NIALS 7th Inaugural Lecture Series: Full Text of Prof Peter Terkaa Akper’s Lecture on, “Towards Realising The Potential of The Mining Sector: Policy, Legal and Institutional Reform Imperatives For Nigeria”

By Peter Terkaa Akper, SAN, OFR
Professor of Mining Law and Policy

1. INTRODUCTION
I am immensely grateful to God for the divine providence granted me to present this lecture. Inaugural Lectures signify
the attainment of a significant milestone in an academic’s career. It not only denotes the promotion to the rank of full Professor, but also affords an opportunity for the lecturer to present his or her innovative research and scholarly contributions to knowledge. However, let me assure you that I am not a “Baby Professor” by any stretch of imagination, having been promoted
to the Rank of Research Professor of Law, 14 years ago. The delay in presenting this lecture is largely attributable to my rather long sojourn on National Service in the hallowed Chambers of the Attorney General of the Federation and
Minister of Justice, where I served from August 2007 to May 2015, researching and advising on different aspects of law and policy and assisting three successive Attorneys General in the discharge of their constitutional and statutory responsibilities.

While this National Service impacted my research efforts at the Institute, it afforded me the rare privilege and opportunity to gain valuable insights into the workings of government. The foregoing notwithstanding, I totally subscribe to the admonition of King Solomon contained in the Book of Ecclesiastes, Chapter 3: 1, to the effect that “for everything, there is a season and a time for every matter under heaven”. Therefore, I fervently belief that today is the date and time ordained by God. In this regard, I salute the doggedness of my indefatigable Director General, Professor Mohammed Tawfiq Ladan, an accomplished Scholar in his own right, who decreed by executive fiat that this lecture be presented today even when I felt I was not quite ready. I am, however, presenting the lecture with mixed feelings. While, on the one hand, I am glad that by this lecture, I am fulfilling my obligations to the Institute, on the other hand, I am saddened by the fact that the lecture is not taking place at the Institute’s permanent site in Abuja which has regrettably remained uncompleted over 4 decades of the Institute’s existence. I submit with respect that for a national Institution renowned for its ground-breaking research and contribution to the progressive development of the law and the legal profession to remain without a befitting permanent site (45) years after its establishment is not in my view, a befitting testimony to the vision and efforts of its founding fathers who envisioned it as the Apex Institution for research and advanced studies in law and related disciplines. His Lordship, Honourable Justice Umaru Abdullahi, CFR, FNIALS, retired President of the Court of Appeal and the Chairman, NIALS Body of Fellows, has on several occasions reiterated, with justification, the need for the NIALS Permanent Site in Abuja to be completed to provide a conducive environment for research and studies. One can only pray that this anomaly is addressed sooner than later. I joined the services of the Nigerian Institute of Advanced
Legal Studies (NIALS) on the 18th of September 1997. Although, I was not privileged to serve under the legendary Dr. Akinola Aguda, the 1st Director General of the Institute, renowned for his pioneering role in positioning the Institute as a great citadel of research and learning, and late Professor Ayo
Ajomo, the 2nd Director General who followed in his giant strides and footsteps; I had the good fortune of serving under Professor Ignatius Akaayar Ayua, SAN, OFR, (of blessed memory), the 3rd Director General of the Institute, who prioritised research geared towards addressing societal problems.

I imbibed this philosophy early in my career and with advice from Professor Onje Gye Wado who was then on sabbatical leave from the University of Jos that Oil and Gas Law which had attracted my attention was already a saturated field, I decided to focus my research on Minerals Law and Policy and haven’t regretted that decision ever since. But, before I launch

myself into the lecture proper, permit me to acknowledge the fact that this lecture has recorded many firsts worth mentioning. It is the first inaugural lecture in the Institute to be delivered
in the subject area of Mining Law and Policy by a Senior Advocate of Nigeria from the Department of International Law. It is also the first Inaugural Lecture to be delivered under the tenure of Professor M.T Ladan as Director General of NIALS. It is the first to be delivered under the tenure of a Fellow of the
Institute, Hon Justice Olukayode Ariwoola, FNIALS, GCON, CJN, as Chairman of the Governing Council of the Institute. It is also the first to be delivered under the tenure of a Fellow of Institute, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, FNIALS, SAN, in his capacity as the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation
and supervising Minister of the Institute.
Mining law has, in addition to the fame and recognition it has brought me, opened my eyes to the vast mineral occurrences of Nigeria and the potential benefits derivable from their sustainable exploitation and management. My research interests have revolved around the question of how Nigeria can harness
its mineral resources for national development. This has, over the past 26 years, influenced my research and writings and has certainly informed the topic of my Lecture “Towards Realising
the Potentials of the Mining Sector: Policy, Legal and Institutional Reform Imperatives for Nigeria”, which seeks
to highlight the potentials of the Mining sector and answer the question why the potential has remained largely unreal is able despite successive policy and legal reforms to reinvigorate the sector. The Lecture will, with the benefit of my scholarly contributions, proffer recommendations to address identified
challenges.

2. CONCEPTUAL CLARIFICATIONS
This lecture revolves around two basic concepts: ‘Minerals’ and ‘Mining’. It is, therefore, pertinent to clarify the meaning attached to these concepts to engender a greater appreciation of
the lecture.

2.1 Minerals
Minerals are naturally occurring substances derived from the earth’s crust and upper mantle, which are of value to man. Technically, minerals are naturally occurring or naturally formed inorganic substances with a definite composition or range of compositions, usually possessing a regular internal crystalline structure. To be classified as a mineral, a substance must have an inorganic or non-living origin and a composition
that can be expressed by a chemical formula. The National Minerals and Metals Policy, 2008 describes minerals as “…naturally occurring inorganic substance, possessing a definite chemical composition and atomic structures. For this purpose, it includes Rocks, such as Coal, Marble, Limestones and Bitumen amongst others.” This description of minerals highlights the formation of
minerals and their chemical composition and contrasts with the National Policy on Solid Minerals 1998 which specifically
defined Solid Minerals to “encompass a wide variety of endowments going from iron ore to coal to sand and gravel:
some of them found on the surface while others can only be won from the earth through underground mining”. The definition simply outlined substances that qualify as minerals, their origins and how such minerals are won. The
foregoing notwithstanding, the concept, has been statutorily defined by the Nigerian Minerals and Mining Act, 2007, as: any substance whether in solid, liquid, gaseous form occurring in or on the earth, formed by or subjected to geological processes including occurrences or deposits of rocks, coal, coal bedgases, bituminous shales, tar sands, any substances that may be extracted from coal, shale or tar sands, mineral water, and mineral components in tailings and waste piles, but with the exclusion of Petroleum and waters without mineral content. A cursory reading will reveal that the Act also highlighted the formation and examples of substances that qualify to be called

minerals and the ones that do not fit the description. Minerals can be broadly classified into minerals in the energy group, the ferrous group and the non-metallic group. By simple elimination, therefore, solid minerals cover all of the above groups, excluding crude oil, gas and water, but not coal, lignite, uranium thorium and tar sands. It is contended that by this definition, the resin amber and fossil fuels, petroleum and natural gas are not ‘true minerals’ since they are formed from organic substances (animal or vegetable matter) that once lived
on the earth. In Nigeria, minerals have been classified by the Geological
Survey Agency of Nigeria by use rather than origin. The five main groups are Mineral Fuels, Metallic Minerals, Structural and Building Minerals, Industrial Minerals and Gemstones. Apart from this classification according to use, minerals are also classified as strategic to ‘national interest’. These minerals include mineral fuels like coal, lignite etc. Others are classified according to the ‘security interest’ of the country and they include uranium and fissionable minerals. The third category is the minerals strategic to the ‘industrial interest’ of the country such as iron ore, gypsum barites etc.

2.2 Mining
Mining is concerned with the selective recovery of minerals and materials other than recently formed organic materials, from the earth’s crust or the search for, and extraction of minerals from the earth.11 In this respect therefore the site in which minerals are excavated for the production of ore, industrial minerals or
coal etc, is called a ‘mine.’ The Nigerian Minerals and Mining Act, 2007 in an attempt to clarify the meaning of ‘mine,’ defines the concept from two perspectives, when used as a ‘noun’ and when used as a ‘verb’. The Act provides that ‘mine’ when used as a verb means:
any place, excavation or working in or on which any operation connected with mining is carried on together with all buildings, promises, erections,
infrastructure water reservoirs, tailings, ponds, waste, overburden and other dumps and appliances belonging or appertaining thereto, above or below the ground for the purpose of mining, treating or preparing Minerals, obtaining
or extracting any Mineral or metal by any mode or method or for the purpose of dressing mineral ores but does not include a smelter or a refinery. But, when used as a verb, it means: to intentionally mine minerals, and includes any operations directly or indirectly necessary therefore or incidental thereto, including such processing of minerals as may be required to produce a first saleable product, and the “mining”
shall be construed accordingly.

The terminology does not however refer to oil wells and rock quarries. Mining is perhaps one of mankind’s oldest activities. It has been the major source of materials from which tools were made,
almost from the beginning of the Stone Age about 2.5 million years ago. Thus, from the moment when the predecessors of human beings first began to recover selected rocks from which to dip their tools, mining had begun. It progressively developed from digging the flints or other selected rocks from the ground
to the pits and eventually underground mining as the surface deposits depleted. It is reported that the oldest identified
underground mine, a mine for red ochre, was at Bomvu Ridge in Swaziland, Southern Africa and that it dates back to 40 000 BC. Surface mining, of course, goes much farther in time.

3. NIGERIA’S MINING SECTOR: AN OVERVIEW
Nigeria is reputed to be endowed with 44 different mineral resources (occurrences) in about 450 locations in virtually all States of the Federation, including the Federal Capital Territory,
Abuja. Despite these occurrences, Nigeria is not reckoned as a mining jurisdiction, but rather as an oil and gas country. This
is understandable because the sectors contribution to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in the 1960s-70s which stood at 5 per cent of GDP,17 gradually declined to 0.003 per cent in the 1990s.

The decline of the mining sector is largely attributable to the discovery of oil in 1956 and its commercial exploitation, which progressively displaced the solid minerals as a source of revenue and foreign exchange earnings for the country.

Secondly, the 30-month civil war that engulfed the country from 6th July 1967 to 15th January 1970 created an unfavorable operating environment for mining investments, especially around the Eastern field where coal was mined in commercial quantities. Expatriates who were engaged in the mining of coal
withdrew from the country to more favourable destinations. Since mining was essentially private-sector driven, the
withdrawal of foreign investors constituted a major setback for the country. To fill the vacuum created by the withdrawal of expatriate miners, the government, in an apparent reversal of its earlier policy of ‘non-involvement in the mining business,’ intervened and became an active player in the mining industry. Although the intervention was a welcome development, the expected gains of that intervention did not materialise as the sector continued to experience decline.

Thirdly, the implementation of the government’s Indigenisation Policies which started in 1972 was not well
received by investors. The Policy made it compulsory for Nigerians to own interests in strategic sectors of the economy the perspective of foreign investment attraction and promotion,
the Indigenisation policy inadvertently created an unfavorable operating environment for mining investments in Nigeria. It was not well received by foreign mining companies and expatriates who perceived it as a form of ‘creeping nationalism.’ Consequently, foreign investors who were not prepared to dilute their investment in existing mining ventures to accommodate
Nigerian enterprises as required by the policy closed shop and relocated their mining operations to favorable destinations. Other sundry challenges included the fall in the international
price of mineral commodities like tin, which Nigeria was a major producer and net exporter, rendering its commercial
exploitation largely unprofitable. Tin mining companies operating in the Northern Field in areas like Jos Plateau were naturally discouraged from continuing with their operations. They consolidated their companies to form the Consolidated Tin Mines (CTM) and gave the Nigerian Mining Corporation some
equity in the company. Also, the fact that Nigeria continued to rely on the Minerals Act, which was essentially a 1946 colonial Ordinance which had become archaic and no longer in tune with the development priorities of an independent Nigeria to regulate the mining sector was a major disincentive.
The net effect of these policies was the mass withdrawal of foreign investment from Nigeria and the eventual stagnation of the mining industry. Although, the 1971 policy promoted government involvement in the mining sector through the establishment of the Nigerian Mining Corporation (NMC) in 1972 as the government’s investment vehicle, the NMC struggled to develop the deposits abandoned by foreign companies and profitably operate the mines. It was glaring that the mining sector was on the decline as evidenced by its negligible contribution to GDP which by 1996 was a dismal 0.33
per cent of the GDP. The rather gloomy picture of the mining sector of the late
1980s and early 1990s progressively changed with renewed attention given to the sector as a result of the structural
imbalances in the economy created by the unwholesome dependence on oil (petroleum) as a source of revenue and
foreign exchange earnings. Nigeria was finding it increasingly difficult to fund its budget as a result of the fall in the international price of oil. As a result of the new economic realities, the solid minerals sector, which had been neglected because of the discovery of oil and its low contribution to GDP, was considered by the government as a viable alternative to petroleum. The realisation that the solid minerals sector could be harnessed for national development provided the impetus for renewed interest in the sector. This led to the creation of the Ministry of Solid Minerals Development in 1995 which began consultations with stakeholders in the sector through Conferences and Workshops to address the problems that had militated against the development of the sector. The implementation of sector reforms led to the articulation of a new National Policy on Solid Minerals in 1998 and the enactment of the Minerals and Mining Act of 1999. The new policy sought to address the weaknesses of the 1971 Policy and eliminate identified implementation challenges.

The policy highlighted the strategic partnership between the Government and the private sector as it made the development of Nigeria’s mineral endowments a shared responsibility
between the state and the private sector. It provided clearly defined roles against which performance could be measured.
For instance, the government was saddled with the responsibility of creating and enabling an environment for the development of the sector, while the private sector played a leading role in the development of the sector by undertaking most of the mining activity.

The period witnessed a policy reversal from that of governments’ active participation in the sector to private sectorled development that had characterised the pre-independence
era. The sector had to be deregulated to attract investments, and state-owned enterprises such as the Nigerian Coal Corporation and the Nigerian Mining Corporation were reorganised, and
their enabling legislation was amended to remove their monopoly and allow them to operate commercially and compete with the private sector. The Minerals and Mining Act of 1999
was enacted to regulate the sector like its precursors, vested the ownership and control of minerals in the State and enacted other key provisions of the 1998 Policy. It provided a mineral rights
system and granted incentives for mining investments. It is important to observe that these reforms did not meet
global standards, making Nigeria lose several waves of supercycles which countries that had reformed to global
standards in the 1990s achieved. For instance, countries like Argentina, Madagascar, Papua New Guinea, and Tanzania to mention a few of the countries that reformed their mining sector were able to attract mining investment worth Billions of Dollars. The 1998 Policy and 1999 Act were repealed and replaced by the Nigerian Minerals and Metals Policy of 2008 and the Nigerian Minerals and Mining Act of 2007. This was an anomaly as the law was enacted before the policy was articulated. Consequently, the law did not take advantage of the policy as can be gleaned from the almost complete absence of orovisions relating to metals. The 2008 Policy identified the government’s major policy thrust in the mining sector. First, it identified the mining industry as a global industry with many countries competing for exploration funds; the Government’s responsibility is, therefore, to create an enabling environment for the business to flourish. This includes the development of a new and modern legislative framework with specific provisions to enhance private sector leadership in the development of the mining industry. Secondly, it envisaged the separation of the distinctive role of the Government as regulator/administrator from that of the private sector as operator and manager. The policy provides that access to mineral titles will be transparent, flexible and free from undue interference of government officials. The government’s role will be limited to articulating policies and their implementation and the collection, collation, storage, dissemination, and archiving of geoscience information and knowledge both for wealth creation and public interest and heritage. Thirdly, it seeks to address issues relating to the socio-economic well-being of the people with both direct and indirect contact with the mining industry. The government also defined its role in the sector as that of promoter/regulator,

thereby positioning the private sector as the operator and taking the lead in the development of the sector. This was the renaissance period of the mining sector, as several reform initiatives were implemented. The Ministry of Solid Minerals was restructured for greater efficiency into five technical departments with specialised functions, namely:
Mining cadastre, Geological Survey of Nigeria, Mines Inspectorate, Artisanal and Small Scale Mining, and Mines
Environmental Compliance. Formal recognition was given to Artisanal Miners as the government approved the establishment of Artisanal and Small Scale Mining Projects, the establishment
of Artisanal Mining Cooperatives, the creation of buying centre’s to assist artisanal miners in marketing their products at a fair price, the provision of extension services etc. Despite the enactment of the new law and approval of the policy, the sector’s contribution to GDP remained low as a result of the unconducive operating environment occasioned by micro and macro-economic challenges. The Road Map on the Development of the Solid Minerals and Metals Sector was launched in 2012 to ensure the realisation of government
developmental objectives in the sector. It identified the challenges to the development of solid minerals to include:

(a) inadequate geoscience data needed to support detailed mineral investigation, development and exploitation;

(b) inadequate infrastructural facilities such as roads;

(c) very high proportion of Artisanal and Small Scale Miners (ASM) operations deriving mineral exploitation in the country resulting in environmental degradation, and exposure to high risk and health hazards due to the use of
unsafe mining and mineral processing practices;

(d) lack of adequate legislation, and

e) low institutional and human capacity.

The 2012 Road Map articulated the steps to be taken to address the challenges and reiterated the “need to diversify the economy away from over-dependence on oil as a principal revenue source and transform the minerals and metals into a strategic catalyst of growth”.
34 The following targets were set:

(i) increasing the sector’s contribution to the nation’s GDP from the current 0.4 per cent to at least 5 per cent by the year 2015 and 10 per cent by 2020;

(ii) creating about 3 million direct and indirect jobs by 2015;

(iii) facilitating the production of coal needed to fire coal-firedpower stations that would contribute 30 per cent of the nation’s power generation by 2020;

(iv) revitalising the entire steel sector for the operation and production of 3 million tonnes of liquid steel per annum by 2015 and 12. 2 million tonnes of liquid steel per annum by 2020;

(v) becoming a major regional and global producer of aluminium and steel products with a target of 100,000 tonnes per year of primary aluminium and 3 million tones per year of steel products by the year 2015;

(vi) achieving enhanced capacity to supply 50 per cent of skilled manpower required for all segments of the minerals and metals sector and

(vii) producing geological maps on a scale of 1: 100,000, covering the entire nation by 2020.

By 2015, it became obvious that the strategies and performance targets enumerated above were unrealisable, which called for its reappraisal. It was thereafter replaced by the Road Map for the Growth and Development of the Nigerian Mining Industry 2016 (2016 Road Map). The 2016 Road Map identified major hindrances to the development of the mining sector from five primary lenses, namely; Geosciences, Industry participants,
Stakeholders, Institutions and governance and Key enablers and proposed solutions to address the challenges. It prioritized activities and leveraged prior roadmaps and initiatives aimed at addressing the deficiencies in the sector. It also detailed activities and a comprehensive set of initiatives that, when implemented, were expected to drive the growth of the sector.

The Ministry was given a new charge by the President to “reposition the mining sector as a frontier of this administration’s economic diversification agenda.” In line with the objectives of the Road Map, the Ministry continued with its resolve to “build a world class minerals and mining ecosystem designed to serve a targeted domestic and export
market for our minerals and ores”.
The Ministry also focussed on improving the sector’s contribution to GDP and creating jobs and economic opportunities for Nigerians. The Ministry received funds from the World Bank to implement the Mineral Sector Support for Economic
Diversification Project (MinDiver) and accessed N30 Billion approved for the sector from the Natural Resources Intervention Fund for the exploration of new minerals and strengthening of the regulatory capacity of the Ministry; the National Council on Mining and Mineral Resources Development (NCMMRD) was
established to provide a forum for mining sector stakeholders to periodically meet to develop policy advisory, validation and other  interventions, to effectively guide the government in achieving the full implementation of the Road Map and the achievement of its targets. Steps were also taken to reactivate the State Minerals Resources and Environmental Management Committees (MIREMCOs) to ensure greater synergy between the federal and State Governments involved in the governance and operations of the sector.

The Ministry also intensified efforts to improve the geological information and its prospecting activities as critical
success enablers for the sector. In this regard, the ministry in 2017 completed several projects, such as the characterisation of Kaolin in Ekiti State, exploration of gold in Niger State as well
as generating the geology and mineral database of 30 States. It also secured the delivery of 26-line KM of Electromagnetic data and carried out the geological mapping of 1:50,000 sheets 53
Maru (NW, NE, SW, SE). All these developments were indicative of the strong desire to harness the mineral potential of the country.

3.2 Potentials of the Minerals and Mining Sector
Nigeria’s soil is reportedly rich in mineral resources that harbour tremendous potential for the economic growth of the country. The Inventory of Nigeria’s Mineral resources shows
that Nigeria is endowed with vast mineral occurrences. These minerals include gold, iron, lead, zinc, coal, and Gemstones capable of catalysing the development of the country.41 Nigeria
is also rich in strategic minerals such as coal, iron ore, bitumen, gold, limestone, lead -zinc and barite.

These vast mineral occurrences are envisioned as key in the efforts to diversify the economy, hence the renewed focus on the mining sector. Consequently, as the country’s hydrocarbon deposits are quickly depleting, attention is shifting to the
country’s green energy potential. According to Mr Dele Alake, Nigeria’s Minister of Solid Minerals Development,
“Nigeria currently possesses a deposit of mineral products worth $750bn…the mining has the potential to contribute a large part of the nation’s goal to achieve a trillion-dollar economy”.

Similarly, the Nigerian Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (NEITI) reported that Nigeria earned a total sum of N193.59 billion from the solid minerals sector in 2021, representing an increase of N60.32 billion or 51.89 per cent when compared to the 2020 revenue flows of N116.82billion. The report, however, noted that “this contribution, though a significant increase over past years, is still abysmal considering
the potentials of the sector to the Nigerian economy.”

The studies conducted by the Nigerian Geological Survey Agency (NGSA) have confirmed the availability of energy transition minerals such as copper, molybdenum, nickel, bauxite, lithium, graphite, Rare-Earth Elements, tin, and lead zinc in Nigeria, which have generated interest from local and international investors. The quest for energy transition around the world has led to significant demand for these minerals, which are in short supply.

This presents a tremendous opportunity for Nigeria’s energy transition minerals that remain largely untapped.

As aptly observed in the Nigeria Economic Summit Group’s (NESG) report “Nigeria’s mining industry has the potential to provide some of the critical minerals required to develop and produce some of the renewable energy technologies.” What is required is concerted efforts to link the sector to the industrial sector to facilitate the exploitation and utilisation of Nigeria’s energy transition minerals.

Minerals are the basis of industrialisation, which results in the economic development of the country. Nigeria is blessed with vast reserves of “development minerals” (low-value
minerals), which include: industrial minerals- barite, bentonite, glass, granite, gypsum, etc; Construction minerals-gravel, limestone, ceramics bricks, construction sand, glass; Dimension
Stones- granite, marbles, slate, sandstones etc. These minerals
ordinarily do not command high global commodity prices but can be mined, processed, manufactured and used domestically by local industries such as construction, infrastructure, and agriculture.48 Nigeria can, therefore, leverage its development minerals to promote its local industry. Apart from revenue earnings, the mining sector has the potential to generate employment, especially semi-skilled and unskilled manpower. While education is generally the recognised pathway to job creation and poverty alleviation, the solid minerals sector also creates a huge platform for job creation, irrespective of the literacy levels of individuals involved in the process. As aptly observed by Tene: most jobs require varying degrees of specialisation and expertise, the mining sector only requires basic knowledge and brawns rather than brains to mine, thereby creating great prospects for employment generation for the masses of illiterate Nigerians.

It is posited that Nigeria can reduce its present unemployment rate which as of 2023 surged to 5.0 per cent in the third quarter of 2023 from 4.2 per cent in the previous quarter,50 if the mining sector is properly positioned.

3.3. Challenges Limiting the Realisation of the Sector’s
Potential

The challenges militating against the realisation of the potential of the mining sector and strategies for addressing them have been duly articulated in the Road Map 2016. However, for this discourse, I have identified a few of the sector challenges that in my view, require urgent attention.

3.3.1 Lack of a Comprehensive Policy Framework for the Mining Sector

A mining policy is an important regulatory instrument as it serves as a benchmark for all other relevant laws. A sound mining policy should clearly provide guiding principles and directions for the development of the sector and set clear objectives and strategies for realising them. According to the Inter-Governmental Forum (IGF), a Mining Policy Framework “represents the good practices required for good environmental, social, and economic governance of the mining sector, and the generation and equitable sharing of benefits in a manner that will contribute to sustainable development” It is, therefore, important for a country to have a comprehensive mining policy capable of driving the development of the sector.

At the moment, Nigeria’s policy framework apart from not being comprehensive is not aligned with the African Mining Vision (AMV) adopted by the African Union (AU) Heads of State and Government in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, in 2009. The AMV recommends an appropriate policy framework for AU
Member States, including Nigeria. The AMV aims at inclusive and broad-based development of the mining sector and promotes linkages for the benefit of the peoples of Africa. The expectation for Member States of the AU is for Country Mining Visions aligned to the AMV to be developed. Nigeria is yet to comply with this important step designed to catalyse the development of the mining sector.

3.3.2 Inappropriate Legal and Regulatory Framework for the Mining Sector

The legal framework consists mainly of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, the Nigerian Minerals and Mining Act of 2007 (2007 Act) and the Nigerian Minerals and Mining Regulations of 2011. As previously observed, the 2007 Act is not aligned with the Mining Policy because the Act
was enacted before the policy was approved in 2008. Besides, the Act has been in operation for about 17 years, during which period, its weaknesses have become glaring. Chiefly amongst the weaknesses of the legal regime is the
apparent lack of roles or involvement of the sub-nationals in the governance of the sector, a factor that is responsible for the increasing wave of conflicts between the Federal Government and State Governments, with the States assuming regulatory control over mining activities not constitutionally assigned to them. The States have reportedly been banning mining activities over which they have no regulatory control, justifying their
unconstitutional actions on factors such as: insecurity, environmental degradation, revenue mobilisation (improving their internally generated revenue), and benefit-sharing challenges as factors responsible for their actions.
The Mineral Resources and Environmental Management Committee (MIREMCO), the only body established under the 2007Act to foster federal /state relations in the administration of the mining sector, has proved to be unsuitable and illequipped to perform its statutory role of coordinating federal state participation in the governance of the minerals sector because of the deficiencies in its composition, structure and funding. The Committee has not been constituted in some States, and even where constituted, experience has shown that often, persons with the requisite know-how and experience are not appointed by the Governors.

Although, the Minister in charge of Solid Minerals Development has allowed state governors to appoint the chairpersons of MIREMCOs for purposes of promoting
synergy, some state governments have appointed politicians without the requisite qualifications and experience.
Furthermore, the Committee is expected to meet at least once every three months (4 times a year). However, due to financial constraints, meetings are held infrequently, negatively impacting the committee’s efficiency and effectiveness in considering and recommending remedial actions to the minister. Finally, the Committee is merely advisory, leaving the minister to accept or reject their recommendations. Even where
the recommendations are accepted, there are no guarantees that they will be implemented.59 As succinctly stated by the NESG, the lack of an effective mechanism to foster federal/state
relations in the administration of the mining sector is the reason “several states have taken steps to have greater influence over the sector’s regulation and development contrary to the express provisions of the Constitution, creating policy uncertainties and affecting the investment climate for mining.”

Another significant weakness of the legal regime is the absence of an independent sector regulator to effectively administer the Act and regulations, which has led to the prevalence of disorderly activities in the mining sector. Experience has shown that the independent sector regulators
established for other economic sectors that were deregulated have stimulated investments, growth and development of the respective economic sectors they are regulating. These include: the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC)61 for the Telecommunications sector, the Nigeria Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) for the Power Sector, and recently the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission
(NUPRIC) and Nigerian Midstream and Down Stream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) in the Petroleum sector.

As a result of the lack of independence, the Technical Departments in the Ministry of Solid Minerals Development, namely: the Mines Inspectorate, the Mines Environmental Compliance and Artisanal and Small-Scale Mining
Departments, have been unable to effectively regulate and enforce the provisions of the Nigeria Minerals and Mining Act, 2007 and the Nigerian Minerals and Mining Regulations 2011
leading to the prevalence of illegal mining and a host of disorderly mining activities that serve as disincentive to
investors (local and foreign). Although the technical departments were established to serve as regulatory vehicles, experience has shown that they are not adequately resourced to effectively and efficiently discharge their regulatory functions. This is in addition to the apparent lack of financial and
operational independence required of a regulator.

3.3.3 Availability of Geoscience Data/Inappropriate Exploration Strategy

The availability of geoscience data is an important consideration for investors in the mining industry, as no investment decision and be made without the appropriate geoscience data. This point was succinctly made by Dr Abdulrazak Garba, Director General of the NGSA, where he observed that:

…the availability of credible geoscience data in the development of any country’s mining sector cannot be overemphasised… the key purpose of
geological surveys is to provide geological information needed to attract investors to the sector… without the geological survey, investments in mining will not come into the country because investors will not have information on mineralogy needed to make investment decisions.

The Fraser Institute Annual Survey of Mining Companies in Canada and around the globe confirms that “more weight is given to the Mineral Potential Index to reflect the importance of
attractive geology in investment decisions” while assessing the
overall Investment Attractiveness of a particular jurisdiction.  Nigeria has accomplished a lot in terms of geoscience
information with the implementation of the National Integrated Mineral Exploration Project (NIMEP) designed to gather geoscience data with respect to gold, PGM, nickel, chromium,
cobalt, rare earth minerals, lead zinc, silver, copper, barite and iron ore resources in Nigeria. The challenge however is how to sensitise investors and relevant stakeholders on the
availability of the reports gathered from the NIMEP and how to access the information efficiently.  Closely related to the issue of the availability of geoscience
data required to make informed investment decisions, is the exploration strategy that was adopted by the government under the NIMEP. The objective of the project was to generate
integrated geoscience information in Greenfield and Brown field explorations/evaluation (remote sensing Geological, Geochemical and geophysical data) setting which will spur the desired investment into the sector. However, the experiences of other mining jurisdictions indicate that by concentrating on the
exploration of old legacy mines, they were able to attract more investments to reopen and work these legacy mines.
Consequently, Nigeria should have conducted its exploration in phases by first concentrating on the legacy mines of the Nigerian Mining Corporation generating improved geoscience data, that would have attracted more investments than what has been accomplished by a general exploration (Greenfields and Brownfields) done under the NIMEP. This is because, in most mining jurisdictions, governments only provide regional data and Investors are then left to carry out activities such as drilling on sites.

3.3.4 Inadequate Infrastructure

One of the weaknesses of the mining sector is inadequate infrastructure for mining and downstream mineral operations. Mining operations most often take place in rural areas and require infrastructure not only to conduct operations but also to move the mineral resources to processing centres along the entire value chain.

Infrastructure such as roads, rail, and power grids have become necessary to ensure effective mining operations. It should be appreciated that for some commodities, infrastructure contributes to the economic viability of the project during the feasibility stage. This includes bulk minerals like iron ore, steel, coal, etc. However, the mining sector suffers from the general infrastructure inadequacy that has afflicted all other economic sectors.

3.3.5 Insecurity

The present wave of insecurity in the country has grave implications for the development of the mining industry. Nigeria has in recent times witnessed unprecedented security challenges such as terrorism, insurgency, banditry, kidnapping for ransom, farmer-herder clashes, etc. The drivers of insecurity in Nigeria are myriad but have been identified to include ineffective and
inadequate security architecture, proliferation of small arms and light weapons, resources control agitation, high incidence of poverty and unemployment, porous borders, access to illicit drugs and psychotropic substances, climate change impacts,
inefficient criminal justice systems, etc. These security challenges impact negatively on mining operations that take place, especially in rural communities that are largely under policed. Furthermore, Governments’ response to the security challenges by some states has been to outrightly ban mining activities perceived to be responsible for the wave of insecurity
in the state as was done in Zamfara and Kebbi States. The point being made is while the government has the primary
responsibility to tackle the nation’s security challenges, it is posited that the banning of mining activities because of security threats cannot be the appropriate response strategy as it affects operations that provide livelihoods for thousands of people with a potential to grow the economy. The government should therefore upscale efforts to tackle insecurity in the country
generally and specifically around rich mineral resources states like Zamfara, Kebbi, Borno, Plateau, Nasarawa, Niger and Kaduna States that have experienced heightened security challenges attributable to the activities of illegal miners, bandits and terrorists.

4. CONTRIBUTIONS TO KNOWLEDGE

My contributions through scholarly publications and advocacy using relevant platforms and communications channels have contributed to the development of the mining sector and influenced policy and legal reforms and the implementation of mining sector programmes in Nigeria. I have however chosen to highlight only a few of such contributions that align with my
topic.

4.1. Scholarly Contributions

I have posited that the untapped potentials of the mining sector can be unlocked with the right policies, laws and institutional framework. My scholarly contributions in this regard are
discussed in the form of questions that I have raised and answers that I have attempted to provide through my published works.

(a) Can Public-Private Partnerships be Leveraged to Bridge Nigeria’s Infrastructure Gap? As a young scholar, I was eager to make contributions to solving societal problems. Consequently, one of the issues that struck me in the 1990s was the yawning infrastructural gap in the country and its effect on the economic development of the country. At the material time, a significant portion of the country’s road network and rail infrastructure was in poor condition, leading to increased transportation costs and reduced economic activity. Power generation, transmission and distribution systems were insufficient, resulting in frequent power outages impacting economic growth; access to clean water and proper sanitation facilities was a challenge, leading to
public health concerns. Generally, the country’s infrastructure was insufficient and in need of upgrades. The challenge was that the country faced a significant

financing gap in addressing its infrastructure needs, with estimates suggesting a requirement of around $100-150 billion annually for several years to bridge the gap. This was at a time when infrastructure development was largely financed by government revenue and domestic debt, with external debt financing also playing a role.76 The infrastructural decay that
afflicted the country from the late 1990s to the early 2000s amid dwindling revenues required the adoption of new strategies and measures designed to address the problem. In my 1st Staff Seminar at the Institute which was published as “Privatisation and the BOT Contract Option”, I showed that countries facing similar infrastructural challenges had adopted policy and legal frameworks that enabled the private sector to participate in the provision of infrastructural delivery on a commercial basis. Pakistan was a good example of a developing country that had used the concessioning of infrastructure to the private sector to provide on a commercial basis while relying on the payment of user charges to recoup the cost of investment and profit over a fixed duration of time.

Thus, relying on the Zia -ul- Hag formula in Pakistan, I argued for the adoption of public-private partnership (PPP) models such as Build Operate and Transfer (BOT), Build Own and Operate (BOO) and other variants to bridge Nigeria’s
infrastructure gap. I further argued that Nigeria could start by adopting BOTs where selected roads could be concessioned to the private sector to build, recover their investment through user charges and eventually transfer them to the government at the
end of the concession period. Other viable areas proposed were the provision of water and sanitation and drew examples of the pioneering work of the Lekki Concession Company, which had
started concessioning infrastructure projects in Lagos as a pointer to the viability of Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) in Nigeria. I recall with nostalgia that the late Professor I.A. Ayua,
SAN, OFR, who presided at the Staff Seminar, was very sceptical of my proposal. According to him, “What would be the primary responsibility of government if it abdicated its
responsibility of providing public goods to the private sector?” While it was difficult to envision the utility of PPPs in the late 1990s, you will agree that they have become quite ubiquitous today. Apart from the fact that PPP projects abound in the Nigerian economic landscape, the government has gone further to provide a legal framework to regulate concessions in Nigeria
through the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Act of 2005 (ICRC) and established an institutional framework known as the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (ICRC) to superintend over the PPP process in Nigeria. This was closely followed by the articulation of a National Policy on Public Private Partnerships.

My appointment as an Alternate Director, representing the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice on the Board of the ICRC in 2008 further exposed me to the PPP process and its utility in the provision of
essential infrastructure. This exposure influenced my research and writings in the area of infrastructure law. The scepticism that greeted my proposals in the 1990s has been completely erased as PPPs have taken firm root in the economic landscape in Nigeria. Today,
my argument is that Nigeria can adopt PPPs to develop roads and rail along the economic corridors that will enable mineral resources to be transported from the mines to processing centres
along the economic corridors to the ports for export.

(b) Can Solid Minerals be a Viable Alternative Source of Revenue and Foreign Exchange Earnings for Nigeria?
Nigeria is reputed to have vast mineral endowments. Therefore, I have argued that if these minerals are sustainably exploited and managed, the mining sector can be a viable alternative in the

quest to diversify Nigeria’s source of revenue and foreign exchange earnings. This is based on the projections that the
sector can generate significant revenues which can be used to develop other sectors of the economy. Thus, when Nigeria was experiencing structural imbalances in the economy as a result of the vagaries in the international price of oil and could hardly fund its yearly budgets, I argued in my chapter contribution titled “Solid Minerals as a Viable Investment Window for Nigeria.”
published in 2003, that solid minerals could be a viable alternative source of revenue and foreign exchange earnings for the country if certain reforms were carried out.

I drew attention to the huge mineral endowments of the country, which had been left largely under-exploited because of the discovery of oil and its commercial exploitation and queried the unwholesome reliance on crude oil as the source of revenue and foreign exchange earnings of the country. I recommended that the government should shift its attention to solid minerals and harness their potential for national development. I also
recommended measures such as improved geological information, reforms in the policy and mining code to make Nigeria competitive as a mining destination for investors, and
investment incentives, amongst others. I am glad that the suggestions made in the publication were adopted by the government as the sector witnessed greater attention, and large-scale reforms were carried out to improve
the sector and position it as a major source of revenue and foreign exchange earnings for the country. The Ministry of
Solid Minerals Development, created in 1995, which was renamed the Ministry of Mines and Steel Development, was
reinvigorated with the creation of specialised technical departments. The government’s policy towards the sector
changed as private sector-led development was emphasised, with the State playing the role of promoter/administrator of the sector. The Minerals and Mining Act of 1999 was repealed and a more progressive Nigerian Minerals and Mining Act, of 2007 was enacted to replace it. Similarly, the National Policy on Solid Minerals Development of 1998 was jettisoned, and
replaced with the National Minerals and Metals Policy of 2008. These policy, legal and institutional framework reforms were carried out to attract local and foreign investors to develop the country’s mineral endowments and enhance its contribution to the GDP.

(c) Is there a Conceptual Difference between Illegal and Informal Miners? One of the contentious issues in the mining sector is the rather thin line of distinction between ‘illegal miners’ and ‘informal miners.’ The argument has been made that those who take to mining to eke a living or as a poverty reduction strategy should be encouraged to formalise their operations for sustainability. I argued in my chapter contribution titled “The Regulation of
Artisanal and Small Mining in Nigeria” published in 2005 that informal mining has been and continues to be a significant economic activity among the rural poor communities in many
developing countries including Nigeria. I further argued that informal miners account for over 90 per cent of the mining activities carried out in Nigeria and that apart from employment
generation, informal miners are excellent prospectors who need to be encouraged. My thesis was that the government has not been able to
harness the energies of artisanal miners for national development because of the negative toga (illegal miners) associated with their operations. I argued that there is a difference between those who lack the necessary wherewithal to comply with the capital-intensive provisions of the law who should be given institutional support to formalise their operations and those with the resources to formalise their operations, but deliberately operate illegally to avoid their tax, royalty and environmental obligations and who must be sanctioned.

I, therefore, posited that for the first category of miners, the correct terminology should be “informal miners” distinct from ‘illegal miners’ whose negative activity cannot be
encouraged or supported by the government. Similarly, in the paper titled “Combating Illegal Mining: Legal and Institutional Imperatives for Nigeria” published in 2004, I outlined the institutional support that could be extended to informal miners to formalise their operations as a strategy to confront the illegality issues in the mining sector. They include capacity building, access to technical and financial support, etc.

I am pleased to observe that this fine distinction has been embraced in the mining sector as industry practitioners and policy makers have tended to recognise informal miners as a class of miners that require support to formalise their operations distinct from illegal miners who should be discouraged and
penalized. The policy recommendations made in my paper regarding
recognising informal miners in the policy and code as well as providing institutional support were implemented by the Government through the creation of the Artisanal and Small Scale Mining Department of the Ministry of Mines and Steel Development to provide support for artisanal miners.

(d) Should Artisanal Miners be Formally Recognised in the Mining Policy and Legal Framework?

The literature in the mining sector confirms that the energies and prospecting ingenuities of artisanal miners can be harnessed for national development. The argument is that such a class of miners, if provided with the right enabling environment, particularly recognition in the Mining Policy and Code, will pull their energies and resources together as Cooperatives and, with the requisite institutional support, formalise and carry out sustainable mining operations. Despite the huge benefits driveable from regulating or formalising artisanal mining activities in Nigeria, the Policy and Legal regime did not recognise this special class of miners. In my paper published in 2005, I posited that no meaningful progress could be achieved without the formal recognition of this class of miners in the Mining Policy and Mining Act. Although, the National Policy on Solid Minerals 1998 and the Minerals and Mining Act of 1999 contained provisions relating to Small Scale Miners, no direct mention or recognition was given to Artisanal Miners. The advocacy for the recognition continued until 2007 when the Nigerian Minerals and Mining Act of 2007 formally recognised ‘artisanal mining
operations’ as distinct from ‘small-scale mining operations’ and provided statutory definitions for them in the following words: ‘Artisanal Mining ‘ means ‘Mining Operations limited to the
utilisation of non-mechanised methods of reconnaissance, exploration, extraction and processing of Minerals Resources within a Small Scale Mining lease Area.’

‘Small Scale Mining’ on the other hand, means ‘Artisanal, Alluvial and Other
forms of Mining Operations involving the use of low level technology or application of methods not requiring substantial expenditure for the conduct of Mining Operations within a small
scale.’

Although the 2007 Act proceeded to provide for the Small Scale Mining Lease (SSML)to cater for these classes of miners, it is submitted that the Small Scale Mining Lease does not take
cognise of this distinction between artisanal and small-scale miners. It is thus contended that having recognised them as separate activities, the Act should have proceeded to provide for
a separate Artisanal Mining Lease for the benefit of artisanal miners. Therefore, my advocacy in this regard continues.

(e) How Suitable is Nigeria’s Mineral Rights System for the Attraction of Investments?

The nature of rights granted in a mining regime is of prime concern to investors as it reveals at a glance, the nature of

mining operations that can be carried out, the duration and the appropriate financing structure to be used in a given jurisdiction. The Minerals and Mining Act of 199992 was renowned for the
sanity it brought to the regulation of the mining sector by repealing hitherto existing legislation that created a regulatory maze in the sector as it provided in a single legislation, the
regulatory requirements for mining investment in Nigeria. In my paper titled “The Nature and Extent of Mining Rights in Nigeria”, published in 2004, I observed that the Minerals and Mining Act of 1999 provided for prospecting titles and Mining titles. At the prospecting stage, the prospecting rights, exclusive
prospecting, and special exclusive prospecting licences were granted. While at the Mining stage, the Mining Lease,
Temporary Mining Lease and Special mining lease were granted. My research revealed that the conditions for the grant
of these rights were generally in alignment with best industry practices around the globe, but decried the rather wide discretionary powers vested in the Minister. The paper argued that vesting a political appointee with such powers that are likely to be abused would not augur well for business. Investors require a legal system that guarantees stability and predictability and the possibility of a revocation of mining titles on subjective
grounds could be a disincentive. I also examined the security of tenure provisions under the Act in an article titled “Security of Tenure under Nigeria’s Mining Law and Policy,” which was published in 2003. The term ‘security of tenure’ as applied to mining investment means the assurance or reasonable expectation that the investor who has
successfully discovered a sizeable mineral resource due to exploration will be able to proceed with the development of such a resource. Bastida rightly observed that security of tenure
implies ”the notion that the investor has to be provided with assurance of being able to develop a successful discovery prior to committing sizeable resources to exploration or the right to proceed from exploration in the mining stage, i.e. (the right to mine.” I considered it pertinent to assess the security of tenure provisions under the Act because the overall objective of the reforms that gave rise to the National Policy on Solid Minerals of 1998 and the Minerals and Mining Act of 1999 was to encourage private sector participation in the development of the vast mineral endowments of the country. The paper, therefore, argued that private capital flows only to places and ventures that offer reasonable security and good return on investments. The very nature of mining investment calls for predictable rules and transparent criteria for granting and revoking mining titles.

Since mining investments have a long gestation period, it was necessary for the status quo to be maintained and the investment risk reduced to the barest minimum. The major concern with the security of tenure of mineral titles under the Minerals and Mining Act, 1999 was the absence of an automatic transition from exploration licence to mining lease. Investors, therefore, ran the risk of carrying out successful operations only to lose out at the mining stage where, for whatever reason, they were unable to secure the mining lease or a mining lease had been granted over the same area to another applicant. The primacy of security of tenure was demonstrated in the survey of 32 International mining companies conducted by the East-West Centre of Hawaii in 1989, which revealed that the “right to mine” was considered critical by 97 per cent of the respondents. The World Bank, in a similar survey in 1990, arrived at the same conclusion as the respondents rated the guarantee of mining rights before starting exploration as a major incentive.

I was, therefore, delighted when this weakness of the old regime was addressed in the Nigerian Minerals and Mining Act of 2007. Apart from reinforcing the security of tenure provisions from the exploration to the mining state, revocation of mineral titles is not left to the discretion of the Minister, but is subjected to the professional input of the Mining Cadastre Office (MCO). The MCO has also, through its institutional reforms and operational modalities, adopted the first come, first served process, which has reinforced the security of tenure in
Nigeria’s mineral rights system. It is safe to conclude that the 2007 Act has substantially allayed the fears expressed by Georgious Agricola in the De Re Metallica that, “the miner should not start mining in a district which is oppressed by a tyrant, but should carefully consider if the overlord there be friendly or inimical.” It is submitted that the 2007 Act is friendly and that the Act does not allow the Minister in charge of solid minerals development to act as a tyrant.

(f) How Can Nigeria Limit the Impacts of Mining Operations on the Environment?

My research in the mining sector has sought to explore theintersection between mining and the environment. As an undergraduate at the University of Jos, I experienced first-hand, the adverse effects of tin mining operations on the environment and people in the mining host communities around Jos, Plateau
State. Also witnessed was how arable lands degraded by mining operations were not reclaimed, rehabilitated or restored to their original state for farming purposes. While acknowledging the economic benefits derivable from
mining investments, such as revenue and employment generation and economic empowerment, one is not unmindful
of the mining industry’s potential for degrading the environment. Mining is generally known to be intense and
intrusive, and its operations often leave large environmental impacts on the local surroundings as well as wider implications for the environmental health of the planet.

In a paper titled “Addressing Environmental Concerns in the
Exploitation of Solid Minerals in Nigeria” published in 2011, I highlighted the land, water and air pollution occasioned by
mining operations and the strategies that should be adopted to address these impacts. The paper specifically examined the responsibilities of Mineral Title Holders and the Mines Environmental Compliance Department of the Ministry of Solid Minerals Development under the Nigerian Minerals and Mining Act, 2007. The government’s objectives in relation to the environment under the National Minerals and Metals Policy of 2008 were also examined. The paper observed that the task of protecting the environment is a shared responsibility between the government, miners, professional bodies and non-governmental organisations.
I concluded that the provisions of the Mining Policy and Mining Act were generally adequate for the purposes of
protecting the environment, but observed that appropriate policy and statutory provisions are themselves only sterile instruments which are incapable of transforming or engendering the
realisation of the goals they are designed to achieve without faithful implementation. I further posited that combating environmental degradation is a venture that should be technology-driven, meaning that Nigeria should constantly reappraise or review her Strategies and Action Plans in the light
of evolving technological developments for efficiency and effectiveness.

I recommended the granting of incentives to investors who invest in new technologies to combat environmental degradation. I am delighted that the Nigeran Minerals and Mining Regulations of 2021 have encapsulated in greater detail, the processes and procedures for addressing environmental concerns as they relate to mining operations, thereby reinforcing
some of the recommendations made with respect to protecting the environment from the adverse impacts of mining.

(g) Does the Mining Sector Require an Independent Regulator to Improve its Governance?

The economic reforms carried out by the National Council on Privatisation and driven by the Bureau of Public Enterprises (BPE) to liberalise the Nigerian economy, eventually led to the
establishment of some independent sector regulators such as the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) for the telecommunications sector; the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory
Commission (NERC) for the Power sector; and the Pensions Regulatory Commission (PENCOM) for the Pensions sector to name but a few. The establishment of these sector regulators translated to increased efficiency in the operations of these sectors and service delivery. For instance, statistics indicate that before liberalisation, Nigeria’s teledensity was approximately 0.4 percent before 2001, with only 400,000 lines, making it one of the lowest in the world.105 However, after full liberalisation of the sector, Nigeria’s teledensity increased significantly. By the end of December 2013, it had reached over 91.15 per cent with 127.6 million lines. By the end of December 2014, it had further increased to over 99.39 per cent with 139.1 million active subscribers.106 As of August 2023, the NCC reported that the number of active lines in Nigeria had reached 220,715,961 million with a teledensity of 115.63 per cent. Also, the of active
internet mobile subscribers over the same period was 159,034,717 million, with broadband penetration at 45.57 per
cent. The successes recorded in the telecommunications sector were largely attributable to the establishment of the NCC as the sector regulator. This has provided the impetus for calls for a
sector regulator for the mining sector, which, to all intents and purposes, is underperforming in much the same way as the telecommunications sector before the reforms that led to the establishment of a sector regulator. These developments caught my attention, and after due consideration of the relative merits and demerits of establishing an independent regulator in the
extractive sector, I joined the bandwagon in 2017 when at the twilight of the tenure of Dr. Kayode Fayemi as the Honourable
Minister, Ministry of Mines and Steel Development of Mines and Steel Development, I consulted for the Ministry in an effort to amend the Nigerian Minerals and Mining Act, 2007 to establish the Nigerian Minerals and Mining Commission as the
independent regulator for the mining sector.

The consultancy afforded me the opportunity to put forward the structure of NCC as a model that could be replicated to establish the Nigerian Minerals and Mining Commission (NMMC) as an independent sector regulator for the mining sector. The proposal sought to excise all the technical departments in the Ministry of Mines and Steel Development (now the Ministry of Solid Minerals Development), namely: the Mines Inspectorate, Mines Environmental Compliance, Artisanal and Small-Scale Mining and the Mining Cadastre Office to form the nucleus of the new sector regulator. The Ministry was to be restructured to focus mainly on policy formulation, investment promotion and representation of the
country at international mining fora. Unfortunately, the legislative proposal for the sector regulator was not passed into law by the National Assembly before the end of the tenure of Dr Kayode Fayemi, CON.

In 2020, it became clear to me that the initial enthusiasm to establish a regulator for the sector had considerably waned. Therefore, I considered it pertinent to bring the issue to the
consciousness of relevant stakeholders in the industry. In a paper titled “Towards an Independent Regulator for Nigeria’s
Minerals and Mining Sector: Is the Proposed Nigerian Minerals and
Mining Commission, A Case of New Wine in Old Wine Skins?” published in 2020, 108 I reiterated the need to amend the Nigerian Minerals and Mining Act, 2007, to establish a sector regulator for the mining sector. The paper drew attention to the existence of other economic regulators, such as the NCC and NERC. It examined their Board and Management structure, statutory functions and powers, as well as financial and operational independence that have enabled them to effectively discharge their regulatory functions. The paper compared these independent regulators to the technical departments in the Ministry of Solid Minerals Development and observed that there was a world of difference in their operational modalities, efficiency and effectiveness. First, the technical departments did not enjoy the operational and financial independence required of a regulator such as to inspire the confidence of the regulated entities and the general public. Secondly, the technical departments were generally under-resourced in terms of human and material resources (dearth of skilled manpower, operational vehicles, poor training and remuneration, etc.) such that the exercise of their regulatory functions was severely hampered making them susceptible to regulatory capture.

The paper cautioned that it was not just a case of establishing a regulator for the sake of it but that such a regulator should be independent, adequately empowered and resourced to discharge its responsibilities, or else the situation would be akin to putting new wine in old wines skins. I concluded that the establishment of a regulator was a sine qua non, not only to address the governance challenges in the mining sector but also to catalyst its development in much the same way as has been done in the Power, Telecommunications and Pensions sectors.

Although the idea of establishing a regulator has yet tomaterialise, the advocacy has created a demand for reforms, and a lot is being done to sensitise relevant stakeholders. The Bureau for Public Enterprises (BPE), the Nigerian Extractive Industries
Transparency Initiative (NEITI), and the Revenue Mobilization, Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) are working with the Nigerian Economic Summit Group (NESG) to advocate for
reforms that will lead to the establishment of a regulator for the
mining sector. The Petroleum sector has taken the lead in this regard since the coming into force of the Petroleum Industry Act of 2021, which established two independent sector regulators,
namely, the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRIC) and the Nigerian Mid and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA). I am, therefore,
confident that the establishment of an independent regulator for the mining sector is just a matter of time.

(h) Are Community Development Agreements (CDAs) Effective Mechanisms for Transferring the Social and Economic Benefits of Mining Investments to Mining Host Communities?

Mining is a capital-intensive business with a long gestation period and enormous impact on the people and environment where operations occur. Mineral Title Holders/Mining Companies, therefore, seek to gain acceptance of their mining host communities through
implementation projects/programmes designed to create a harmonious and conducive operating environment. This process, which is technicallyreferred to as ‘social licence to operate’, has historically been carried out on a voluntary basis. However, some mining jurisdictions, including Nigeria, have moved away from this trajectory of a voluntary process to a regulatory requirement that compels the transfer of the social and economic benefits of mining investment to host communities.

The Nigerian Minerals and Mining Act, 2007, provides that the Mineral Title holder shall conclude a Community
Development Agreement (CDA) with the Mining host community prior to the commencement of mining investment,
thereby making it a mandatory regulatory requirement. In a paper titled “A Legal Analysis of Community Development Agreements as a Tool for Enhancing Social Licence to Operate for
Mining Companies in Nigeria” which was published in 2017, I appraised the CDA mechanism to assess its utility, effectiveness and fitness for purpose and with the benefit of Nigeria’s history

commended the introduction of CDAs. The paper drew attention to the sad history of Nigeria’s legacy mines around the country, where investors didn’t do much in terms of executing projects and programmes designed to benefit their host communities and, in some instances, investors closed shop, leaving their host
communities with nothing but degradation of their environment.
However, the paper observed with regret that the CDA negotiation process has not been inclusive, excluding large segments of society such as Women, Youths and People Living with Disabilities (PWD) from the process; some of the projects
selected for execution were mainly for the benefit of community leaders/chiefs rather than the community at large, and project implementation was poor in the absence of effective monitoring
mechanism. I also argued that the enforcement of CDAs through
ministerial intervention and contractual remedies was a challenge because of the inequality of arms between the parties
to the agreement, with the Mining Companies having the upper hand. I therefore recommended the reform of the process to make it fit for purpose.
Quite fortuitously, in 2023, I was invited by the African Centre for Leadership and Development (Centre LSD) to the
validation of their research on the efficacy of CDAs in Mining Host communities in Nigeria.

It afforded me the opportunity to share my thoughts and concerns regarding the CDA process and consider reform proposals to improve the efficacy of the mechanism. Centre LSD later invited me to be a part of a team constituted to review the Guidelines for the Production of Community Development Agreement, 2014 and propose amendments to improve it. The Team proposed significant changes to improve the CDA process such as the capacity of participating stakeholders, inclusiveness in community representation and CDA implementation monitoring process.

The review gave rise to the Revised Guidelines for the Production of Community Development Agreement, 2023, which was signed by Mr Dele Alake, Honourable Minister Solid Minerals Development, on the assumption of office in 2023. Despite these salutary developments, I have argued with the benefit of the Petroleum Industry Act, (PIA) 2021 that the CDA is an inadequate mechanism to ensure the transfer of the social and economic benefits of mining investments to host communities. I have expressed a preference for the Incorporated Communities Trusts provided under the PIA 2021 as a more effective mechanism because of its secured funding mechanism, which is complemented by an institutional implementation process supervised by the sector regulator.

Furthermore, the Regulations made pursuant to the PIA 2021, to regulate the process are comprehensive and provide sanctions for non-compliance, unlike the CDA Guidelines, where implementation was before the Revised Guidelines of 2023, left entirely to the Parties with minimal Institutional oversight.

(i) How can Nigeria Mitigate the Social and Community Issues Relating to Mining?

Closely related to the issue of transferring benefits to host
communities is the need to protect host communities from the social and community issues occasioned by mining
investment/operations. Research has shown that mining has potential negative impacts on the social lives of people and
occasion a host of community issues such as prostitution, drug use/addiction, criminalities, etc. Mining communities have had their objects of veneration destroyed or violently debased by
miners, especially during ‘gold rushes.’
Nigeria is now primed to upscale the exploitation of its mineral resources. This has implications for the socio-economic
and community issues affecting Mining host communities. In a chapter contribution titled “Addressing the Socio-Economic and Community Issues in Mining: Issues and Challenges for Nigeria” published in 2023, I called on the government and regulatory bodies to pay special attention to these issues to avoid the unintended consequences of mining operations on the social and cultural life of mining host communities. Furthermore, the

measures that have been adopted and implemented by the Government to address identified challenges were appraised to assess the extent of their compliance with international best
practices. The findings revealed that Nigeria had substantially adopted international best practices aimed at addressing the socio-economic and community issues arising from mining
operations. However, the major challenge was implementation gaps, which had rendered the measures ineffective.

Consequently, measures to control illegal mining, formalize Artisanal mining operations, improve health and safety, and prevent environmental degradation will require closer attention in terms of monitoring and resourcing of relevant institutions to achieve the desired effect.
It was therefore gratifying when Mr Dele Lake, Honourable Minister of Solid Minerals Development, unveiled
his “Agenda for the Transformation of the Solid Minerals for International Competitiveness and Domestic Prosperity namely, the creation of the Nigerian Solid Minerals Corporation, Joint ventures with Mining Multinationals, Big data on Specific seven priority minerals and their deposits, the
30-day grace period for illegal miners to join artisanal cooperatives, Mines Surveillance Task Force and Mine Police,
Comprehensive review of all Mining Licences and creation of six Mineral Processing Centres to focus on value-added products. The Minister’s Agenda has, by his pronouncement, taken onboard my past advocacy and recommendations to the effect that addressing the illegality issue in the mining sector was crucial for any government desirous of attracting local and foreign investment to the sector. The commitment of the government to curbing illegal mining was amply demonstrated when, on 4th April 2024, Mr Dele Alake announced the
“unveiling 2,200 Strong Mines Marshal to smoke out illegal miners and those who flout the nation’s mining laws”. This
brings the issue to the front banner with a salutary effect on investors who have been groaning under the weight of illegal
operators who have not only become irritants but also constituted a major hindrance to their operations.

(j) Does Nigeria Require a State-Owned Enterprise (SOE) to Catalyse the Development of the Mining Sector?

The 7-Point Agenda for the transformation of the Solid Minerals
sector announced by Mr Dele Alake, Honourable Minister of Solid Minerals Development, includes the creation of the Nigerian Solid Minerals Corporation (NSMC). It is however important to observe that this is not the first time that the government will float the idea of establishing a State Owned Enterprise (SOE) in the mining sector. As already stated, the Nigerian Mining Corporation (NMC) was established in 1972
to drive the development of the mining industry and fill the void created by the exit of expatriates and foreign mining
companies. However, it soon became obvious that the government was not such a good ‘businessman’. The NMC
progressively recorded abysmal performance due to poor funding, mismanagement and corruption, and eventually became comatose.

Furthermore, in 2021, the 9th National Assembly considered the Bill to establish the Nigerian Minerals Development Corporation (NMDC), sponsored by Senator Tanko Al Makura. The Bill sought to establish the NMDC as an SOE with privatesector participation and governance to, amongst other things,
drive the development of the mineral resources of the country across the entire value chain (upstream, Midstream, and
downstream) operations to diversify the country’s revenue and foreign exchange earnings. However, I had concerns about the viability of the NMDC and expressed them in a paper titled “Quo vadis? The Nigerian Minerals Development Corporation Bill, 2020 and Development of Nigeria’s Mining Sector” which was published in 2023.

We sought answers to the following questions:

(i) Does the Bill signal the return to public sector-led development of the mining sector, which had been discarded since the late 1990s in favour of private sectorled development?

(ii) Has a sufficient case been made for the establishment of another corporation following the abysmal performance of
the NMC?

(iii) Why was the option of revitalising the moribund NMC not being explored?

(iv) What are the prospects of the NMDC in the face of daunting challenges that militated against the performance of the
erstwhile NMC?

The debate about whether the government is a good businessman
has also found expression in the mining sector. Nigeria’s experience with State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) has not been
altogether satisfactory to the extent that enabling legislation was passed by the National Assembly to demonopolize and
commercialise the SOEs that had been established when the government.

Analysis of the Bill revealed. First, the provisions were essentially similar to that of the NMC Act of 1972 as amended. We therefore wondered why the option to amend the NMC Act to incorporate the desired changes was not explored, if indeed there was a consensus to return to public sector-led development of the mining sector. Secondly, we queried the much-touted operational independence of the proposed NMDC as the ownership, Board Structure and Corporate Governance provisions of the Bill did not guarantee such independence because of the overwhelming government
control of the proposed corporation, a fact which will potentially render the NMDC susceptible to political influence and control in much the same way as the defunct NMC. We, therefore, concluded that the Bill to establish the NMDC as an SOE was not fit for purpose unless some fundamental changes were made to the provisions relating to ownership, board structure and corporate governance. However, the processes leading to the
establishment of the NMDC were not concluded as the Bill was not passed into law and assented to by President Muhammadu Buhari, GCFR, before the end of his administration on 29th May
2023. The idea of establishing an SOE in the mining sector has been resurrected by Mr Dele Alake, on the assumption of duty as Honourable Minister of Solid Minerals Development. He announced that the creation of the Nigerian Solid Minerals Corporation was a priority.125 It is refreshing to note that the Minister has assured that “the pitfalls of the defunct NMC would be avoided by ensuring that the new company operates
according to the values of the market by reducing unnecessary intervention to the barest minimum and motivating its officials to make decisions solely for the profitability and capital formation in the sector.”

While I strongly believe that private sector-led development will advance the development of the mining sector, views have been expressed that the sector requires more investment from the government to stabilise it for the reception of private investments. The SOE may be the channel through which the government can fund the sector akin to the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, which has since transformed into a Limited Liability Company (NNPCL). The Minister’s
assurances that the pitfalls of the NMC will be avoided are comforting. Whether the Nigerian Solid Minerals Corporation
will fulfil its purpose, only time will tell.

4.2 Interfaces with Relevant Stakeholders

Apart from my scholarly writings, I have been involved in advancing mining sector issues and interfacing with organisations in the public and private sectors whose objectives are to improve the policy and legal regime and address structural challenges besetting the mining sector.

(a) Nigerian Bar Association Section on Business Law (NBASBL)

I have worked closely with the Nigerian Bar Association/Section on Business Law, where I served as the Pioneer Chairman of the Mining Law Committee, to organise seminars and Conference Sessions on Mining Law at the NBA Annual Conferences, trainings and webinars for practitioners and stakeholders in the mining sector to draw attention to burning

issues as they affect the mining sector. Some of these
engagements have led to policy and legal reforms and the strengthening of relevant sector institutions.

(b) Nigerian Economic Summit Group (NESG)-Mining and Manufacturing Policy Commission

The NESG Annual Summits provide a veritable forum for Public Private Dialogue on reform issues and proposals in different sectors of the economy, including mining. I have taken an active interest in the work of the Nigerian Economic Summit Group (NESG), especially the work of the Mining Thematic Group which is playing a leading role in advocating for appropriate policies and legal reforms in the mining sector. I am privileged to serve as Co-Thematic Lead of the Mining
Thematic Group where I have joined other like-minded Nigerians in contributing to advocacy programmes aimed at drawing attention to the challenges in the mining sector and
proffering policy options for reform.
The Thematic Group’s reform priority is to ensure a comprehensive review of the mining policy to align it with the African Mining Vision adopted by African Union Heads of States and Government in 2009 to promote inclusive and broadbased development of the mining sector.

5. REFORM IMPERATIVES FOR NIGERIA

The potential of the mining sector can be realised through the faithful implementation of the following reform proposals:

5.1 Comprehensive Mining Policy that Aligns with the African Mining Vision (AMV)

The point has been made that a country’s mining policy signposts the guiding principles and the direction for the
development of the mining sector; setting clear objectives and strategies for realising those objectives. Consequently, Nigeria needs to elaborate a comprehensive mining policy that aligns
with the AMV to replace the present Nigerian Minerals and Metals Policy 2008 in operation. There is a need to have a
consultative process to build consensus among key stakeholder groups in Nigeria about how they envision the mining sector. The emphasis on the AVM is because it emphasised stakeholder participation. Furthermore, with the myriad of issues in the industry, stakeholders need to deliberate on the
future of the mining industry and their respective roles in developing and reforming the sector. The comprehensive
mining policy so developed will provide the pathway for identifying the legal, regulatory and institutional reforms to
undertake and their sequencing. It will answer important questions such as the new laws we require, the ones to amend,
which institutions to strengthen and the ones to establish. The policy will also define appropriate roles for the sub-nationals and mining host communities.

5.2 Progressive Minerals and Mining Act

The Nigerian Minerals and Mining Act, 2007 has been in operation for 17 years. The operation of the Act has revealed inherent weaknesses that require strengthening to bring it in tandem with current realities. Most importantly, the Act needs to be amended to establish an independent sector regulator for
the mining sector akin to the regulators established for other economic sectors and specify clear roles for the sub-nationals in the mineral sector governance framework to address the present jurisdictional conflicts between the federal government and the
sub-nationals in the governance of the sector. Furthermore, the legislation should address the extant challenges in the consent provisions of the Act (s. 100); strengthen the provisions relating
to Community Development Agreements with the benefit of the Incorporated Communities Trust under the Petroleum Industry Act, 2021 to ensure effective transfer of social and economic benefits of mining investment to the Mining host communities; reform the dispute resolution mechanism to make it more efficient and effective amongst others.

5.3 Restructuring of the Institutional Framework

The Ministry of Solid Minerals Development, the main institutional framework for the sector should be restructured and adequately resourced to effectively discharge of its mandate.
The Technical Departments in the Ministry (Mines Inspectorate, Mines Environmental Compliance and Artisanal and SmallScale Mining) should be excised from the Ministry together with the semi-autonomous Mining Cadastre Office (MCO) to form
the nucleus of the Independent Sector Regulator. This will enable the ministry to focus on policy formulation, investment promotion, supervision of mining sector parastatals and
representation of the country at meetings of international organisations relevant to the sector. The independent sector regulator so created should enjoy financial, management and operational independence, empowered to set standards as required of a regulator to sanitise the sector and make it more
responsive to the needs of investors and stakeholders in the mining sector.

5.4 Access to Geoscience Data/Change in Exploration Strategy

The Ministry of Solid Minerals Development should prioritise
access to geoscience data for investors in the sector. The Nigerian Geological Survey Agency (NGSA) should organise
geoscience data to facilitate easy access by investors in the sector. Furthermore, government should adopt the practice of
mapping out areas with sufficient geoscience data for bidding by investors to raise funds and recover part of the exploration expenses. Government should change its exploration strategy
from one that focuses on Greenfield exploration of the country to Brownfield exploration that takes cognisance of the legacy mines that existed before the abandonment of the sector and
reopening them to attract investors.

5.5 Linkages between the Mining Sector and other Economic
Sectors

Nigeria’s mining sector has tended to develop as enclaves without proper linkages (vertical and horizontal) to other sectors to enable the country to benefit from its multiplier effect along the entire mineral value chain. The mining industry should be repositioned to stimulate industrialisation (resource-based industrialisation) where upstream industries that produce heavy machinery used for mining can be encouraged to set up industrial clusters around mines as well as downstream mineral processing facilities (lapidaries) that make use of minerals produced as a feedstock for their industries. This will stimulate economic activities, revenue and employment generation needed to grow the economy. The AMV provides the requisite framework for attaining this objective to ensure inclusive and broad-based development of the mining industry.

5.6 Harnessing of the Energies and Ingenuities of Artisanal Miners for Development

Nigeria’s geology is generally conducive to artisanal mining operations since most mineral occurrences are not large enough to attract large-scale operators. The government must evolve a strategy that can effectively harness the energies and ingenuities of artisanal mining for the overall development of the mining
sector. Artisanal miners, apart from their prospecting ingenuity, are forebears of the large-scale mines. They often discover mineral occurrences that attract the attention of large scale operators. The government needs to give sufficient attention to artisanal miners by making provisions for their co-existence
with large-scale operators under conditions that allow them to thrive. One sure step to the realisation of this objective is toprovide for an Artisanal Mining Licence in the mineral rights
regime and a District Licensing system that will bring the licensing process closer to the people at the grassroots. Other viable initiatives include simplifying the registration process and
facilitating the development of a mining finance ecosystem.

5.7 Tackling the Security Challenges in the Mining Sector

The government should adopt measures to effectively tackle the security challenges in the country in general and particularly around mining communities in Nigeria. This will create an enabling environment for mining activities to thrive in the country in addition to making the country a destination of choice for investors in the mining sector. The effective tackling of the security challenge will further de-risk the sector and attract ancillary investment opportunities for mining host communities with a salutary effect on the economy.

6. CURRENT RESEARCH

In my over 26 years as an academic, I have traversed many areas of law that hold special research interests for me. I have developed an interest in international criminal law and the
administration of criminal justice reforms. In 2001, Honourable Justice Emannuel Ayoola, JSC, who also served at the Appeals Chamber of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, identified the
need to train Nigerians in international criminal law to serve at the various Ad-Hoc Criminal Tribunals (International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and International
Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) established by the UN Security Council and the treaty-based International Criminal Court (ICC).

In 2002, the Institute under the Headship of Prof Ameze Guobadia took up the challenge by organising a Sensitisation
Workshop on International Criminal Justice and its Administration. The Workshop was domiciled in the Department of International Law where as Head of Department, I worked closely with Professor Amaze Guobadia to successfully deliver the workshop that thereafter continued to feature on the training calendar of the Institute’s continuing legal education programme for over a decade. The proceedings of the Maiden Sensitisation Workshop were published under the title “An Introduction to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court”, which Professor Amaze Guobadia Co-edited with me. This stimulated my interest in International Criminal Law to the extent that I later introduced and taught the course “International Criminal Law and Jurisdiction” at the Postgraduate Programme of the Nasarawa State University, Keffi, from 2015-2018.

Imbued by this exposure, I launched myself in the field and published some scholarly works in the area of international criminal justice. I also participated in the Mac Arthur Foundation-sponsored project on the Implementation of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015(ACJA) and the various States Administration of Justice laws (ACJLs). This project took me across virtually all the states of the federation holding capacity-building programmes for judges and prosecutors and drafting and validating Rules of Court to aid the
implementation of ACJLs. This ordinarily should have put me in the position of an expert in criminal law, but Prof Adedeji Adekunle, SAN, FNIALS who is a public law expert, has time and again demonstrated his superiority in this area of law. I, have, therefore, yielded the space to him. Constitutional law naturally appeals to me like any trained lawyer. Apart from participating in meetings such as the Forum of Federations and National Assembly Public Hearings on Constitutional amendments and amendment of other statutes, I also wrote some scholarly works aimed at contributing to knowledge in the area of Constitutional law, However, I have continually found it difficult to stamp my authority in this fieldbecause of the towering image of Professor Ameze Guobadia, FNIALS whom you all know, is not just a mentor, but an accomplished and globally renowned constitutional law scholar.
I therefore have no option but to bow to her superior knowledge. Commercial law has interesting intersections with mining
law and naturally appealed to me at some point. My participation in the OHADA Project on Harmonisation of Business Laws in West Africa in 1999 provided further impetus, which encouraged me to venture into the field to publish some articles with the hope of making an impact in the area, but Professor Paul Indornigie, SAN, FNIALS, Professor Bolaji Owasonoye, SAN and Professor Animi Sylvanus Pepple, who are the Institute’s core commercial law scholars, have demonstrated their core competencies in this area of law and have refused to yield ground. Joining them will only place meat the periphery.

Although my interest in Intellectual Property Law predates the Institute, I could not pursue this interest further because of the towering image of Professor Adebambo Adewopo, SAN and Dr. Helen Chuma-Okoro (Associate Professor of law), who have become leading authorities in this area of law. I am therefore contented to be known as their Associate.

The nexus between Environmental law and Mining Law is so strong that one cannot appreciate mining law without delving into the rudiments of environmental law. Over the years, I have served as a Lead Tutor in the Advanced Environmental Law Course at the NIALS Postgraduate School, teaching environmental law to postgraduate students. Although, I can reasonably assume some measure of competence in this area of law, making it a central focus of my research will be selfdefeating with established environmental law scholars like Professor Emmanuel Okon and budding academics like Dr. Nkiruka Maduekwe (Associate Professor of Law) and Dr Izuoma Egerouh-Adindu (Associate Professor of Law) who have demonstrated remarkable scholarship in the area.

I have therefore resolved to remain in my familiar forte’ and continue my research and advocacy towards improving mining sector governance in Nigeria. I am convinced that with this
endeavour I will continue to contribute towards the development of Nigeria’s mining sector.

7. CONCLUSION
Nigeria can unlock the untapped potential of the Mining sector by adopting the various reform initiatives recommended. The Ministry of Solid Minerals Development, which is responsible for articulating policies for the development of the mining sector
should commence consultations with relevant stakeholders to articulate a comprehensive Mining Policy framework for the mining industry that will define the legal and governance framework, establish an independent sector regulator, define roles for the sub-nationals, Mining communities and civil
society organisations in the mining sector governance framework in Nigeria.

8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am immensely grateful to God for the guidance and the enablement to discharge my responsibilities as an academic in the Institute by presenting this lecture. I appreciate the support
of my family, Mrs Sarah Awureka Akper, PhD, Vania Anase Terkaa-Akper and Sughter Terkaa-Akper, and my siblings,
Chief Mrs Hannah Mlumun Banfa, Mrs Hembadoon Erekaa, Dr. Elijah Uva Akper, Honourable Moses Terver Akper,
Professor Godwin Iornenge Akper, Mrs Naomi Nguwasen Iorzenda and Late Miss Ngimbee Akper for their love,
forbearance, and continued support in my academic and life journeys.

My nephews and nieces also deserve special mention: Nandir Flora Williams, Late Nansak Samuel Banfa, Lohya Fwa,
Mandam Mark Banfa, Nimfa Banfa (Jnr); Nguseer Erekaa, Samuel Terhemba Erekaa, Engr Terdzungwe Erekaa, Gbidi
Erekaa; Jennifer Hembafan Fadare, Kelly Mbaember Akper, Kase Akper; Stella Nguher Akper, Terhide Akper; Suurnen
Akper, Shater Akper, Aondosoo Iorzenda, Ngodoo Iorzenda, and Doose Iorzenda for making me feel loved as an Uncle. I
also acknowledge my siblings from other mothers, Late Ibukun Babajide, Oladipo Sobowale, Ajibola Edwards, Dimeji Edwards, Kwei Olabunmi Edwards, Asabe Yusuf, Late LAWAL Baba Yusuf, and Binta Yusuf with whom I grew up in Wemabod Estate, Ikeja, Lagos.

I am indebted to my benefactors, Late Air Commodore Bernard Nimfa Banfa (rtd), Makamam Langtang and his wife, Chief Mrs, Hannah Mlumun Banfa who nurtured me from 1971 when I was 8 years old, till I graduated from the University and was called to the Nigerian Bar in 1988; late Alhaji Baba Yusuf of Kano Transport International who looked after me from primary 5 and enrolled me into Victory High School, Ikeja for my secondary education; Late Air Vice Marshall Usman Muazu, former Military Governor of Kaduna State, who took me into his house hold in form 4 and looked after me until I graduated from secondary School in 1981; Late Alh Musa Magaji, Turakin Jega and Wanbai Gwandu, retired Federal Permanent Secretary, who made may stay at the Nigerian Law School, Victoria Island, Lagos a memorable one by accommodating me in his house in Victoria Island, in addition to a weekly stipend which gave me a privileged status amongst my colleagues especially the ones from Benue state; Mr. Tony Liam Ge, former Company Secretary/Legal Adviser, Delta
Steel Limited Aladja, and Honourable Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Benue State who took me under his wings during my National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) Programme in the former Bendel State and taught me the rudiments of writing office memos, legal opinions and drafting agreements. I am ever grateful to Amb. Ignatius Chive Kaave, former Honourable Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Benue State, who employed me in his Chambers in Jos in 1989 and later entrusted his entire practice to me when he resigned to take up an appointment as Company Secretary/Legal Adviser, Benue Cement Company, Gboko, Benue State; Mr. Adzenda Sombo, former Managing Director, Taraku Mills Limited, for teaching me the rudiments of management and how to deal with the complex issues in the corporate world; Late Prof I.A. Ayua, SAN, OFR, who not only employed me in the Institute, but later appointed me as his Special Assistant in 2000 and Personal Assistant when he became the Solicitor General of the Federation and Permanent Secretary, Federal Ministry of Justice; Chief Michael Kaase Aondoakaa, SAN, former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, who appointed me as his Special Assistant and exposed me to the workings of the Office of the Attorney General of the Federationand Minister of Justice. I found him to be a cerebral and courageous leader in every sense of the word; Prince Adetokunbo Kayode, SAN, CON, former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, who also appointed me his Special Assistant and trusted me with immense
responsibilities of his office. He taught me the virtues of trust and loyalty in the discharge of one’s responsibility, and Mr. Mohammed Bello Adoke, SAN, CFR, FCI Arb (UK), DSSRS, former Honourable Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, who without any referral from anyone and limited prior personal interactions, appointed me Senior Special Assistant in the Attorney General’s Chambers. I have benefitted immensely from his knowledge of the law, courage and personal conviction to do right at all times, no matter the circumstances or inconveniences. It is not surprising that our relationship has, over the years, metamorphosed from that of a Boss to a friend and, ultimately, a brother. He has been instrumental in my professional development, including my elevation to the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria.

I am similarly grateful to my Mentors, Mr. Benjamin Tuse, my Headmaster at NKST Transferred School, Agbonor, Mbagen, in Buruku Local Government Area of Benue State, Mrs Odunsi, Principal, Victory High School, Ikeja Lagos, late, Mr Luke Otoko, my Scoutmaster, at Tunwase Nursery and
Primary School, Ikeja, for early childhood mentoring that helped to mould my character and moral fibre. Chief Raymond Ihyembe, Tsar u Tiv, former Managing Director, Afribank Plc,
for taking special interest in my career development; Honourable Justice Benedict Bapkwaph Kanyip, PhD, FNIALS, President, National Industrial Court for accommodating me and
guiding me when I joined the Institute in 1997 and teaching me the rudiments of academic writing; Professor Ademola Popoola, FNIALS, former Dean, Faculty of Law, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife who supervised my PhD research and guided my thoughts towards the successful completion of the work at a
time when many scholars avoided postgraduate work at OAU, Ife for fear of not graduating in good time.

I am grateful to all the Directors General of the Institute for their support and mentoring, starting with Professor Ameze Guobadia, FNIALS, one of the greatest scholars I have encountered in my academic life with an eye for detail. I am glad that she has continued to place her wealth of knowledge and experience at my disposal; Professor Epiphany Azinge, FNIALS, SAN, OON, is not just a mentor, but a friend who advanced my career by promoting me to the rank of Research Professor of Law and the Jadesola Akande Distinguished
Professorial Chair; Professor Adedeji Adekunle, SAN, FNIALS an exceptionally brilliant an unassuming personality who taught me a great lesson in humility right from when out parts crossed in the Institute to working together as Senior Special Assistant in the Attorney General’s Chambers where his intellect and capacity to solve complex legal problems was evident, and
Professor M.T. Ladan, the current Director General of the Institute for his dexterity, hard work and determination to make a difference no matter the odds. The manner in which he has pursued academic linkages and the execution of the permanent site project is commendable. I appreciate the encouragement and support of my
professional colleagues at the Institute, Professor Yinka Omorogbe, SAN, Professor Paul Idornigie, FNIALS, SAN
C.Arb, Professor Adebambo Adewopo SAN, Professor Animi Sylvanus Pepple, Professor Emily Alemika, Professor
Emmanuel Okon, Professor Ngozi Udombana, Prof Ibe Ifeakandu, Professor Uluacha, Professor Jide Owoeye,
Professor Okeke, Professor Francisca Nlerun, Dr Helen Chuma Okoro (Assocaite Professor of Law) Dr. Osato Eruaga (Associate Professor of Law) Dr. Adebisi Arewa (Associate Profesor of Law), Dr. Peter Anyembe, (Associate Professor of Law) Dr. Fatima Bello (Associate Professor of Law), Dr.
Taiwo Ogunleye (Associate Professor of Law), Dr. Nkiruka Chida Maduekwe (Associate Professor of Law), Dr. Jane
Ezerigwe (Associate Professor of Law), Dr. Lilian Uche (Associate Professor of Law), Dr. Izuoma Egeruoh- Adindu
(Associate Professor of Law), David Oluwagbami, Shankyula, Tersoo, Late Dr. Habila Ardzard, Adejoke Adediran, Awele Ikobi- Onyali, Ebele Ogwuda, Lanre Adetunmobi, Andy Mmakwe, Oluchi Azoro, Mr. John Yawe, Mrs Jetty Imiahagbe, Mr. Danjuma Tagni, Hyelsinta Ndahi, Charity Adinngi,
Rahmatu Bello-Duwap, Mrs Belau and Mrs Rose Omokwa.

I am grateful for the support I have enjoyed from colleagues outside of the Institute, Professor A.S. Shaakaa, Professor Jamila Mohammed Nasir, Professor Dakas C J Dakas, SAN,
Professor Joash Amupitan, SAN, Professor Shikiyil Sylvester, SAN, Professor Bem Angwe, Prof, A. A.Adedeji, Professor Ben Akume, Professor Odoba Omoreigie SAN, Professor Zac Gundu, Professor Tor Iorapuu, Professor Kenen, Professor Vitalis Verlumun Tarhule, Professor Joseph Kur, Professor
Amuda Kannike, SAN, Professor Kayode Olatoke, SAN, Professor Oludayo Amokaye, SAN, Professor Samuel
Aondoawase Apinega, Professor Adeniyi Olatubosun, Professor Lanre Fabgohun, SAN, Professor Bankole Shodipo, SAN,
Professor Sam Erugo, SAN, Professor Fatima Alkali, Professor Maiyaki, SAN, Professor Jumai Audi, Professor LOC
Chukwu, Professor Maxwell Gidado, SAN, Professor Fabian Ajogwu, SAN, Suleiman Nchi, Professor Alphonsus Alubo
SAN, Professor Elijah Okebukola, Judge Doocivir Yawe and Mr. P.C. Okorie.

I appreciate the encouragement of Icons of the judiciary who have at different times encouraged and supported me.
Honourable Justice S M. A, Belgore, GCON, FNIALS, former Chief Justice of Nigeria, late Honourable Justice Alloysius
Iorgyer Katsina- Alu, GCON, FNIALS former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Hon Justice Umaru Abdullahi, FNIALS, former
President, Court of Appeal, Honourable Justice Monica Domgban Memson, President, Court of Appeal, CFR
Honourable Justice Ejembi Eko, JSC, rtd, late Honourable Justice C.C. Nweze, JSC, Honourable Justice Tijani
Abubarkar, JSC, late Hon Justice Joseph Ikyegh, JCA, Late Honourable Justice Tine Tur, JCA, Honourable Justice, Mohammed Lawal Shuibu JCA, Honourable Justice Peter O.Affen, JCA, Honourable Justice Abba Mohammed, JCA, Honourable Justice J.T. Tsoho, Chief Judge, Federal High Court, Honourable Justice Adeniyi, Honourable Justice Bukar Zannah, CJ, Bornu State, Honourable Justice Aondoaver Ka’kaan, OFR, retired CJ, Benue State, Honourable Justice
Maurice .A. Ikpambese, CJ, Benue State, Honourable Justice Cosmos Idye, OFR, President CCA, Benue State, Honourable
Justice Yinka Faji, Hon Justice Simon Aboki, Honourable Justice T.T. Asua, and Honourable Justice E.N. Kpojime.
I appreciate my Bar Leaders, Learned Colleagues of the Inner and Outer Bar, Asiwaju Adegboyega Solomon Awomolo,
FNIALS, SAN, Chief Akinolu Olujimi, SAN, Chairman, Body of Benchers, Chief Kanu Agabi, SAN, CON, Chief Bayo Ojo,
SAN, CON, Chief J.K Gadzama, FNIALS, SAN, OFR, Dr. D.D. Dodo, SAN, OFR; Mallam Yusuf Ali, SAN, Mr. Bernard
Hom, SAN; Chief Mamman Mike Osuman, SAN, Mr Paul Erokoro, SAN, Professor Mike Ozekhome, SAN, OFR, Mr Sunday Ameh, SAN, Mrs Beatrice Jedy-Agba, mni, OON, Solicitor General of the Federation, Mr. Anthony Ijohor, SAN.
Mr. S.T. Hon, SAN, DSSRS, Mr. Babatunde Ajibade, SAN, Professor Yemi Akinseye George, SAN, Mr Ade Okaaya Inneh,
SAN, Mr. Godwin Obla, SAN, Chief (Dr) Richard Oma Ahonaruogho, SAN, Senator Solomon Ewuga, Mr. Emmanuel Akaa, Mr. Ahmedu Sule, Chief Isaac Danladi, Mrs Iveren Niege and Dr. J.M. Asagh.
I appreciate the support of all Members of K30, particularly, Mrs Agatha Mbamali, SAN, Chief Sam Olugunorisa, SAN, Norrison Quakers, Mr. Y.C. Maikyau, SAN, OON, Solomon Umoh, SAN, J.S Okutekpa, SAN. Other distinguished
colleagues, Mr, Anthony Malik, SAN, Mr. Paul Harris Ogbole, SAN, Sir, Steve Adehi, SAN, Mr. Elachi Agada SAN, Mr. EE,
Eko, SAN, Oladipo Tolani, SAN, Mr. Olumide Akpata, Dr. Steven Andzenge, Dr. Terhemen Andzenge, Mr. Bola
Odubesan, Mr. Ola Alakolaro, Max Ikomgbeh, Tudun Taiwo, Abdullahi Salisu and all the staff of Equity Law Partners, Fatima Audu, Barr Rotimi Olujide, Dipreye Bob-Manuel, Egwuenu
Odinichionye Andrawmida, Peace Onuoha, Mr Jonathan Oguche and Mr. Hassan.

I am grateful to the Board of the Nigeria Economic Summit Group (NESG) for providing me with a credible platform to
advocate and ventilate issues relating to the mining sector. I am particularly, Dr. Tayo Aduloju, CEO, Lumun’ Amanda Feese, Coordinator, Mining and Manufacturing Policy Commission,
NESG, for her mentoring and support, Jumoke Fajemirokun, Co-Thematic Lead, Mr. Mbotiom Jackson, Technical Anchor, Mining Thematic Group, the Technical Advisory Committee and all members of the Mining Thematic Group.

My special class of friends deserve special mention for weathering the storm with me and providing support at all times to enable excel in my academic pursuits. They include: Benham
Manu Pisagih, Professor Akarren Samuel Shaakaa, Hon. Mike Kusa, Mr. Terungwa Abari, Dr. Taiwo Ogunleye (Associate
Professor of Law), Mr Femi Oboro; Izuoma EgerouhAdindu,PhD, (Associate Professor of Law), Laura Ani, PhD,
Dr. Kelly Nduka, Mr. Mohammed Imam, Barr Moses Adaguusu, Professor Akpegba Ker, Elder I. Igbana, Mike and
Vickie Kusa, Sola Akingbade and all my class mates at Victory High School, Ikeja (Class of 81); Faculty of Law, University of Jos (Class of 87), and the Nigerian Law School (Class of 88).

May the Lord Almighty bless you all.