An Abuja based lawyer, Mathew Onoja, representing a lessee of the Federal Capital Territory Administration, FCTA, has lamented and alleged impunity in the takeover of his client’s disputed property located in Kado, Abuja, despite a pending court case over the land.
Onoja said the dispute concerns a property which his client lawfully occupies under a lease from the FCTA, adding that the circumstances surrounding the purported allocation of the same property to another party were unusual and abnormal.
Speaking at an event in Abuja over the weekend, Onoja said the development prompted his client to petition the Inspector-General of Police, IGP, seeking an investigation into how the property could have been purportedly allocated to another party while he remained in possession.
According to Onoja, his client was invited by the police, adopted the petition and provided available evidence relating to his claim over the property.
He said the police also indicated that the other party would be contacted and asked to produce documents and evidence supporting its claim.
He, however, alleged that before the investigation could be concluded, an attempt was made to take over the property.
Onoja said his client immediately brought the development to the attention of the police and also wrote to the Development Control Unit of the FCTA, notifying the authority that there was a dispute over the land and that the matter was already before the court.
He said relevant parties had been joined in the suit.
He added that the sole director and shareholder of the other company involved in the dispute had also been joined in the suit, with hearing notices issued to the parties.
The lawyer alleged that despite the pending proceedings and notification to the relevant authorities, some men arrived at the property with equipment and bulldozers and began destroying parts of the premises.
He said the perimeter fence was pulled down, trees were felled, and installations belonging to his client were destroyed.
According to him, after receiving information about the operation, he went to the property the following morning and met the same group of people returning to continue the work.
Onoja said when he asked the men to produce the authority under which they were taking possession of the property, no document was shown to him.
He alleged that he was told he had no right to question the men and was advised to go to court.
The lawyer argued that his client was being trampled upon because other interests involved had greater resources or power.
“We cannot be in court and then have any authority or individual who is already joined in the suit go behind the court to encroach upon or prejudice the interests of another party in the same matter that is pending before the court. It means there is no regard for the rule of law and shows contempt for the jurisdiction of the honourable court,” he said.
“My demand is not merely a personal demand. It is the demand of every right-thinking Nigerian that due process be followed. Let the parties maintain the status quo, with my client remaining in possession, until the rights of the parties in court, which have already been submitted for determination, are decided one way or the other.”
He disclosed that the matter is scheduled to come up for hearing in October 2026, adding that his client’s chairman had also reached out to the police and was invited in connection with the matter.
Onoja said this was not the first time the police had been informed about the dispute, adding that Development Control officials had previously been made aware of the matter and the ongoing police investigation.
He called on the government, the FCT minister and the Inspector General of Police to intervene, saying the parties should maintain the status quo until the court determines their respective rights.
Speaking on the matter, a civil society advocate, Armsfree Ajanaku, said his group became involved because the dispute also raised questions about the protection of Abuja’s green areas.
Ajanaku said the group’s immediate concern was adherence to the rule of law, but added that it was also concerned that the disputed location was a green area allegedly designated under the Abuja master plan.
“For us, this is not just about private interest; it is also about public interest. We cannot fold our arms and watch what is supposed to be the only city in Nigeria where we say we should not have a concrete jungle lose all its green spaces to development,” he said.