would allow both federal and state governments to have jurisdiction.
The Chairman, House Committee on Solid Minerals, Hon. Jonathan Gaza Gbefwi announced the advocacy of the 10th Assembly to remove the solid minerals from the Exclusive List to the Concurrent List, to allow states to legislate on their resources. This is as he also informed that five per cent of all resources mined in every community belong to the indigenous community as stated by law. The Chairman gave these views in his keynote address at a two-day training for indigenous communities on Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Community Development Agreement (CDA), which took place in Nasarawa State. The training organized by Global Rights in collaboration with the Nigeria Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (NEITI), and the House of Representatives Committee on Solid Minerals respectively, had traditional leaders and other community members in attendance.
According to Gbefwi who is also an indigene of the Nasarawa State, mining, when conducted, responsibly can be a catalyst for economic growth and development, noting, that such endeavours must be approached with a keen sense of responsibility and a commitment to long-term sustainability. The committee chair noted that while previously, mining companies resorted to ridiculous community development agreements (CDAs) which shortchanged the communities he said “What we have learned in the law is instead that five per cent of whatever is mined extracted from that ground belongs to the host community. “In that five per cent, I would want to propose one per cent can go to traditional new laws, another one per cent can go to the land owners. 0.5 per cent should go to the government because the government is going to have the entire issue and going to monitor the matter. Then, a balance of 2.5 per cent will go to a community development association. In the federal government, we have exclusive rights and by the way, we have already moved an amendment to the constitution that will move mining from the exclusive to the concurrent so that states can legislate over the natural resources in their states”, Gbefwi stated.
Meanwhile, presidents of traditional councils in the 13 Local Government Areas of Nasarawa state have warned community members in the state to refrain from selling off their indigenous farmlands to mining companies for temporary gains. Leading the discussions, the Etsy of Karu, Luka Baba Panya, while highlighting the many issues faced by indigenous mining communities, warned the communities against selling off their farmlands to mining companies, warning that it could lead to loss of livelihood, loss of agricultural lands and loss of indigenous lands among others. The traditional leaders highlighted the need for transparent mining licenses, noting that some companies present fraudulent consent letters to the Mining Cadastre Office to acquire licenses without the deliberate involvement of Traditional Rulers.
They stressed the need for setting the right boundaries, definition of roles by government, communities and host communities, legislation of Corporate Social Responsibilities (CSRs), challenges of pollution, loss of livelihoods and loss of access to farmlands as communities sell off ancestral lands to mining companies in the state. The traditional rulers also highlighted the need for the mining Cadastre Office to ensure that consent letters are signed by real traditional/district heads, and traditional leaders are fully captured and involved as they are oftentimes left settling disputes between community members and mining companies who sometimes bring ridiculous and questionable licenses to claim lands not fully substantiated. In her remarks, Executive Director of Global Rights, Abiodun Baiyewu, who was represented by Global Rights Program Manager, Edosa Oviawe, noted that mining activities often have profound impacts on the environment, health, and socio-economic structures of host communities. According to Baiyewu “These communities frequently face challenges such as pollution, land degradation, and threats to their cultural heritage and way of life. Empowering mining host communities with the skills, knowledge, and resources needed to engage in safeguarding efforts not only mitigates these adverse effects but also promotes sustainable development and long-term community resilience. Capacity building for indigenous communities is essential to ensure their active involvement in the management and oversight of these resources”. Abiodun noted that mining host communities are often the primary custodians of local ecosystems and cultural landscapes. Their traditional knowledge and practices provide valuable insights into sustainable land management and environmental preservation” she said.
Baiyewu further explained that the purpose of the training was to help build their capacity to help them better protect these ecosystems from harmful mining practices, ensuring that the environmental costs of mining do not compromise their health, heritage, and quality of life. “When empowered, mining host communities can effectively advocate for sustainable practices that align with both environmental preservation and the responsible extraction of resources”
Findings by Valuechain reveal that this shift will empower states to develop their mineral resources autonomously, fostering economic diversification and reducing overreliance on federal allocations. For decades, resource-rich states such as Zamfara, Kogi, and Plateau have struggled to harness their mineral wealth due to bureaucratic bottlenecks and centralized governance. If the amendment is passed, these states could directly attract investors, create jobs, and develop infrastructure tailored to their needs.
The potential benefits of this shift are immense. States could see increased revenue generation, which would, in turn, support infrastructure development and reduce poverty. However, critics warn of possible negative outcomes. One major concern is the risk of resource mismanagement and exploitation by state governments. Without strong regulatory frameworks, states may face challenges such as environmental degradation, corruption, and conflicts over resource ownership. Furthermore, the move could amplify regional inequalities. States with significant mineral resources would likely experience rapid economic growth, while resource-poor states may lag, deepening existing socio-economic disparities. At its core, this proposal reignites the debate on Nigeria’s federal structure. Advocates for devolution argue that decentralizing resource control aligns with the principles of true federalism, allowing states to thrive independently while reducing the fiscal burden on the Federal Government. On the other hand, opponents caution that weakening central oversight could undermine national unity and create governance challenges. The path to constitutional amendment is neither simple nor swift. The proposal must gain the approval of two-thirds of the National Assembly and be ratified by at least 24 state Houses of Assembly. This rigorous process underscores the gravity of the issue and the diverse perspectives it encompasses. Thus, whether this move becomes a game-changer or a missed opportunity will depend on the effectiveness of its implementation and the willingness of the government to adopt it.