A Case Study Approach

192

When the case of EPA v. Ampol Ltd⁴⁰¹ came before the court in 1993, it was the view of the court that negligence could mean any one of ‗gross‘ negligence, the civil standard or some statutory half measure depending on the circumstances of the case.⁴⁰² In that case it was found that Ampol had actually complied with all regulatory instructions and EPA requirements in spite of which there still occurred a spillage from one of the underground tanks of a fuel depot of which Ampol was the owner/lessor. Ampol in addition had taken action to ensure that the lessee followed the correct operational procedures. Consequently, Ampol as owner of land was charged for negligently causing or contributing to the conditions which gave rise to the commission of the offence.

193

product of a ‗reactionary phase. For instance, if a most serious environmental offence is being committed or is found to be on the increase, the usual attitude in official circles appear to encourage offensive activities by whosoever thereby instituting deterrence mechanisms.

However, today in Nigeria, the best developed of these kind of offences are those covered by the HWSCPD aftermath of the ‗Koko‘ incident.

Under that act, it is an offence for anybody to without lawful authority carry, deposit, dump or cause to be carried, deposited or dumped or is in possession for the purpose of carrying, depositing or dumping any harmful waste on any land or in any territorial waters or contiguous zone or Exclusive Economic Zone of Nigeria or its inland waterways⁴⁰³ and for anyone to transport or cause to be transported or is in the possession for the purpose of transporting any harmful waste.⁴⁰⁴

For individual offenders⁴⁰⁵, conspirators⁴⁰⁶ and accessories after the fact⁴⁰⁷ the penalty after conviction

403 sI.15 of 1991.

404 Decree No. 86 of 1992 (now an Act). The primary aim of this statute is to infuse environmental considerations into development project planning and execution. Any person who fails to comply with the

provisions of the Act shall be guilty of an offence and on conviction shall be liable to pay a fine or be imprisoned.

405 Decree No. 18 of 1995. The goals of this statute, among others is to ensure protection of life ,

194

is life imprisonment.⁴⁰⁸ For corporate bodies, both its officials as well as the body corporate shall be guilty of the crime and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.⁴⁰⁹ Nonetheless the punishment appear to be laughable except for that provided in the HWSCPD. Yet that too probably due to life imprisonment provision appear not practicable or ignored by those who ought to apply it. It is obvious that there is lack of political will lead to ensure establishment of environmental crime and its prosecution in Nigeria.

4.10 Methods of

Enforcement of Environmental Sanctions

There are many methods which can be applied to ensure that environmental pollution or degradation is not with appropriate sanction and that any sanction is enforced. The researcher divided the methods into 3 viz;

1. By Provisions of legislations

health, property and the environment from the harmful effects of ionizing radiation by regulating the possession and application or radioactive substances and devices emitting ionizing radiation. The penalty

for contravention is a fine or imprisonment or both such fine and imprisonment. In addition the Nigerian

Nuclear Regulatory Authority (NNRA) may cancel, revoke or suspend any registration, exemption or license that might have been granted – S. 45.

406 HWSCPD s1(2)(a)

407 HWSCPD s1(2)(b).

408 HWSCPD s2

409 HWWSCPD s3.

195 2. By Court pronouncements

3. Actual Implementation of sanctions

4.10.1 By Provisions of legislations

There is nogainsaying the fact that more than adequate legislations exist on enforcement of sanctions for any environmental degradation. Some of the sanctions are by award of damages for purely civil matters or fines and/or imprisonment in crimes. One of the foundations of sanction is the polluter pays principle. This ensures that whosoever pollutes must pay either by remediating the environment to its original state or payment of adequate monetary damages to the victim(s).

Atimes the legislations provide the maximum penalties for any environmental degradation. Atimes recourse is to the Courts of law for redress.

The Courts are expected to be knowledgeable on issues of environmental degradation so as to understand the gravity and apportion appropriate sanction. This the Courts can do by awarding damages that will meet the justice of any action before it as seen in Gbremre v SPDC⁴¹⁰ in which the Federal High Court sitting at Benin City, Edo State delivered a landmark decision.

The Court examined and distilled all aspects of the effects of oil spill on the environment including the right to life and healthy living. This decision the

410 (unreported suit No. FHC/B/CS/53/05)

196

researcher believes is in tandem with what obtains in other climes.