A renewed dispute over oil wells between Cross River and Akwa Ibom states is fast evolving into a complex political, legal and economic contest that analysts warn could deepen tensions in Nigeria’s oil-producing region if not urgently addressed at the highest level of government. At the centre of the controversy is Cross River’s intensifying push to be recognised as an oil-producing state, anchored on claims of abandoned, capped and potentially viable oil and gas wells within its territory.
Cross River officials point to multiple oil fields said to exist across the state, including in Bakassi, Akpabuyo, Calabar South, Biase, Akamkpa and Odukpani, many of which were drilled in the 1950s and 1960s by multinational firms such as Shell but were later abandoned due to low commercial viability at the time. The state highlights specific assets: the Odukpani Oil Field, estimated to hold about 33 million barrels of crude; the Akpet Central Field, reportedly discovered in 1986 with reserves of 27 million barrels of oil and 21 billion cubic feet of gas; and the Ogoja Gas Field, believed to contain up to 70 billion cubic feet of gas.
Beyond geology, Cross River’s case rests heavily on legal interpretations of the landmark International Court of Justice Bakassi ruling, which ceded parts of the Bakassi Peninsula to Cameroon. The state argues that the ruling did not transfer the entirety of the Bakassi territory, and that significant portions of the Ikang mangrove, western Bakassi islands and segments of the Calabar estuary remain within Nigerian sovereignty and specifically within Cross River. The dispute echoes the long-standing disagreement over 76 offshore oil wells, which the Supreme Court ruled in favour of Akwa Ibom, but Cross River now argues that fresh findings indicate the presence of at least 67 oil wells within its territory separate from the previously adjudicated 76 wells.
From a fiscal perspective, recognition as an oil-producing state carries significant financial implications under Nigeria’s revenue-sharing formula, which allocates derivation funds to states based on oil production. A resolution in Cross River’s favour would entitle it to a share of oil revenues, potentially increasing its internally generated revenue and reducing dependence on federal allocations. However, any such redistribution would reduce the derivation funds available to Akwa Ibom, creating a zero-sum contest. The federal government must urgently intervene to prevent the dispute from escalating into a broader regional crisis that could disrupt oil production and investment.
