Legal Experts Clash Over Cross River’s Bid to Reclaim 76 Oil Wells from Akwa Ibom

Calabar, Nigeria — Two prominent legal minds, Chief Okoi Obono-Obla and Justice Osai Ahiakwo, have expressed diverging opinions on the chances of the Supreme Court reversing its 2012 judgment which awarded 76 oil wells to Akwa Ibom State in a landmark dispute with Cross River State.

Their opinions follow recent remarks by Cross River State Governor Bassey Otu, who disclosed that his administration is making fresh moves to recover the oil-rich assets lost over a decade ago. The governor’s revelation has since stirred debate on social media and among legal observers, especially regarding whether new evidence could justify reopening the case.

Obono-Obla: “A Futile Move”

Chief Obono-Obla, a former presidential aide and seasoned lawyer, cast serious doubt on the feasibility of reversing the ruling.

“While it is true that judgments previously entered by the Supreme Court of Nigeria can be set aside, such applications are rarely successful,” he stated.

He explained that the Supreme Court exercises its discretion to review cases sparingly, particularly when fresh evidence is cited.

To meet the stringent legal standard, the new evidence must:

• Be material and relevant to the central issues.
• Have been unavailable despite due diligence during the original proceedings.
• Be capable of altering the outcome had it been presented earlier.

“A renewed application would not only be unlikely to succeed but would also result in a waste of time, public resources, and judicial effort,” Obono-Obla warned. “It’s a case best left where the Supreme Court laid it — in precedent.”

Ahiakwo: “It’s Possible Under Compelling Grounds”

On the other hand, public affairs analyst and legal expert Justice Osai Ahiakwo argued that a review, though rare, remains constitutionally possible.

He referenced Section 232(1) of the 1999 Constitution, which gives the Supreme Court original jurisdiction in inter-state disputes, and also cited Order 20 Rule 4 of the Supreme Court, which permits the court to review its decisions under specific conditions.

“The court is not infallible,” Ahiakwo stated. “If compelling new facts or errors of law emerge, the court can revisit the 2012 ruling.”

He echoed Obono-Obla’s point that new and previously inaccessible evidence would be key to convincing the court. Additionally, procedural errors, legal misinterpretations, or significant shifts in the legal or factual landscape could form valid bases for a review.

“Ultimately, the court would weigh all factors and exercise discretion carefully,” Ahiakwo added. “But the door is not entirely closed.”

Akwa Ibom Responds

Meanwhile, the Akwa Ibom State Government has responded firmly, rejecting any renewed claim by Cross River over the oil wells. In a statement released Saturday, the state insisted that the Supreme Court judgment remains final, and the disputed oil wells lie within its lawful maritime boundaries.