attorney rivers state v. attorney- general, akwa ibom state in the ...

It is clear from the pleaded facts by the parties that what is essentially in dispute
between the plaintiff and the 1 st defendant is a maritime boundary dispute. It is to be noted
that the 2 nd defendant is sued in a representative capacity as the Attorney General of the
Federation representing the Federal Government of Nigeria and its Agencies or parastatals
such as the National Boundary Commission (NBC); Revenue Mobilization Allocation and
Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) and the Accountant General of the Federation (AGF) against
whom a complaint is made or in connection with which an allegation of fact is leveled. It is
the contention of the plaintiff that upon the implementation of the Onshore/Offshore
Dichotomy separating onshore and offshore production and restricting oil producing states
to drawing their 13% derivation funds from revenue produced onshore only was
introduced. The 2 nd defendant, as averred
by the plaintiff, thereafter, directed its agency i.e. the National Boundary
Commission to produce maps of littoral states to determine the attribution of oil
wells based thereon with a view to demarcating the maritime boundaries of
littoral states including the plaintiff and the 1 st defendant The NBC was further
directed to submit the maritime maps produced to the RMAFC for purposes of
preparing indices for the sharing of the 13% derivation funds to the littoral states
on a monthly basis. Upon the drawing of the relevant maps by the NBC and
submission of same to the RMAFC for necessary action, the latter started to
receive complaints from littoral states challenging the boundary demarcation and
one of these complaints was lodged by the 1 st defendant that its boundary with
the plaintiff showed a disputed annexation of a triangular portion of the sea from
Akwa Ibom to Rivers State. 1 st defendant requested for the application of the
Historical Titles Method as against the use of the strict. Technical Equidistance
lines method used by the NBC in drawing up the maritime maps on the ground
that in accordance with Articles 15 and 7.1 of the United Nations Convention on
the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) 1982, only the Historical Titles Method is
applicable. That, apart from the fact that Article 15 of UNCLOS 1982, recognizes
the Strict Equidistance Technical Lines Method as the applicable method for use
in drawing up maritime maps, this Han. Court in the case of A - G of the
Federation v. A - G of Abia State (2002) FWLR (Pt.10) 1 specifically excluded the use of
the Historical Titles Method for use in boundary demarcation between littoral states. In the
case just cited above, the plaintiff herein, contends that the strict Technical Equidistance
Lines Method for demarcating boundaries of littoral states in accordance with Article 15 of
the UNCLOS 1982 was given judicial approval as the accepted method for drawing up
maritime maps of littoral states in Nigeria.
The plaintiff further averred that sometime in 2006, the 2 nd defendant intervened and
the plaintiff and 1 st defendant represented by their respective Executive Governors met and
agreed to a Political Solution Method which led to the weighting of 50% of the disputed