The Federal High Court has dismissed a suit filed by the traditional ruler of Ekpetiama in Yenagoa Local Government Area of Bayelsa State, Bubaraiye Dakolo, challenging Shell’s divestment and seeking remediation for alleged environmental pollution spanning about 40 years.
Delivering the ruling, Justice Ayo Emmanuel held that the action was filed outside the period prescribed by law and that Dakolo lacked the legal standing to challenge the divestment because he had no statutory role in the transaction.
The monarch had alleged that Shell’s divestment of its onshore and shallow-water assets failed to comply with the requirements of the Petroleum Industry Act, 2021.
He also sought redress over what he described as decades of cumulative pollution that had damaged the environment and affected communities in Yenagoa Local Government Area.
Justice Emmanuel held that objections relating to the divestment ought to have been filed within three months and that the claims against the public officers named in the suit were commenced outside the statutory limitation period.
The judge further ruled that the plaintiff failed to first explore and exhaust the dispute-resolution mechanisms provided by the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission before approaching the court.
According to the court, compliance with those mechanisms was a mandatory condition precedent, and the failure to satisfy them deprived the court of jurisdiction to entertain the case.
“Plaintiff’s failure to satisfy the mandatory statutory conditions precedent under the Petroleum Industry Act strips this court of jurisdiction,” the judge held.
Justice Emmanuel rejected the argument that the alleged environmental damage constituted a continuing injury capable of extending the time within which the suit could be filed.
The judge distinguished between the continued consequences of an earlier act and the repeated occurrence of a legally wrongful act.
“A continuous injury means a recurrence of the legally wrongful act itself, not the continuous persistence of the injurious effects of a singular past act,” he held.
The court found that the plaintiff combined historical grievances stretching back several decades with specific events allegedly occurring around 2024.
It consequently held that the causes of action against the Attorney-General of the Federation, the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission and the Minister of Petroleum Resources arose outside the three-month period prescribed by law.
The judge also ruled that the claims founded on alleged tortious liability were barred by the five-year limitation period under Section 16 of the Limitation Law of Bayelsa State.
Responding after the ruling, counsel to the Minister of Petroleum Resources, Lawrence Edet, thanked the court for deciding the matter in favour of his client.
Dakolo’s legal team, however, said the traditional ruler would challenge the decision before the Court of Appeal.
The Resource Justice and Social Action group also criticised the judgment, expressing disappointment that the court resolved the matter on procedural and technical grounds rather than the environmental complaints raised by the affected communities.
The group’s Resource Justice Manager, Prince Edegbuo, alleged that pollution had devastated the environment, deprived residents of their livelihoods and affected their reproductive health.
“It is very unfortunate. The pollution has devastated the environment and denied people of their livelihoods and even affected the reproductive health of the people,” he said.
Edegbuo said the organisation would continue supporting the Ekpetiama people in the litigation and pursue the case at the appellate court.