Lagos Govt Dismisses Peter Obi’s Criticism Over Trade Fair Demolitions

The Lagos State Government has rejected former Labour Party presidential candidate Peter Obi’s criticism of the recent demolitions at the Lagos International Trade Fair Complex, insisting the affected structures lacked valid planning approvals.

Obi, who visited the demolished ASPAMDA Market plazas on September 30 alongside lawmakers and Labour Party officials, condemned the exercise, calling it “a test of impunity, justice, and compassion.” He maintained that the traders had secured necessary approvals and urged the authorities to handle the matter with fairness.

However, in a statement on Wednesday, the Lagos Commissioner for Information and Strategy, Gbenga Omotoso, dismissed Obi’s remarks as misleading. He explained that traders were given multiple opportunities to regularise their building documents during a government-declared amnesty programme, which was extended several times, but many failed to comply.

According to Omotoso, enforcement officers from the Ministry of Physical Planning had even been attacked during previous visits before being rescued by police.

“The facts are clear: the affected property owners had no approvals. Despite ample time provided by the government, they failed to regularise their papers. This is not about emotions or politics—it is about the law,” the statement read.

The state also clarified that the Federal Government’s Trade Fair Complex Management Board had no authority to approve construction within the facility. While the board could allocate shops and manage commercial activities, all building permits had to come from the Lagos State Government.

Officials cited a 2003 Supreme Court ruling, Attorney-General of Lagos State v. Attorney-General of the Federation, which affirmed state jurisdiction over physical planning and development on all lands within their territory, including federal properties, except in core federal enclaves such as military bases.

The government maintained that the demolitions were lawfully executed to protect the integrity of the city’s planning system and would not be swayed by emotional appeals or political pressure.