I labelled various developments going on in Akwa Ibom and Cross-River state, so we can situate whats happening with where they are happening. Hope you find this useful at least.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/554507_3594277658211_1311532698_3498754_462793114_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/532350_3594396781189_1311532698_3498787_714678980_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/527863_3594397381204_1311532698_3498788_195947636_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/533460_3594397901217_1311532698_3498789_640317976_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/523575_3594398701237_1311532698_3498790_1171076713_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/544371_3594399661261_1311532698_3498791_1938450475_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/558696_3594400861291_1311532698_3498792_1722085182_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/540594_3594402341328_1311532698_3498794_1524663859_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/522342_3594403421355_1311532698_3498796_1283062383_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/539428_3594405061396_1311532698_3498798_23137499_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/555053_3594405861416_1311532698_3498800_761951794_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/548074_3594406661436_1311532698_3498801_1019262740_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/306164_3594407901467_1311532698_3498804_134522250_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/559916_3594409061496_1311532698_3498807_435771405_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/559037_3594410061521_1311532698_3498809_1987156889_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/523575_3594410741538_1311532698_3498810_1895363899_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/551219_3594411461556_1311532698_3498812_1828340087_n.jpg

Our Offshore Oil Fields

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/562588_3594276658186_1311532698_3498753_681591364_n.jpg

Hi akwafina, good maps,this will help in locating the different places. I have a very detailed road map of the state. You asked abt the sites I get some of the pix.actually the sources are many eg. The state's official project monitoring site,contracors site,my personal snap shots etc.

Hi akwafina, good maps,this will help in locating the different places. I have a very detailed road map of the state. You asked abt the sites I get some of the pix.actually the sources are many eg. The state's official project monitoring site,contracors site,my personal snap shots etc.

Can I have a copy of the road map of the state, or can u post it here thanks

Akwa Ibom road map
http://i624.photobucket.com/albums/tt324/dnaijaguy/ADMINMAP1aks.jpg

Does anyone know of a source for correct & current KLM/KMZ Google Earth
files or shapefiles for Akwa Ibom & Cross River that includes
Local Political Boundaries?

We have been tasked with making large 3d terrain models of these 2 states and would like them to be correct.

Also a kmz/klm with recent road additions would be sweet.....

Thanks in advance.

Ed Howard
HowardModels.com

Does anyone know of a source for correct & current KLM/KMZ Google Earth
files or shapefiles for Akwa Ibom & Cross River that includes
Local Political Boundaries?

We have been tasked with making large 3d terrain models of these 2 states and would like them to be correct.

Also a kmz/klm with recent road additions would be sweet.....

Thanks in advance.

Ed Howard
HowardModels.com

What is a KLM?KMZ?

Does anyone know of a source for correct & current KLM/KMZ Google Earth
files or shapefiles for Akwa Ibom & Cross River that includes
Local Political Boundaries?

We have been tasked with making large 3d terrain models of these 2 states and would like them to be correct.

Also a kmz/klm with recent road additions would be sweet.....

Thanks in advance.

Ed Howard
HowardModels.com

What is a KLM?KMZ?

Its a file used in google earth to either overlay an image or piece of information that 3rd party developer made

http://www.google.com/gadgets/directory?synd=earth&preview=on&cat=all_short&sort-order=desc

HA!!!, Akwafina, Se na wetin you dey do for ya spare time b dis???
I catch you 2day .../// lol

Akwafinaa and all,
I had mentioned the kmz and klm files only because from your images it looks like you use the Google Earth (file, save place as....).

I would be grateful for help in any form.
Most important to me is to get national & state boundaries correct.
I think that the yellow national boundary (googleearth) on this image is correct
http://www.howardweb.com/uploads/Nigeria/googleearthplus.jpg

But the boundary between AI & CR from google earth (white line in same image)
appears to conflict with the below image from CR state surveyors.
The islands in the delta belong to who?
http://www.howardweb.com/uploads/Nigeria/crossriver_map_clip_image002.jpg

Somehow, I would like to know what is correct.
I am really surprised that I can't seem to find reliable information yet.

Akwafinaa and all,
I had mentioned the kmz and klm files only because from your images it looks like you use the Google Earth (file, save place as....).

I would be grateful for help in any form.
Most important to me is to get national & state boundaries correct.
I think that the yellow national boundary (googleearth) on this image is correct
http://www.howardweb.com/uploads/Nigeria/googleearthplus.jpg

But the boundary between AI & CR from google earth (white line in same image)
appears to conflict with the below image from CR state surveyors.
The islands in the delta belong to who?
http://www.howardweb.com/uploads/Nigeria/crossriver_map_clip_image002.jpg

Somehow, I would like to know what is correct.
I am really surprised that I can't seem to find reliable information yet.

The ownership of some of those islands in the Cross-River Delta also confuse me sometimes. On some maps they belong clearly to Cross-River state, but in others Akwa Ibom owns some of the islands. I will try and get maps from my office and compare. I would like to work with you on this!:cheers:

The yellow national boundary between Nigeria and Cameroon along Cross River State is correct and according the the latest Oil and Gas Heli industry map it runs into the sea as shown below

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/548074_3594406661436_1311532698_3498801_1019262740_n.jpg

Labelled here are various Local Government Areas in Akwa Ibom State.
Clearly some islands in the cross river delta fall into some of this LGAs.

http://upcinn.com/images/akwa_ibom.jpg

A quality of road survey done by a German company for the AKS state gov , shows clearly that some of those big Islands are within Akwa Ibom State territory.

http://www.as-p.de/projectimages/projekt/226208/226208_map_centres_secondary.jpg

source: http://www.as-p.de/projects/traffic-planning/226208-road-network-and-transportation-development-plan-akwa-ibom.html

Road Network and Transportation Development Plan Akwa Ibom, Nigeria, 2008

http://www.as-p.de/projectimages/projekt/226208/226208_02_kommunikationsachse.jpg

http://www.as-p.de/projectimages/projekt/226208/226208_03_transport.jpg

http://www.as-p.de/projects/traffic-planning/226208-road-network-and-transportation-development-plan-akwa-ibom.html

2 conflicting maps from the federal gov.

http://nipc.gov.ng/images/akwaibommap.jpg

http://nipc.gov.ng/images/crossrivermap.jpg

source:http://nipc.gov.ng/statesmaps.html

Northern Cross River state topographical map

http://www.pandrillus.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/afi-topo-map-v2-smaller1.jpg

source: http://www.pandrillus.org/projects/afi-mountain-wildlife-sanctuary/

http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/africa/calabar_tpc_1996.jpg

source: http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/africa/calabar_tpc_1996.jpg

http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/jog/nigeria/txu-oclc-224104596-nb32-10.jpg

Best map I have found so far. Looks like some sort of Aeronautical Chart .

http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/jog/nigeria/nb-32-14-calabar-nigeria-cameroon.pdf

So the Bakassi Peninsula that was "in dispute" shows up as part of Cameroon back in 1975... interesting. That was why I was finding the Nigeria/Cameroon border confusing.
I was reading about International courts awarding it to Cameroon in 2002 but wasn't seeing any change reflected in recent maps when compared to older ones.

So the Bakassi Peninsula that was "in dispute" shows up as part of Cameroon back in 1975... interesting. That was why I was finding the Nigeria/Cameroon border confusing.
I was reading about International courts awarding it to Cameroon in 2002 but wasn't seeing any change reflected in recent maps when compared to older ones.

Most Nigerian maps I have clearly place Bakassi peninsular within Cameroon. However I think all the oil wells in the sea still belong to Nigeria, because we developed those fields. We are told not to fly helicopters anywhere near the Bakassi Peninsular to avoid conflict , so clearly the Bakassi peninsular belongs to Cameroon now.

http://www.aksgonline.com/images/imgPaperOilWellsStatus.jpg

The agregation of current Akwa Ibom oil wells in relation to previously denied oil wells (bound by dotted lines)

Historical Development
Petroleum exploration in what is now Akwa Ibom commenced in the early fifties even before the first commercial oil discovery in Nigeria was made at Oloibiri near Port Harcourt in 1956. Production from Akwa Ibom offshore came on stream in 1970. Realising the enormous revenue the Federal government in 1971 introduced the onshore-offshore dichotomy in petroleum revenue sharing.

Crude oil production in Akwa Ibom was mainly offshore, the largest in Nigeria. The state received very little from the federation account as the offshore oilfields were more economically viable than onshore oil fields leaving the state with very little development in spite of its enormous contribution to national wealth. It was only until 1987 when President Ibrahim Babangida empanelled an AFRC committee to recommend an effective method of disbursing funds to oil producing states. This led in 1992 to the establishment of the Oil Mineral Producing Areas Development Commission (OMPADEC) to manage 3.5 per cent share from the federation account.

Also in 1992, due to the perseverance of the administration of Governor Obong Akpan Isemin, President Babangida took the final redeeming step of abrogating the onshore-offshore dichotomy which immediately placed Akwa Ibom as the third largest petroleum producing state in the federation and revenue accruing to the state became based on 18 percent production rather than 0.56 percent when only onshore oil was used.
Geographic Considerations
The Nigerian states of Lagos, Ogun, Ondo, Delta, Bayelsa, Rivers, Akwa Ibom, and Cross River placed in that order from the south west of Nigeria on the border with the Republic of Benin, to the south east border with the Republic of Cameroon are coastal states. Apart from Cross River State, these states open directly to and have contiguity with the sea and are geographically and technically accorded a 'littoral' status in relation to offshore oil wells.

Geographic contiguity entitles states to lay claim to resources on maritime territory and in this case, for the attribution of revenue from oil resources to littoral states, accruable from the federation account.

The Supreme Court maintains that there are 7 littoral states in Nigeria with coastal regions that open directly to the sea and therefore contiguous. Relating to Akwa Ibom, there are further geographical considerations which include the Bakassi Peninsula and an estuary besides the coastal areas.

On Bakassi, the isthmus of the peninsula does not originate from Nigerian territory and had understandably been a source of dispute for decades resulting in loss of lives. The estuary adjacent the Bakassi peninsula is an emptying of the Cross River which is boundary water shared by both Akwa Ibom and Cross River States. Akwa Ibom State has a 128Km coastal stretch all having contiguity and connectivity with the sea. Cross River State on the other hand has no coastal area having contiguity with the sea and cannot lay claim to offshore oil wells, its connectivity to the sea however crosses maritime territory of Akwa Ibom State and Cameroon, thereby wiping off any claim to offshore oil wells.
Legal Issues
Several efforts by Akwa Ibom State at seeking redress through written complaints were made without tangible results, till the intervention by the current President, Alhaji Umaru Musa Yar’Adua who directed that the various complaints from all the States be examined and addressed based on the principle of the rule of law and devoid of sentiments. In a case instituted by Cross River State itself, the Supreme Court delivered judgment on 24th June 2005 rejecting the claim of Cross River State for administrative control over the maritime area within which those oil wells were believed to be located. The non-littoral status of Cross River State was further confirmed vide judgement of 24/06/2005 in a case instituted by Cross River State itself.

The Supreme Court pronounced that the decision of January 2005 to transfer 76 oil wells which has always belonged to Akwa Ibom State to Cross River State was made at a time the prevailing issues were awaiting judicial decision.

The purported transfer of the 76 oil wells from Akwa Ibom State to Cross River State was based on a faulty assumption that Cross River State shall access the sea through the administration of Western Bakassi.

In October 2002, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled the ownership of the Bakassi peninsula in favour of Cameroon; this was followed by the Greentree agreement. In the agreement, Nigeria recognised the sovereignty of Cameroon over the Bakassi Peninsula in accordance with the judgment of the ICJ and committed itself to the land and maritime boundary as delineated by the ICJ. Complete handover of Bakassi was made in October, 2008.

Before the April 2002 Supreme Court judgment and the promulgation of the offshore /onshore Dichotomy Abrogation Act 2004, revenue from oil resources was shared to the States on the basis of about 1% derivation. At this time also, there was no dispute whatsoever on the ownership/attribution of oil wells to Akwa Ibom State in relation to her neighbouring states of Rivers and Cross River.

Historical Development
Petroleum exploration in what is now Akwa Ibom commenced in the early fifties even before the first commercial oil discovery in Nigeria was made at Oloibiri near Port Harcourt in 1956. Production from Akwa Ibom offshore came on stream in 1970. Realising the enormous revenue the Federal government in 1971 introduced the onshore-offshore dichotomy in petroleum revenue sharing.

Crude oil production in Akwa Ibom was mainly offshore, the largest in Nigeria. The state received very little from the federation account as the offshore oilfields were more economically viable than onshore oil fields leaving the state with very little development in spite of its enormous contribution to national wealth. It was only until 1987 when President Ibrahim Babangida empanelled an AFRC committee to recommend an effective method of disbursing funds to oil producing states. This led in 1992 to the establishment of the Oil Mineral Producing Areas Development Commission (OMPADEC) to manage 3.5 per cent share from the federation account.

Also in 1992, due to the perseverance of the administration of Governor Obong Akpan Isemin, President Babangida took the final redeeming step of abrogating the onshore-offshore dichotomy which immediately placed Akwa Ibom as the third largest petroleum producing state in the federation and revenue accruing to the state became based on 18 percent production rather than 0.56 percent when only onshore oil was used.
Geographic Considerations
The Nigerian states of Lagos, Ogun, Ondo, Delta, Bayelsa, Rivers, Akwa Ibom, and Cross River placed in that order from the south west of Nigeria on the border with the Republic of Benin, to the south east border with the Republic of Cameroon are coastal states. Apart from Cross River State, these states open directly to and have contiguity with the sea and are geographically and technically accorded a 'littoral' status in relation to offshore oil wells.

Geographic contiguity entitles states to lay claim to resources on maritime territory and in this case, for the attribution of revenue from oil resources to littoral states, accruable from the federation account.

The Supreme Court maintains that there are 7 littoral states in Nigeria with coastal regions that open directly to the sea and therefore contiguous. Relating to Akwa Ibom, there are further geographical considerations which include the Bakassi Peninsula and an estuary besides the coastal areas.

On Bakassi, the isthmus of the peninsula does not originate from Nigerian territory and had understandably been a source of dispute for decades resulting in loss of lives. The estuary adjacent the Bakassi peninsula is an emptying of the Cross River which is boundary water shared by both Akwa Ibom and Cross River States. Akwa Ibom State has a 128Km coastal stretch all having contiguity and connectivity with the sea. Cross River State on the other hand has no coastal area having contiguity with the sea and cannot lay claim to offshore oil wells, its connectivity to the sea however crosses maritime territory of Akwa Ibom State and Cameroon, thereby wiping off any claim to offshore oil wells.
Legal Issues
Several efforts by Akwa Ibom State at seeking redress through written complaints were made without tangible results, till the intervention by the current President, Alhaji Umaru Musa Yar’Adua who directed that the various complaints from all the States be examined and addressed based on the principle of the rule of law and devoid of sentiments. In a case instituted by Cross River State itself, the Supreme Court delivered judgment on 24th June 2005 rejecting the claim of Cross River State for administrative control over the maritime area within which those oil wells were believed to be located. The non-littoral status of Cross River State was further confirmed vide judgement of 24/06/2005 in a case instituted by Cross River State itself.

The Supreme Court pronounced that the decision of January 2005 to transfer 76 oil wells which has always belonged to Akwa Ibom State to Cross River State was made at a time the prevailing issues were awaiting judicial decision.

The purported transfer of the 76 oil wells from Akwa Ibom State to Cross River State was based on a faulty assumption that Cross River State shall access the sea through the administration of Western Bakassi.

In October 2002, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled the ownership of the Bakassi peninsula in favour of Cameroon; this was followed by the Greentree agreement. In the agreement, Nigeria recognised the sovereignty of Cameroon over the Bakassi Peninsula in accordance with the judgment of the ICJ and committed itself to the land and maritime boundary as delineated by the ICJ. Complete handover of Bakassi was made in October, 2008.

Before the April 2002 Supreme Court judgment and the promulgation of the offshore /onshore Dichotomy Abrogation Act 2004, revenue from oil resources was shared to the States on the basis of about 1% derivation. At this time also, there was no dispute whatsoever on the ownership/attribution of oil wells to Akwa Ibom State in relation to her neighbouring states of Rivers and Cross River.

The Bakassi peninsula. Now a cameroonian territory extends an international boundary into the estuary across to Akwa Ibom State The estuary that keeps the coast of Cross River 'helmed in' and 'land licked' as a result of Cameroon now in complete control of Bakassi Akwa Ibom's 128Km coastal stretch is contigous with, and even the eastern side connects to, the sea making for a littoral status (images from Google Earth)
The Bakassi Penisula
The geographic location of Cross River State negates its classification as a littoral State except with her possible assurance of contiguity through administrative control of the western part of the Bakassi Peninsular. Pronouncements to this effect as they relate to oil wells between Akwa Ibom and Cross River States were made only in January 24th 2005 vide letter Ref NBC.SEC.28/I/142.

Cross River State had been erroneously considered littoral only on this assumption of Bakassi being a part of the state. On this assumption alone, it had been excessively enjoying benefits from oil resources which would even with this assumption; still geometrically belong to Akwa Ibom State. This error had been on since November 2004 when the offshore/onshore Dichotomy Abrogation Act 2004 came to effect and continued despite the fact that the very assumption, upon which this claim was based, was never and never came to be.

Granting but not conceding that this was right, the geometry that created a maritime corridor for Cross River State through Bakassi at the expense of Akwa Ibom State remained unexplainable till this day as it violated all known principles of maritime delineation.

Even if the western part of the Bakassi Peninsula is today handed over to Cross River State, the median of the cross river would first intersect at the baseline (joining the Akwa Ibom coast near Okposo, and the one at the south western tip of the Peninsula).

Applying either the principle of equidistance, bisector , or normal to the general direction of the baseline in extending the line seawards would still leave the 76 wells falling on the west of the line, that is to say, in Akwa Ibom State rather than Cross River.
Estuarine Considerations
Prior to the ICJ ruling of 2002 Nigeria had full and complete sovereignty and exclusive jurisdiction over the estuary that opens into the sea through a border river flowing on the borders of Akwa Ibom and Cross River.

The impact of the ICJ ruling was to the effect that the June 24, 2005 judgment by the Supreme Court reads, "the effect of the judgment of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) dated 10/10/2002 on the land and maritime boundary case between Nigeria and Cameroon is that it has wiped out what used to be the estuarine sector of Cross River State as a result of which the State is hemmed in by the new international boundary between Nigeria and Cameroon."

"That being the case, there seems to be no longer any estuarine boundary between Akwa Ibom State and Cross River State. If the 'median line' or 'thalweg' principle is adopted drawing the boundary line along the Cross River between Akwa Ibom and Cross River States, the line must intersect the new maritime line between Nigeria and Cameroon with the result that Cross River no longer has a seaward boundary."

"The riparian territory of Cross River State is truncated at the intersection of the 'Maroua Line' with the median of the Cross River. This is several nautical miles from the sea."

The estuary leaves Cross River State helmed in and land locked without any contiguity to the sea but only connectivity to the sea through Akwa Ibom and Cameroonian waters.

The illegal hand over of our oil wells to neighbouring states was based on an assumption that the administration of the western part of the Bakassi Peninsula would be in the hands of Nigeria, a situation presumed to offer Cross River State littoral possibilities as a result of the western part of Bakassi being contiguous to the sea. However, this was yet to be judicially decided, even from 2004 when the illegal transfers of our oil wells were made.
Coastal Considerations
A state that has a coastal boundary also possesses certain areas of the sea. Sovereignty over bodies of water is regulated by four separate 1958 conventions - the Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone, the Convention on the Continental Shelf, the Convention on the High Seas, and the Geneva Convention on Fishing and Conservation of the Living Resources of the High Seas - and by the comprehensive Law of the Sea treaty or UNCLOS (United Nations' Convention on the Laws of the Sea) Law of 1982, which entered into force in 1994 and to which Nigeria is a signatory.

According to the law of the sea, beyond its territorial waters, every coastal country may establish an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) extending 200 nautical miles (370 km) from shore. Within the EEZ the coastal state has the right to exploit and regulate fisheries, construct artificial islands and installations, use the zone for other economic purposes, and regulate scientific research by foreign vessels.

Every coastal country has exclusive rights to the oil, gas, and other resources in the seabed up to 200 nautical miles from shore or to the outer edge of the continental margin, whichever is the further, subject to an overall limit of 350 nautical miles (650 km) from the coast or 100 nautical miles (185 km) beyond the 2,500 meter isobath. Legally, this area is known as the continental shelf. Where the territorial waters, EEZs, or continental shelves of neighbouring countries overlap, a boundary line must be drawn by agreement to achieve an equitable solution. Many such boundaries have been agreed upon, but in some cases when the countries have been unable to reach agreement the boundary has been determined by the ICJ or by an arbitration tribunal. The most common form of boundary is an equidistance line between the coasts concerned.

While Nigeria enjoys maritime resources up to 2,500 meter isobath continental shelf, littoral states however are entitled to a share of oil resources at 13% derivation up to the 200 meter isobath. Due to the flash point potentials on the issue of Bakassi Nigeria had been mindful of exploration activities close to the coast of Bakassi peninsula and therefore do not own oil wells 200 meter isobath off Bakassi peninsula. Article 7(3) of the Law of the sea provides for drawing baselines in the general direction of the coast. While this was adhered to in all the applicable cases to other littoral states, Akwa Ibom did not receive the same consideration.

Transfer of Oil Wells to Neighbouring States
Upon abrogation of the Offshore /Onshore Dichotomy in 2004, the NBC altered the maritime delineations between the baseline/coastlines of the littoral states and the 200 meter isobath that remained a surprising shock to Akwa Ibom State in favour of Cross River and Rivers States.

The NBC which carried out the exercise produced various maps that were examined but showed skewed, distorted and non perpendicular lines to coastal planes that arbitrarily transferred oil wells originally belonging to Akwa Ibom to neighbouring States of Rivers and Cross River without explanations even resulting with wells bearing Akwa Ibom native names to Rivers State. This is the origin of the dispute and the agitations of Akwa Ibom State for justice, fairness and equity.

Since 2004 Akwa Ibom State became unjustly deprived of 332 oil wells in favour of Rivers and Cross River States, 76 of these to Cross River and 256 to Rivers State. This transfer helped to boost Cross River derivation revenue in October 2000 of 193,572.93 in relation to that of Akwa Ibom of 1,855,346,047.46, a ratio of 1:10,000 and helped Rivers State derivation revenue of 1,531,304,960.77 surpass that of Akwa Ibom State.

The selective application of the equidistant principle to a localized indentation of the coast line at the mouth of Imo River gave rise to the skewed line that transferred historical oil wells that had always belonged to Akwa Ibom State to Rivers State.

This is a raw denial of Akwa Ibom State's legitimate derivation due to economic activities of federal maritime properties on Akwa Ibom State maritime resources of only up to 200 meter isobath.
Explored Options at Recovery of our Oil Wells
Political Solution: This was canvassed by Akwa Ibom State but was rejected by the Cross River State Executive Council. The rejection was conveyed by His Excellency, The Governor of Cross River State to the President of the Federal Republic vide letter dated 27th March 2006 and copy forwarded to The Governor of Akwa Ibom State from State House Abuja on April 28th 2006 vide letter Ref PRESS/44.

It should be emphasized that if a political solution is again to be contemplated, it needs to address the Supreme Court pronouncement holistically.

Technical Solution: This involves the firm and final exclusion of Cross River State from the list of littoral states. Not having any access to the sea by Cross River State stems from two geometric reasons:

That the riparian territory of Cross River State is truncated at the intersection of the “Maroua line” with the median of the cross river. This is several nautical miles from the sea.
That the western part of the Bakassi Peninsula which Cross River State would have claimed as its corridor to the sea, and which assumption the NBC relied upon is today totally a Cameroonian territory.

Historical Title: This has often been misread or misunderstood. The Law of the Sea in Article 15 provides for this option as a complement to the technical solution, where the states have adjacent or opposite coasts to each other in the territorial sea/area subject of delineation.

Cross River State has sometimes made claims to the 76 oil wells using this principle by making reference to a letter written by the former Governor of Akwa Ibom State. This position is not tenable because the letter was written in error as the matter had been settled by the Supreme Court.
Impact of the ICJ Ruling
From the further affidavits of the plaintiffs it is clear that there was a dispute over the boundaries between Nigeria and Cameroon and the ICJ delivered the judgment on October 10, 2002. The part of the territory the plaintiffs brought before the court was involved in the area litigated upon at the ICJ.

In its judgment, the International Court directed the Secretary- General of the United Nations to set up machinery that will supervise the peaceful implementation of the court's judgment and that gave rise to the Greentree Agreement. So it can validly be said that the Greentree Agreement that was drawn up under the auspices of the United Nations and witnessed by some Member-States in the Security Council was done in compliance or enforcement of the judgment of the International Court.

Since the issue had been determined at that level, the decision binds all sovereign states that are members of the United Nations and no member-state can assume jurisdiction to review again what has been decided by the ICJ. It is also noteworthy that a treaty in force is binding upon the parties and must be performed by them in good faith in accordance with the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969.

Akwa Ibom State is where the pain of the entire situation is felt. There were about 100,000 returnees of Akwa Ibom origin from Bakassi hailing from Mbo, Oron, Okobo, Uruan, Udung Uko, Nsit Eket, Eket and Ibiono Ibom Local Government Areas; this is not consistent with the claim by the Cross River State Government in the past that Bakassi was part of their state.

The Nigerian Judiciary is part and parcel of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and, therefore, could not review the judgment, pronouncement or decision of the ICJ, just as the Cameroonian Judiciary cannot do so. After all, the delineation of international boundaries is a matter beyond the jurisdiction of domestic courts.

The hand-over was to take place in view of Nigeria's desire for mutual respect among the comity of nations, particularly bearing in mind her rightful and genuine desire to be a member of the Security Council of the United Nations.

Government Position on Return of Akwa Ibom Oil Wells

The inception of the present Akwa Ibom State administration in May 2007 was met with a regrettable denial of derivation revenue from 332 oil wells originally belonging to the State. In seeking equity for the people of Akwa Ibom State, the State Government approached the Federal Government armed with Supreme Court rulings and generally understood delineation principles for interpretation, explanations, and restitution of the denied oil wells.

The Federal Government was graciously disposed to deal fairly in line with its policy of due process, justice, equity, and rule of law, to yield to established legal precedents set by the Supreme Court and the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

The President is reported to have referred the State Government's request to the National boundary Commission (NBC) with a directive to carry out comprehensive consultation with the National Planning Commission (NPC) and Ministry of Energy (Petroleum).

The outcome of the consultation is the gracious return of 247 oil wells, being 171 from Rivers and 76 from Cross River State, of the 332 oil wells belonging to Akwa Ibom State and the beginning of true derivation revenue based on the actual oil wells credited to the state.

The settlement of issues, disputes, and derivation based on oil wells ordinarily is on the exclusive list of the Federal Government. However, insinuations have been made in certain quarters erroneously suggesting that Akwa Ibom State is enjoying undue derivation from oil wells which ought to be credited to other states. This has resulted in unnecessary propaganda and heating up the polity which ought not to be had the propagandists exercised fairness in relaying the underlying facts of the matter