Africa's borders are bestride with many challenges ranging from religious and terrorist movements to cattle rustling, military conflicts to human trafficking. The challenges are endless, but whether the boundary disputes are terrestrial or maritime, they are mostly about security and prestige. Growing human population, political awareness and environmental challenges mean that the problems are likely to heighten, unless they are resolved. Despite the provisions of UNCLOS, Africa has several unresolved maritime boundary disputes. In this light, this article aims to examine the African situation, and discuss the challenges involved in the delimitation and management of maritime boundaries in Africa. This article presents the issues, causes, essence and the security imperative of maritime boundary disputes in Africa.
Climate change litigation seeks to apply legal rights in order to affect the outcomes that would either mitigate, reduce or can even result in improved alternation to climate change. This article intends to identify and analyse the ways through which the environment and the people are protected from rapid changes in climate through the means of climate change litigation. Protection of the environment as well as people by climate change litigation can be witnessed in various nations throughout the globe particularly Australia, the US, Canada and the UK. The research problem examined in this article shows that the courts are becoming a critical climate change front where climate change conflicts are resolved. The research objectives are to help understand how climate change has impacted human health and the environment and how the courts have stepped into the arena to restrain activities that cause climate change impact. The methodology adopted in this article is both doctrinal and theoretical drawing upon primary and secondary sources of information. The key findings and implications to theory and practice of this article is that it is a medium to foster the jurisprudence of the role of climate change regime through judicial intervention in protecting the environment and people from climate change through climate change litigation.
The injustice and chaos in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria resulting from the manner in which the oil industry is being run and regulated have since captured the attention of the world. Importantly, the 2011 UNEP Report on the Environmental Assessment of Ogoniland (a Niger Delta community) which revealed shocking levels of ecological degradation has helped to keep the issue on the front burners of international discussion. In this light, this article explores the nature of injustice in the oil producing areas of Nigeria; it assesses the regulatory mechanisms that have been set up to prevent and reverse the injustice in the region; and based on the inadequacies of the present system, it makes recommendations as to how the mechanisms might be better strengthened, and governance executed, all in a manner that is more responsive to the plight of the affected people.
This article revolves around distinct dimensions related to the international environmental legal framework. In the recent years, there have been various developments in the field of international environmental law. Some of the interstate disputes have raised concern towards resolving environmental issues. There are three well-known cases properly discussed in this article, i.e. Indus Waters Kishenganga, South China Sea and Pulp Mills case. In all of these three cases, a new jurisdiction has been proclaimed giving a new side to the international environmental litigation. For instance, ICJ's judgement introduced the need for inclusion of EIA in the Pulp Mills case. On the contrary, the Partial Award in the case of Indus Waters Kishenganga, extended rights of India over Indus River but restricted the State from conducting extensive operations. The South China Sea case prohibited China from exercising historic rights over resources which belong to the nine dash line.
The right to ownership and control of natural resources under the Nigerian law is constitutional. The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) section 44 (3) and item 39 Schedule II of the Exclusive Legislative List vests the control and management of the natural resources and hydrocarbon operations on the federal government for the common good and benefit of the citizens. This article aims at examining the constitutional provisions and its implications for environmental law and practice. It examines some theories of ownership of mineral resources and analyses the decisions of the Supreme Court of Nigeria on the subject, particularly the case of Attorney-General of the Federation v. Attorney General of Abia State & 35 Others (No. 2) (2002) 6 NWLR (Part 764) 542 where the Supreme Court of Nigeria made several judicial pronouncements on the constitutional question of the derivation principle and ownership and control of natural resources in the Nigeria Federation. This article concludes by advocating for reforms and further research on the subject matter. It recommends the adoption of what is obtainable in other jurisdictions like Canada and South Africa.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.