Shangisha claimants question alleged title covering 549 plots
Claimants described in published reports as 546 judgment creditors have questioned the Lagos State Government over the alleged issuance of a single Certificate of Occupancy covering 549 plots in the longstanding Shangisha land dispute.
According to Independent’s November 9 report, the complainants allege that the title was issued in favour of Chief Adebayo Adeyiga and two associates. They want the government to suspend or revoke it and halt further administrative dealings pending the resolution of related appeals.
According to the report, the complainants favour individual allocations or a title issued to the association’s registered trustees for distribution among eligible members. They argue that the alleged arrangement could prejudice other beneficiaries.
IDNN has not authenticated the disputed title, its beneficiaries or the claim that the complaint represents 546 judgment creditors.
Published accounts trace the dispute to the implementation of a 2012 Supreme Court judgment involving the Shangisha Landlords Association. Current reports describe disagreements among claimants over how the allocation should be handled. IDNN has not reviewed the judgment’s full terms or established how they apply to the disputed title.
Earlier coverage presented a different perspective on the allocation process. In an October 27 report, ThisDay quoted Adeyiga welcoming the government’s action as progress towards implementing the judgment.
That report also said Lagos State Solicitor-General Hameed Oyenuga, representing Attorney-General Lawal Pedro, presented a map of the allocated area. A lawyer representing judgment creditors called for infrastructure and completion of the remaining allocations.
Those comments predate the current complaint and do not answer its specific allegations about the disputed title.
The complainants cite two appeals concerning representation and the allocation process. IDNN has not reviewed the filings, confirmed their current status or authenticated any operative injunction or stay.
The reviewed material did not include a fresh response from Lagos authorities or Adeyiga addressing the specific allegations. IDNN has not contacted them.
The reviewed material did not establish whether the disputed title was issued on the terms alleged.
