Cover Story

Inside Governor Kefas’ Strategic Engagement with Nigeria’s Security Chiefs

When Governor Agbu Kefas walked into Nigeria's top security headquarters in Abuja, the visits were far more than routine courtes...

Court Clears Way for Resumption of Mining Activities, Nullifies Executive Order Banning Mining

 

The Federal High Court sitting in Jalingo has nullified Executive Order No. 3 issued by the Taraba State Government banning mining activities across the state.

Delivering judgment in a suit filed by Newberry Nigeria Limited against Governor Agbu Kefas and others, the court held that the governor lacks the constitutional authority to suspend or regulate mining operations, ruling that mining falls exclusively under the jurisdiction of the Federal Government.

The court consequently granted an injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's mining activities at Akwana in Wukari Local Government Area of Taraba State.

However, the court upheld Executive Order No. 5, which is anchored on Section 42 of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Act and Section 14 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended). The judge ruled that these provisions empower the governor to take necessary measures to protect the environment and safeguard public welfare.

Reacting to the verdict, counsel to the plaintiff, Barrister Iliya Bitrus Allurah of Milkman Karel & Co., described the judgment as a reaffirmation that the judiciary remains "the last hope of the common man." He said the ruling removes previous obstacles faced by his client and clears the way for Newberry Nigeria Limited to continue its mining operations in Akwana without interference.

Counsel to the defendants, Barrister Nierus Banadzem Mainamo Johnson, described the decision as a "win-win" for both parties. He noted that although Executive Order No. 3 was struck down, the affirmation of Executive Order No. 5 empowers the state government to enforce environmental safety standards under the EIA Act.

Johnson added that the nullification of Executive Order No. 3 would have minimal practical impact since the state already relies on Executive Order No. 5 to regulate environmental compliance. He commended the judgment for clearly defining the limits of state authority while reinforcing the government's duty to protect the environment from harmful activities.


No comments