‘Why Makoko demolition is necessary’
Makoko’s recent demolitions have ignited fierce public backlash, casting the Lagos State Government as heavy-handed and insensitive. Yet officials insist the action was driven by safety, environmental risk and long-term
Makoko’s recent demolitions have ignited fierce public backlash, casting the Lagos State Government as heavy-handed and insensitive. Yet officials insist the action was driven by safety, environmental risk and long-term regeneration concerns. In this special report, Associate Editor ADEKUNLE YUSUF interrogates that claim, the regeneration promises behind it, and the process that followed
By any measure, Makoko is one of Lagos’ most complex urban spaces — socially vibrant, economically productive, historically layered, and physically fragile. Built largely on stilts above the Lagos Lagoon, the community has expanded over decades toward sensitive transport corridors, power infrastructure, and waterways that are critical to the city’s functioning. This reality has long placed Makoko at a delicate intersection between human survival and public risk.
Recent demolition activities carried out by the Lagos State Government (LASG) have sparked outrage, protests and deep emotional distress among residents and civil society groups. Images of displaced families, damaged structures, and disrupted livelihoods have dominated public discourse, shaping a narrative of sudden and sweeping state action. The government, however, maintains that the intervention was neither punitive nor targeted at the urban poor, and was not designed to pave the way for private redevelopment interests.
From the state’s perspective, the exercise was a narrowly defined safety and environmental enforcement action rooted in long-standing concerns about structural instability, fire hazards, waterway obstruction and the encroachment on critical infrastructure. Officials argue that continued inaction would have exposed residents and the wider city to far greater danger.
A settlement sitting on high-risk infrastructure
At the heart of the Lagos State Government’s justification for the recent intervention in Makoko is what officials describe as an unavoidable safety imperative. From the state’s standpoint, no responsible authority can knowingly permit human settlements to exist directly beneath high-tension electricity transmission lines or within corridors that obstruct critical waterways. The sections of Makoko affected by the demolition, the government insists, fall squarely within statutory power-line setback zones—buffers designed to prevent catastrophic loss of life in the event of infrastructure failure.
In a settlement built largely of wooden structures standing on stilts above a conductive lagoon surface, the risks are amplified. Officials warn that a fallen high-tension cable in such an environment could result in mass casualties within minutes. Advisers to Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu have repeatedly framed the decision as an act of prevention rather than reaction, arguing that Lagos has already witnessed deadly incidents linked to fallen power lines, fires, and building collapses in other densely populated informal communities where emergency access is severely limited. From a risk-management perspective, they argue, waiting for tragedy before acting would have been indefensible.
Advertisement
300x250
The government also rejects claims that Makoko was singled out. According to officials, similar clearance exercises have been carried out in other parts of Lagos following fatal electrical incidents, and applying different standards because a community is poor would amount to institutionalising inequality in safety enforcement. These arguments were laid out at a press conference at the Bagauda Kaltho Press Centre, Alausa, by the Special Adviser to Governor Sanwo-Olu on eGIS and Urban Development, Dr. Olajide Babatunde.
Flanked by the Commissioner for Information and Strategy, Mr. Gbenga Omotoso, the Special Adviser on Media and Publicity, Mr. Gboyega Akosile, and other senior officials, Babatunde said the intervention was driven primarily by the need to protect lives in areas dangerously close to high-tension power infrastructure. “Clearing high-tension corridors is a safety requirement across Lagos State,” Babatunde said. “The action taken in Makoko is consistent with what has been done in other communities.” He stressed that the state remained committed to improving living conditions in vulnerable communities, while balancing development pressures with environmental protection and public safety. According to him, Makoko’s situation has been the subject of extensive planning debates for years, with multiple redevelopment options considered before the current approach emerged.
Read Also: Lagos Assembly halts Makoko demolition
One such proposal—the shoreline extension plan—was eventually abandoned after environmental impact assessments raised red flags. Babatunde disclosed that studies conducted by technical experts, construction firms, and international partners warned that pushing development further into the lagoon could disrupt water flow, damage marine ecosystems, and degrade aquatic life. Those findings, he said, led the state to discontinue the plan entirely.
What remains, according to the government, is the Water City Project, a regeneration model designed to upgrade Makoko in situ. The project aims to improve sanitation, drainage, housing quality, and access, while preserving the fishing-based economy that defines the community. Officials insist that the recent demolitions are not linked to luxury real estate development or private commercial interests, noting that the cleared areas fall strictly within safety corridors and do not overlap with the designated footprint of the Water City scheme. “We need to do what we have to do,” Babatunde said. “If we don’t, then we are endangering the lives of the people. However, we need to do it in a systematic way. We have to do it according to international conventions.”
He revealed that the Sanwo-Olu administration committed $2 million in 2021 toward the redevelopment of the Makoko waterfront to meet international standards, with expectations of an additional $8 million in counterpart funding from the United Nations. While global funding constraints have slowed disbursements from donor agencies, Babatunde said the state was looking inward and appealing to international partners, donor organisations, and the private sector to support the project. “The United Nations delegation visited Makoko in 2021,” he said. “It is not an area we are joking with at all. It is an area where we want to do the needful and improve living standards.”
Babatunde also cited past regeneration efforts as evidence of the government’s approach. He pointed to the relocation of residents in Okobaba, Adeniji-Adele, and Dosunmu, which he said were achieved through consultation, negotiated agreements, and compensation. In Okobaba, he noted, residents were relocated to Agbowa, where the state provided hundreds of houses, large parcels of land, and equipment worth billions of naira. “We moved them without any noise,” he said. “We relocated them to a prime area and provided facilities they did not have before. This administration is very much interested in the welfare of the people.”
Beyond electricity hazards, Babatunde cited recurring fires, structural collapses, and the absence of access routes for emergency services in densely populated settlements as further justification for enforcing building codes, minimum setbacks, and land pooling in regeneration areas. Unsafe housing conditions, he argued, ultimately expose residents to greater danger. Commissioner for Information and Strategy, Mr. Gbenga Omotoso, addressed the protests that followed the demolitions, acknowledging citizens’ constitutional right to protest while cautioning against actions that infringe on public order. “Protest is a fundamental human right,” he said. “But it should not obstruct public roads or prevent people from accessing medical care or going about essential activities.” He added that emotions surrounding the Makoko issue were understandable, but urged the public to separate sentiment from facts. “People believed the demolition was anti-people,” Omotoso said. “People are entitled to their emotions, but there are facts and figures.”
Advertisement
300x250
The $10million regeneration vision and compensation for those affected
The Lagos State Government’s defence of its actions in Makoko also rests heavily on what it describes as a long-term financial and regeneration commitment rather than a demolition-first approach. Since 2021, officials say the state has earmarked $2 million toward planning and preparatory work for Makoko’s redevelopment, with the expectation that the United Nations would provide up to $8 million in counterpart funding.
This $10 million regeneration vision, the government argues, underscores its claim that Makoko’s future is intended to be rebuilt, not erased.
That funding framework has, however, run into headwinds. Global donor priorities have shifted, and tighter budgets among multilateral agencies have slowed or stalled the anticipated inflow of international support. Even so, state officials present the initial financial commitment as evidence of intent. They insist the approach to Makoko has always been regeneration-oriented and that the state continues to engage development partners, donor agencies, and private organisations in an effort to bridge the financing gap.
Central to this vision is the Water City concept, which LASG frames as an incremental upgrade rather than wholesale displacement. The idea, according to planners, is to reorganise the settlement with safer building methods, structured housing layouts, improved sanitation and waste management systems, and regulated waterways, while preserving the fishing-based economy that sustains thousands of households. From the government’s perspective, the recent enforcement exercise is described as a painful but limited precursor to this broader upgrade agenda, not a substitute for it.
Advertisement
300x250
This argument unfolds against the backdrop of Lagos’ relentless population growth. The city adds hundreds of thousands of residents each year, while formal housing supply continues to lag far behind demand. In that vacuum, informal settlements inevitably expand into wetlands, waterfronts, and infrastructure corridors. Makoko’s steady growth toward the Third Mainland Bridge and major utility routes has heightened official anxiety. Urban planners within government warn that unregulated expansion in such high-risk zones dramatically increases the likelihood of large-scale fires, structural collapses, electrocution incidents, flooding, water contamination, and blocked access for emergency responders.
Government advisers argue that there is a point at which tolerance of unsafe expansion becomes complicity in a foreseeable disaster. This, they say, is the tension at the heart of the Makoko controversy: how to reconcile the right to shelter with the obligation of the state to prevent mass-casualty risks that are both visible and well documented. LASG maintains that consultations took place ahead of the intervention, involving government teams and advisers linked to international partners, including the United Nations. Community leaders and residents, however, dispute the adequacy of that engagement, arguing that warnings were either unclear or insufficient. Even where communication technically occurs, critics note that the quality, clarity, and timing of engagement often determine whether people feel respected or ambushed. In Makoko’s case, many residents say they received little notice and insufficient time to salvage belongings, reinforcing perceptions of official indifference.
Significantly, state lawmakers have acknowledged these procedural gaps. The Lagos State House of Assembly has since ordered a temporary halt to further demolitions in Makoko and neighbouring communities, calling for structured dialogue, transparency around enforcement taskforces, and a clear framework for compensation. That legislative intervention suggests an internal recognition within government that process matters as much as policy, particularly in communities with deep social and economic vulnerabilities.
On compensation, LASG says affected residents will receive financial relief and assistance, although details around enumeration, verification, and payment mechanisms are still being worked out. Officials point to previous regeneration and relocation exercises — including Okobaba, Adeniji-Adele, Dosunmu, and Pelewura — as precedents where negotiated resettlement and compensation were implemented. In Okobaba, for instance, sawmill operators were relocated to Agbowa, with housing, land, and operational facilities reportedly provided.
By highlighting these cases, the state seeks to counter the narrative that clearance equates to abandonment. Critics, however, caution that Makoko’s size, density, and water-based geography make any compensation or relocation exercise far more complex than past projects. Ultimately, the credibility of LASG’s position may rest less on official assurances and more on how transparently, fairly, and humanely compensation and regeneration commitments are carried out on the ground.
Following a stakeholders’ meeting at the Lagos State House of Assembly, the Leader of the House, Mr. Adams, announced a temporary halt to further demolitions in Makoko, Oko-Agbon, and Shogunro communities, pending further review. Reading out the Assembly’s resolution, he assured residents that compensation would be paid and that community representatives would be involved in subsequent processes. “So are you satisfied with the committee’s work?” Adams asked the gathering. The response, according to those present, was a thunderous chorus of “We are satisfied.”
