A maritime economist has called on the governments of Cross River and Akwa Ibom states to adopt a joint economic development zone in the disputed offshore oil wells and maritime boundaries in the Gulf of Guinea. In essence, he asked the two state governments to withdraw the legal hostilities and adopt a diplomatic economic development framework to resolve the long-running oil boundary dispute.
Friday Udoh, the director of emerging knowledge, policy and partnerships at the Institute of Professional Economists and Policy Management (IPEPM), Nigeria, spoke in Calabar, warning that escalating geopolitical tensions could damage long-standing historical and economic ties between the neighboring South-South states.
The dispute over control of the maritime resource re-emerged recently following new technical interventions commissioned by the Cross River State Government.
In particular, hydrographic work conducted around Parrot Island and Tomshot Island in the Cross River Estuary updated internationally recognized nautical charts.
The recent hydrographic, geophysical, and geotechnical surveys around the Cross River State estuary (specifically near Parrot and Tomshot Islands) were primarily commissioned by Governor Bassey Otu to determine geographic boundaries, littoral eligibility, and resource mapping for the Bakassi Deep Seaport project.
Because these assets comprise an entire cluster of unmonetized wellheads, active exploration targets, and disputed boundary locations rather than a single unified commercial transaction, their valuation is handled administratively.
The focus remains on their political and fiscal weight rather than an outright market sale price. The survey plotted 239 crude oil and gas wellheads using advanced geodetic base maps. These sit alongside independent onshore discoveries in the Calabar Flank, including the Odukpani Oil Field, estimated at 33 million barrels of crude; and the Akpet Central Oil Field: 27 million barrels of oil and 21 billion cubic feet of gas.
On the fiscal objective, Cross River is not selling the wells; instead, it is using the survey data to secure official re-listing as an oil-producing entity by the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC).
Crucially, the surveys established a navigable corridor for Cross River directly to the Atlantic Ocean for the proposed Bakassi Deep Seaport without entering Akwa Ibom’s territorial waters.
Additionally, an inter-agency technical committee (IATC) utilized modern global positioning system (GPS) mapping revealed 239 crude oil and gas wellheads in the estuary—starkly dwarfing the initial 76 offshore wells at the heart of the landmark 2012 Supreme Court ruling which awarded same to Akwa Ibom.
The real economic worth of these newly verified coordinates is the potential unlocking of the 13 percent derivation revenue from the Federation Account, a crucial milestone in restoring the Cross River’s littoral economic status.
While the exact monetary value of the crude trapped beneath those specific 239 wellheads fluctuates based on global Brent crude pricing and sub-surface data from the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRC), they serve as the multi-billion naira cornerstone for Cross River’s economic recovery.
Udoh said, “the ultimate resolution to this friction does not lie in aggressive litigation or polarizing rhetoric, but in a structured, brotherly approach. We must recognize that Cross River and Akwa Ibom states are delineated only by an administrative political boundary. In reality, they remain one people. It is imperative to adopt a veritable approach that will not undermine or engender fractures in the deep historical bond and togetherness of these sister states.”
The dispute traces its origins to the 2002 International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling, which ceded oil-rich eastern Bakassi Peninsula to Cameroon. The ICJ ruling forced Nigerian federal government to relocate residents and local administrative machinery to a New Bakassi on the Nigerian side.
However, a 2012 Supreme Court judgment stripped Cross River of its littoral status for revenue allocation purposes, handing 76 offshore oil wells to its neighbouring Akwa Ibom. The apex court accepted Akwa Ibom’s argument that Cross River lacked the required bathymetric contour and baseline features following the peninsula’s transfer.
However, Cross River is now mounting a fresh challenge, arguing that the 2012 Supreme Court decision relied on a “mistake of fact” and flawed cartography by federal agencies that erroneously erased its maritime corridor.
The state asserts that international frameworks, such as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), protect the inherent rights of coastal ecosystems, pointing out that shifting an international land boundary does not erase the physical reality of the Cross River Estuary abutting the open sea.
Udoh, also a gas value chain expert, levelled sharp institutional criticisms at Nigeria’s boundary regulators, stating that administrative errors have exacerbated internal divisions. He issued a direct institutional call to action for federal mapping authorities to resolve the impasse through rigorous scientific validation.
“The National Boundary Commission (NBC) must immediately step up to fulfill its statutory and constitutional responsibilities,” Udoh IPEPM director stated.
“We [at the Institute of Professional Economists and Policy Management, IPEPM Nigeria] call on the National Boundary Commission to conduct a comprehensive, transparent re-mapping exercise of the internal maritime borders using modern hydrographic data. The NBC must formally profile and gazette these estuarine communities to reflect correct geographical realities, rather than letting deficient, outdated cartography threaten regional peace.”
Subject-Matter expert notes that while Akwa Ibom maintains that the 2012 Supreme Court ruling remains final, the discovery of newly surveyed wellheads and updated naval charts provides Cross River with fresh leverage.
Udoh, therefore, concluded by emphasizing that joint economic zones or shared derivation models could serve as a viable path forward under international maritime principles, preserving both resource equity and regional stability.
