Nigeria’s Federal Capital Territory Administration (FCTA) has issued a 14-day ultimatum to property owners in Abuja to settle overdue ground rent, some of which dates back over four decades. Enforcement began on 26 May, targeting 4,794 defaulters. Ground rent is a mandatory annual payment to the government, which legally owns all land in Nigeria. High-profile properties already sealed include the FIRS zonal office, NAPTIP headquarters, and the PDP national secretariat. In total, 8,375 property owners owe ₦6.97 billion. The FCTA warns that continued non-compliance will lead to further enforcement actions, as it seeks to recover outstanding revenue.

The Federal Capital Territory Administration’s (FCTA) enforcement action on unpaid ground rent in Abuja powerfully asserts governmental authority over land, simultaneously exposing deep-rooted inefficiencies in Nigeria's property administration and fiscal compliance. This crackdown, targeting not only private individuals but also prominent institutions like the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), the National Agency for the Prohibition of Trafficking in Persons (NAPTIP), and the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) national secretariat, symbolises decades of institutional neglect and fiscal irresponsibility in the country’s capital, affecting both public and private entities.

Central to this issue is Nigeria’s unique land tenure system, enshrined in the Land Use Act of 1978, which vests all land in the government to be held in trust for the benefit of the populace. Property rights, granted via Certificates of Occupancy (C-of-Os), are conditional upon paying ground rent—a mandatory annual fee that has been widely ignored. The revelation that some of the 4,794 targeted properties have been in default for up to 43 years is staggering, indicating a systemic failure in enforcement and record-keeping spanning generations. The total arrears of ₦6.97 billion ($4.3 million) owed by over 8,000 property owners represent not just lost revenue but a significant governance gap. For Abuja, which relies heavily on internally generated revenue, these unpaid statutory fees severely hinder the FCTA’s capacity to maintain infrastructure, deliver services, and plan urban development.

This widespread default also erodes the rule of law, particularly when government agencies themselves are complicit. If institutions tasked with fiscal compliance or moral leadership, such as the FIRS or NAPTIP, fail to model lawful behaviour, it signals to the public that accountability is optional. The sealing of the PDP’s national secretariat carries particular weight within Nigeria’s tense political climate. While the FCTA asserts its action is apolitical and part of a broader enforcement drive, critics may perceive it as a veiled political manoeuvre. Regardless of intent, the incident highlights the vulnerability of even powerful actors to administrative enforcement when political will is present.

This enforcement campaign prompts important questions about land governance and equity. While revenue recovery and discipline restoration are crucial, the FCTA must ensure its methods are transparent, legally sound, and consistent. Mass property sealing without clear redress or negotiation could disproportionately affect small businesses or middle-class property holders with unclear inherited titles or poor documentation. A just solution requires pairing enforcement with outreach, data cleansing, and possibly a structured amnesty or repayment plan to distinguish between chronic defaulters and those caught in bureaucratic limbo. The FCTA is fully within its rights to seal defaulting buildings, and the federal government must direct all its agencies to comply.

More broadly, this moment should trigger a reassessment of land management and monetisation in Nigeria’s capital. A digital, integrated land registry that tracks payments, flags early defaults, and automates notices could modernise the system, reduce leakages, and deter corruption, which has often thrived through manual record-keeping, allowing officials to obscure payments for bribes. In sum, while the FCTA’s decisive action may seem overdue, its implications are profound. This is more than a dispute over unpaid rent; it is a test of state capacity, legal integrity, and the balance between coercive power and administrative fairness. The coming weeks will determine if this initiative is a singular show of force or the commencement of a much-needed restructuring of property rights and fiscal accountability in Nigeria’s capital.