A QUERY OF THE LEGALITY OF CONSENT FEE CHARGED BY GOVERNORS PURSUANT TO SECTION 22 OF THE LAND USE ACT

Abstract

This article considered the legality of the consent fee prescribed by Governors for alienation of the right of occupancy under section 22 of the Land Use Act. Considering that this article borders solely on law, the article examined provisions of the Act relating to the practise of consent fees and judicial decisions. The research conducted was doctrinal. The article argues that consent fee is a tax, and that no pecuniary burden can be imposed upon a citizen by whatever name it may be called, whether tax, due, rate or toll or fee, except upon clear and distinct legal authority, established by those who seek to impose the burden. The paper contends that there is no power, express or implied, vested in the Governor to prescribe any fees as a precondition for exercising his power under section 22 of the Act and that the Governor’s consent power is only exercisable subject to a regulation made by the Council of States in that regard under section 46(1(a) of the Act. The paper concludes by recommending a public-interest litigation to test the legality of the practice of Governor’s consent fee.