By Miannaya Essien, SAN & Kinika Alikor, Esq
Miannaya Essien, SAN, FCIArb
Kinika Alikor
Managing Partner
Miannaya Essien, SAN, FCIArb
Miannaya Essien, SAN, FCIArb, Chartered Arbitrator.
Miannaya Aja Essien, SAN, Chartered Arbitrator, FCIArb., Notary Public, is an alumnus of the University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Enugu State, Nigeria and the University of Lagos, Lagos State, Nigeria. She obtained her LLB (Hons.) and LL.M. respectively in 1984 and 1991 and was called to the Nigerian Bar in August 1985. She was elevated to the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria in 2007.
She is the Managing Partner of Principles Law Partnership (www.principleslaw.com) a firm of legal practitioners, notaries public and arbitrators with offices in Port Harcourt and Lagos. She currently leads Principles Law Partnership’s dispute resolution practice.
She became a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (UK) in 2007 and a Chartered Arbitrator in 2015 and holds a Panel Appointment Certificate of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators. She is also a Fellow of the Institute of Construction Industry Arbitrators.
She is a member of the Body of Benchers in Nigeria. https://bob.gov.ng/. It is the legal body of practitioners of the highest distinction in the legal profession and is responsible for the formal call to the Bar of persons seeking to become legal practitioners etc. She is also a member of the Legal Practitioners’ Privileges Committee, the statutory body responsible for the conferment of the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria on qualified legal practitioners.
She is a member of the adjunct faculty of the Nigerian Law School, Abuja where she teaches civil litigation. She is also an approved tutor of the faculty of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (United Kingdom) teaching all aspects of domestic and international commercial arbitration.
She is currently the 3rd Vice-Chairperson of the Nigerian Branch of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, and is a past chairperson of the Port Harcourt Chapter of the Nigeria Branch.
She is experienced and actively involved (both as counsel and arbitrator) in the resolution of complex commercial disputes across the energy, oil and gas, commercial, financial and insurance sectors and criminal matters arising from them. She acts regularly as party appointed arbitrator or chairperson of various arbitral tribunals.
She is on the board of the Lagos Court of Arbitration and a member of Council of the Business Recovery & Insolvency Practitioners Association of Nigeria. She is a member of several associations including the Nigerian Bar Association, International Council for Commercial Arbitration, the ICC Commission on Arbitration and ADR, the London Court of International Arbitration (African Users’ Council), African Arbitrators’ Association, the International Law Association (Nigerian Branch), the Maritime Arbitrators Association of Nigeria and the Nigerian Maritime Lawyers’ Association.
She previously served as Chairperson of the Section on Legal Practice of the Nigerian Bar Association, member of the National Executive Council of the Nigerian Bar Association and of the Council of the Commonwealth Lawyers Association, representing Nigeria. She recently retired from the board of Stanbic IBTC Bank Limited as an Independent Non-Executive Director.
She has attended executive and leadership courses at various institutions including The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA, Stanford Graduate School of Business, California, Columbia Business School Executive Education, New York, UCLA Anderson School of Management, California, USA.
She has contributed numerous scholarly articles on law and arbitration to legal publications, journals, books and is a regular resource person, speaking at seminars, webinars, workshops, and conferences locally and internationally.
Senior Associate
Kinika Alikor
(LL.B., B.L.) Kwame Nkrumah University, Ghana. Called to the Nigerian Bar in 2012.
Introduction
The Taxes and Levies (Approved List for Collection) Act Cap. T2 LFN 2004 (“the Act”) enacted in 1998 as Decree No. 21, provided for the specific tiers of government that could collect specific taxes and levies. Sections 1 and 2 of the Act provided as follows:
“1(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1979, as amended, or in any other enactment or law, the Federal Government, State Government and local government shall be responsible for collecting the taxes and levies listed in Part I, Part II and Part III of the Schedule to this Act, respectively.
(2) …………………..
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1979, as amended, or in any other enactment or law, the Federal Government, State Government and local government shall be responsible for collecting the taxes and levies listed in Part I, Part II and Part III of the Schedule to this Act, respectively.
(2) ……………………………….
The phrase “notwithstanding anything in the Constitution” led to the eventual demise of the Act on the 2nd of February, 2025 in Attorney General Abia State v Imo Transport Company Limited where the Supreme Court decided the Act was unconstitutional as it was inconsistent with the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (‘the Constitution”).
Previous decisions of the Court of Appeal such as Eti-Osa Local Government v. Jegede had emphasised the need for taxation not to be left at the whims and caprices of different tiers of government but that they should be channeled through the Joint Tax Board. However, the Court of Appeal in Uyo Local Government v. Akwa Ibom State Government had held that the Act was unconstitutional. Ultimately, the legality of the Act came up for interpretation by the Supreme Court in A-G Abia State v. Imo Transport Co. Ltd (2025) 16 NWLR (Pt. 2012) 427, where it held, inter alia, that since the Act purported to regulate matters outside the National Assembly’s constitutional authority, it was legally void.
Rationale of the Supreme Court
The rationale for this decision rests primarily on the principle of legislative competence enshrined in the Constitution. Sections 4 and 315 of the Constitution were pivotal in the Supreme Court’s decision. Section 4 confines the legislative powers of the National Assembly and State Houses of Assembly to matters specifically listed in the Exclusive and Concurrent Legislative Lists, as applicable to each legislative house. The judgment emphasised that the Taxes and Levies (Approved List for Collection) Act assigned the collection of taxes and levies which fall outside both legislative lists. For instance, development levies on individuals, among other taxes listed in Parts I, II, and III of the Schedule to the Act, were not within the powers granted to the National Assembly. Thus, the National Assembly lacked the competence to authorize, direct, or delegate the collection of these levies to State or Local Governments and was thus ultra vires.
The Court further emphasized, that even if the Act was promulgated as a Decree prior to the commencement of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, Section 315 of the Constitution required existing laws to conform to the Constitution. In this case, the Act which dealt with matters outside the legislative competence of the National Assembly, could not be deemed valid merely because it existed prior to the Constitution’s commencement.
Impact on Tax Collection Challenges
The Act had provided some much needed relief at a time citizens were facing excesses from multiple collection agencies and tiers of government over taxation, although it is quite surprising that it had not been abrogated before this time. This decision, delivered in February, 2025, altered the tax collection landscape. However, since then, taxation has undergone a significant overhaul with the passing of the Nigeria Tax Act, 2025 and the Nigeria Tax Administration Act, 2025. There are however criticisms as to whether the new collection approach encroaches on the principles of federalism.
Conclusion
With this decision, the Taxes and Levies (Approved List for Collection) Act has been buried and the Supreme Court has reaffirmed the supremacy of the Constitution, emphasizing that only laws enacted in line with the Constitution are valid.
