The Health of Mother Earth Foundation (HOMEF) has called for an appeal against the dismissal of a landmark environmental lawsuit filed by the monarch of Ekpetiama Kingdom against Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria (SPDC), describing the judgment as a major setback for environmental justice in the Niger Delta.
The suit, marked FHC/YNG/CS/8/2025, was instituted by the Amayanabo of Ekpetiama Kingdom, HRM King Bubaraye Dakolo, seeking to hold Shell accountable for decades of alleged oil spills, gas flaring and environmental degradation in the Gbarain oil fields of Bayelsa State before the company’s divestment of its onshore assets to Renaissance African Energy Limited.
Justice Ayo Emmanuel of the Federal High Court, Yenagoa, on July 17, 2026, dismissed the suit after upholding preliminary objections filed by Shell, the Attorney General of the Federation and the Nigeria Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRC).
The court ruled that the action failed to comply with statutory requirements under the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) 2021 and the Upstream Petroleum Remediation Funds Regulations 2022, was barred by limitation laws, and that the fundamental rights claims were merely ancillary to tort claims, thereby sustaining the defendants’ objections.
Reacting to the judgment, HOMEF argued that the court resolved the matter solely on procedural grounds without addressing the substantive allegations of environmental degradation allegedly suffered by the Ekpetiama community over several decades.
The organisation maintained that where oil facilities remain operational, gas flaring persists and contaminated land and waterways have not been remediated, the environmental damage should be regarded as a continuing injury rather than a historical event.
HOMEF contended that treating unresolved pollution as time-barred effectively shields oil companies from accountability while denying justice to affected communities.
Executive Director of HOMEF, Nnimmo Bassey, expressed disappointment that the court did not consider the merits of the environmental claims.
“Every one of these grounds is procedural; not a single finding goes to the merits of the environmental harm the Ekpetiama people have suffered for over six decades,” Bassey said.
He also defended the inclusion of the Federal Government as a defendant, arguing that the Minister of Petroleum Resources, the NUPRC and the Attorney General allegedly approved Shell’s divestment without ensuring compliance with environmental obligations stipulated under the Petroleum Industry Act.
HOMEF’s Legal Officer, Onome Etisioro, said the judgment underscored the need for Nigerian courts to clarify whether long-standing environmental pollution should be treated as a continuing wrong exempt from conventional limitation rules.
She argued that Shell’s environmental obligations could not be extinguished through procedural technicalities.
“The Ekpetiama case was built to force those questions, but it was dispatched before the judiciary could answer them; the communities of the Niger Delta are the poorer for it,” she said.
Etisioro added that repeated dismissals of environmental cases on technical grounds have continued to impede the development of judicial precedents capable of addressing what she described as the cumulative impacts of decades of oil exploration.
HOMEF further stated that the ruling reflects a broader trend in Nigerian environmental litigation, where cases involving long-standing ecological damage are frequently terminated on procedural grounds before courts examine the substantive issues.
The organisation urged King Dakolo and his legal team to challenge the judgment at the Court of Appeal, arguing that higher courts should determine whether the procedural barriers relied upon in the case promote justice or merely frustrate access to judicial remedies for oil-producing communities.
HOMEF also commended the lead counsel, Chuks Uguru, and the Ekpetiama legal team for their commitment to pursuing the matter through all available legal channels.
It called on environmental organisations, human rights groups and legal practitioners across Nigeria to support any appeal through legal advocacy, technical expertise and sustained public engagement.
Environmental advocates regard the case as one of the most significant legal challenges arising from Shell’s exit from Nigeria’s onshore oil operations, with potentially far-reaching implications for corporate environmental accountability, remediation obligations and the rights of host communities in the Niger Delta.
