Long before the first structures were dismantled along sections of the Makoko waterfront, the Lagos State Government had argued that the exercise had undergone extensive safety assessments, legal reviews, and repeated warnings to the residents of possible dangers that could accompany their actions.
As gathered, the government officials’ engagement with the residents was said to have been overshadowed by emotionally charged narratives that later dominated public discourse.
Contrary to widespread claims that Makoko was completely demolished, government officials maintain that the operation was limited, targeted, and driven primarily to save the people, particularly children, from dangers ahead.
According to the government, only structures erected directly beneath high-tension power lines and those encroaching dangerously close to the Third Mainland Bridge corridor were removed in accordance with safety standards.
“Makoko was not wiped out. What we did was a very limited clearance in areas that posed grave danger to lives and critical infrastructure,” a senior government source said.
While insisting that the clearance was neither sudden nor arbitrary, the State Governor, Babajide Sanwo-Olu, disclosed that enforcement was originally scheduled for December 2024 but was postponed several times and eventually extended into 2025 to allow residents adequate time for voluntary compliance.
“We delayed and delayed because we hoped people would comply on their own. This was not something done overnight,” the governor added.
Officials further revealed that warnings to affected occupants did not begin with the current administration. Notices and advisories concerning unsafe waterfront structures, they said, date back several years and span multiple administrations, particularly in areas officially designated as red zones due to safety and environmental risks.
On the issue of compensation, authorities acknowledged that the law is explicit on structures erected without approval on state-owned waterways.
However, the government said it deliberately went beyond the strict legal position. In a widely circulated video, Governor Sanwo-Olu announced relief measures on compassionate grounds, directing local governments and relevant ministries to provide palliatives and relocation stipends to affected residents.
“I have instructed both local governments and the various ministries concerned to see how they also can give additional succour, palliatives, and relocation stipends to some of the people just to show compassion,” the governor said.
“You have done wrong, but the government can still show compassion. It is to ensure that we all can live in a safe and secure environment.”
Behind the scenes, officials say the Makoko clearance was not an isolated case. Records show that illegal structures in higher-income areas—including parts of Ikeja GRA and zones linked to Ikoyi and Banana Island—were also demolished in the first quarter of 2025. Government sources argue that these actions attracted little public outrage, reinforcing their claim that the Makoko exercise was not targeted at the poor.
On ownership claims, the state has pushed back firmly against assertions that Makoko residents legally own the land and waterways. Citing Section 44 of the 1999 Constitution and the Land Use Act, officials insist that all land, including lagoons and waterways, is vested in the governor in trust for the public.
Structures lacking legal titles or planning approvals, they argue, fall squarely outside the law.
Safety considerations, authorities stress, were central to the decision. Urban safety experts warned that Makoko’s dense wooden settlements beneath high-tension power lines posed a catastrophic risk.
“One fault, one spark, and you are looking at a fire that cannot be contained. People would be trapped, and power supply across large districts could collapse,” a safety official said.
Flooding risks, pollution, blocked navigation routes, and security concerns were also cited as factors influencing the clearance.
As viral images of distressed residents and children spread across social media, government officials expressed concern over what they described as deliberate misrepresentation. Governor Sanwo-Olu criticised some NGOs and advocacy groups, accusing them of exploiting the situation for financial gain.
“Sometimes you see some NGOs that are collecting thousands of dollars from donor countries, going around to make videos of two or three children, just for their pecuniary rewards. It is a shame,” the governor said, adding, “We are not about taking anything away from anybody; we are trying to make life better for our people.”
The government has also rejected claims that the cleared areas are being prepared for luxury developments. Officials insist the zones remain designated buffer areas strictly for environmental, maritime, and safety purposes, with no approved private projects.
While acknowledging the hardship caused by the exercise, authorities argue that critical facts were lost in the public conversation. In their view, years of warnings, legal constraints, and safety assessments were drowned out by emotion-driven narratives.
“The choice before us was simple,” a top official said. “Act now, or explain later why a preventable tragedy happened.”
