Akwa Ibom Denies Initiating Legal Battle Over 76 Oil Wells, Accuses Cross River Of Misinformation

The Akwa Ibom State Government has refuted claims that it initiated legal proceedings against Cross River State concerning the ownership of 76 disputed offshore oil wells.

In a press statement released on Friday, the Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Mr. Uko Udom (SAN), clarified that it was Cross River State that first sought legal redress, ultimately losing two major cases related to the matter.

The statement was issued in response to what the Akwa Ibom government described as “renewed petitions, misinformation, and public incitement” emanating from Cross River State regarding the contested oil wells.

Mr. Udom emphasised Akwa Ibom’s commitment to defending its rights under the rule of law. “Contrary to the narrative currently being propagated, the Government of Akwa Ibom State did not initiate any legal action against the Government of Cross River State regarding the disputed oil wells.

“Rather, it was the Cross River State Government that instituted and serially lost two suits against Akwa Ibom State,” the statement read.

The dispute dates back to 1999, when Cross River filed a lawsuit challenging boundaries and ownership of the wells.

The Supreme Court ruled in 2005, granting Cross River certain territorial claims in the north but dismissing their claims to the estuarine area where the 76 oil wells are located.

A subsequent 2012 Supreme Court decision reaffirmed Akwa Ibom’s ownership, citing the 2002 International Court of Justice (ICJ) judgment ceding the Bakassi Peninsula to Cameroon.

This ruling, according to the court, stripped Cross River of its littoral status and rendered it ineligible to claim offshore oil assets.

According to the statement, “In its landmark ruling, the Supreme Court declared: “In considering the merit of the plaintiff’s case, it is important to bear in mind that the effect of the judgment of ICJ dated 10/10/2002 on the land and maritime boundary case between Nigeria and Cameroon is that it has wiped off what used to be the estuarine sector of Cross River State… Cross River no longer has a seaward boundary.”

Akwa Ibom highlighted past conciliatory efforts, including a proposed financial arrangement, that were rejected by Cross River.

The government criticized Cross River for choosing confrontation and media campaigns over constructive dialogue encouraged by the Vice President.

The statement also pointed out the Akwa Ibom State had lost 86 oil wells to Rivers State in a past suit and that the verdict of the supreme court was accepted in good faith.

The Akwa Ibom government reiterated its commitment to peaceful coexistence and respect for judicial decisions, urging against inflammatory rhetoric.

It also called on the Federal Government to support economic mitigation for Cross River without compromising Akwa Ibom’s lawful rights.

“The Federal Government has several policy and fiscal options for assisting Cross River State to mitigate the economic consequences of the ICJ judgment,” the statement noted, suggesting avenues like ecological funds and interventions under the South-South Development Commission.

The Akwa Ibom government stated that it is still open to a political solution, provided such does not seek to deny their people lawful and judicially-affirmed rights.