Oil Pollution, Fundamental Rights And The Nigerian Constitution

An oil spill can destroy farmland. It can contaminate rivers. It can disrupt fishing. It can damage homes and businesses. But can it also violate a fundamental right guaranteed by the Nigerian Constitution? This question sits at the intersection of environmental law, fundamental rights and constitutional law, and Nigerian jurisprudence has not yet produced a completely settled answer. 

Section 20: Environmental Protection Without Direct Enforcement

Section 20 of the Nigerian Constitution provides that the State shall protect and improve the environment and safeguard the country’s water, air and land, among other natural resources.

The provision is constitutionally significant. However, it belongs to Chapter II, not Chapter IV.

That distinction matters because section 46 provides a specific enforcement mechanism for Chapter IV fundamental rights.

The Right to Life

Section 33 protects the right to life. In environmental litigation, this raises a difficult question. Does a right to life merely protect a person from unlawful killing, or can it also encompass environmental conditions that threaten life?

Gbemre adopted the latter approach. The Federal High Court held that the right to life and dignity included protection against a severely polluted environment.

The right to dignity

Section 34 protects the dignity of the human person. Environmental degradation can raise dignity concerns where people are forced to live in severely polluted conditions.

But again, the existence of a factual connection between pollution and dignity does not automatically resolve whether a particular constitutional procedure can be used.

Opara and the Limits of Constitutional Environmental Claims

The Court of Appeal’s decision in Opara v Shell represents an important limitation. The Court treated the pollution dispute as an environmental/tort matter rather than a fundamental-rights claim.

The later Alame judgment described Opara as appellate authority that oil pollution, including gas flaring, does not engage sections 33 and 34 in the manner argued by the claimants.

The African Charter

The African Charter provides another route for environmental arguments. Article 24 recognises the right of peoples to a generally satisfactory environment favourable to their development. Article 16 concerns health, while Article 4 protects life and integrity of the person.

Nigeria has domesticated the African Charter, giving its provisions force of law within Nigeria. Nevertheless, the question of enforcing Charter rights directly against private corporations remains legally contested.

The Significance of COPW

Centre for Oil Pollution Watch v NNPC is important because it demonstrated that environmental organisations can obtain standing to pursue environmental litigation.

What Does This Mean for Communities?

It means that environmental claims should not be reduced to one legal theory. Depending on the facts, affected communities may have claims involving statutory compensation, negligence, nuisance, strict liability principles, environmental legislation, constitutional rights or the African Charter.

The constitutional question remains particularly important because environmental degradation can affect much more than property. It can affect the conditions under which people live, survive and exercise their dignity.