Relative peace has returned to Makoko after weeks of protests by aggrieved residents following the demolition of the waterfront settlement by the Lagos State government. The area was, before now, under the grip of hostility, tension and uncertainty until the arrival of truce, thanks to a five-point agreement reached between the residents and representatives of government.
Read Also: Makoko demolitions: Fate of 1,000 schoolchildren hangs in the balance
Recall that members of an ad-hoc committee set up by the Speaker of the Lagos State House of Assembly, Mr Mudashiru Obasa, on Monday, visited Makoko for an on-the-spot assessment of the demolished area. A stakeholders meeting between the residents, the House ad hoc committee led by its chairman, Mr Noheem Adams, and the Special Adviser to Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu on E-GIS and Urban Renewal, Dr Babatunde Olajide later gave birth to the agreement signed by all parties.
According to Hon. Adams who read the agreement: “Our decisions as a House after deliberations by all is that Makoko community should stop all building on the demolished properties; Makoko community should set up a 10-man committee to deliberate on the remuneration for the compensation of displaced residents; the SA on E-GIS should set a boundary on where to stop the regeneration plan; we agree that the regeneration plan, that is the water-city project, will be for Makoko; and lastly, there is no plan for the elimination of Makoko“.
Water-city project to begin in Makoko
Speaking earlier on government’s plan for Makoko, Dr Olajide explained that the Lagos State government has a two-point agenda for the area. According to him: “ We want to start the water-city project for the people of Makoko. Sanitation is at the lowest ebb in Makoko. So, we are going to systematically work together to address this for the regeneration of Makoko.”
For Makoko leaders,including Baales from Makoko, Sogunro, and Okun-Agbon, as well as including students and youth leaders, the promises of the government were good. But they unanimously stated that they wanted compensation for those affected by the demolition; immediate plans, especially on accommodation for them, especially those who were living on boats and in deplorable conditions; and they wanted to see the boundary of the said regeneration plan by the government.
Why we demolished Makoko – LASG
Meantime, the state government has reiterated its position that the demolition of the waterfront settlement was done in the interest of all. According to its officials, Makoko is one of Lagos most complex urban spaces — socially vibrant, economically active, historically layered, and physically precarious. Built largely on stilts above the Lagos Lagoon and stretching toward vital transport and energy infrastructure, the community has long existed at the intersection of survival and risk.
Recent demolition activities by the Lagos State Government, LASG, have triggered outrage, protests and deep emotional distress among residents and civil society groups. Images of displaced families, damaged homes, and interrupted livelihoods have dominated public discussion. Yet from the government’s standpoint, the intervention was not conceived as an act of hostility toward the poor, nor as a prelude to elite redevelopment, but as a safety-driven enforcement action tied to long-standing environmental and urban planning concerns.
At the centre of LASG’s justification is a stark safety argument: no responsible authority can ignore settlements directly beneath high-tension electricity transmission lines or obstructing critical waterways. Sections of Makoko that were recently cleared, according to the government, fall within the statutory power-line setback corridor — a buffer zone designed to prevent catastrophic electrocution if live cables fall or infrastructure fails. In a dense, water-based settlement where wooden structures stand over a conductive lagoon surface, the consequences of a fallen line could be mass casualties within minutes.
Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu’s advisers have repeatedly framed the issue in these terms: prevention rather than reaction. Lagos has witnessed fatal incidents in other areas linked to electrical hazards, fallen cables, and fire outbreaks in tightly packed informal settlements where emergency response access is nearly impossible. From the state’s risk-management perspective, waiting for tragedy before acting would be indefensible.
Officials argue Makoko was not singled out, but treated in line with broader enforcement efforts across Lagos to clear high-risk corridors. In their view, failing to act because the community is poor would amount to institutionalising a double standard in safety.
Makoko’s future has long been the subject of intense debate, with Lagos State authorities weighing options to balance urban development, public safety, and the preservation of the community’s unique way of life. Among the concepts considered were the shoreline extension, which would have pushed development further into the lagoon, and the “Water City” regeneration model, focused on upgrading the settlement in situ. Environmental assessments, however, ultimately ruled out the shoreline extension. Experts warned that extending into the lagoon could disrupt water flow, degrade fragile ecosystems, and threaten aquatic life, while international consultants cautioned against any approach that risked long-term ecological damage.
What remains is the Water City Project, a plan designed to improve Makoko from within, rather than displace it. According to officials, the model prioritises upgrades to sanitation, drainage, housing quality, and access, while ensuring that the fishing-based economy that has sustained generations of residents remains intact. Government officials emphasise that the recent demolitions were strictly confined to safety corridors, with no overlap on the areas earmarked for regeneration, and reject claims that the exercise was a prelude to luxury real estate development.
Despite these assurances, skepticism persists among residents, many of whom see waterfront land as highly commercially valuable. The tension between opportunity and security is palpable. Yet, the state maintains that the Water City approach offers the only sustainable path forward: a vision that preserves Makoko’s identity while restructuring it into a safer, more resilient settlement. By addressing structural hazards, regulating waterways, and introducing incremental improvements, Lagos State presents a model that seeks to reconcile the community’s heritage with the imperatives of modern urban planning. Ultimately, the Water City Project is framed not as an erasure of Makoko but as a careful recalibration — an effort to safeguard lives, enhance living conditions, and retain the community’s cultural and economic heartbeat within the evolving landscape of Lagos.
The $10m Regeneration Vision
At the heart of Lagos State’s defence of its recent interventions in Makoko is a financial commitment that is said to underscore focus on regeneration rather than demolition. Since 2021, the state government says it has earmarked $2 million for the planning and preliminary phases of Makoko’s redevelopment, with the expectation that the United Nations would contribute up to $8 million in counterpart funding. While global budgetary constraints have slowed disbursements, officials present the pledge as proof of a long-term, structured approach to transforming one of the city’s most complex settlements. The state is actively courting additional support from development partners and private organisations to bridge the funding gap, signalling that the initiative is far from ad hoc.
Central to this vision, officials said, is the Water City concept, a framework that seeks to upgrade Makoko incrementally rather than displace its residents wholesale. The plan envisions structured housing layouts, safer building methods, regulated waterways, and improved sanitation and waste systems, all while safeguarding the fishing economy that underpins the community. From the government’s perspective, the recent demolitions were a painful but limited enforcement action, a precursor to a broader agenda rather than a substitute for it.
They argued that Makoko exists within a city growing by hundreds of thousands of residents each year, with formal housing supply lagging far behind demand. Informal settlements continue to expand into wetlands, waterfronts, and critical infrastructure corridors, heightening the stakes for public safety. The community’s encroachment toward the Third Mainland Bridge and major utility routes has intensified official concern, as planners warn that unregulated expansion in such zones significantly raises the risk of large-scale fires, structural collapses, electrocution incidents, flooding, water contamination, and blocked emergency access.
They also argue that beyond immediate safety considerations, tolerating unsafe expansion risks complicity in preventable disasters. This tension defines the Makoko debate: balancing the right to shelter with the responsibility to prevent foreseeable, mass-casualty events. For Lagos State, the $10 million regeneration vision represents more than financial commitment; it is a statement of intent — to reimagine Makoko as a safer, more resilient, and sustainable settlement while preserving the social and economic fabric that has long defined the iconic lagoon community.
A settlement sitting on high-risk infrastructure
Central to the state government’s justification for the recent intervention in Makoko is what officials describe as an unavoidable safety imperative. From the state’s standpoint, no responsible authority can knowingly permit human settlements to exist directly beneath high-tension electricity transmission lines or within corridors that obstruct critical waterways. The sections of Makoko affected by the demolition, the government insists, fall squarely within statutory power-line setback zones—buffers designed to prevent catastrophic loss of life in the event of infrastructure failure.
In a settlement built largely of wooden structures standing on stilts above a conductive lagoon surface, the risks are amplified. Officials warn that a fallen high-tension cable in such an environment could result in mass casualties within minutes. Advisers to Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu have repeatedly framed the decision as an act of prevention rather than reaction, arguing that Lagos has already witnessed deadly incidents linked to fallen power lines, fires, and building collapses in other densely populated informal communities where emergency access is severely limited. From a risk-management perspective, they argue, waiting for tragedy before acting would have been indefensible.
The government also rejects claims that Makoko was singled out. According to officials, similar clearance exercises have been carried out in other parts of Lagos following fatal electrical incidents, and applying different standards because a community is poor would amount to institutionalising inequality in safety enforcement. These arguments were laid out at a press conference at the Bagauda Kaltho Press Centre, Alausa, by the Special Adviser to Governor Sanwo-Olu on eGIS and Urban Development, Dr. Olajide Babatunde.
With the Special Adviser on Media and Publicity, Mr. Gboyega Akosile; the Commissioner for Information and Strategy, Mr. Gbenga Omotoso and other senior officials in attendance, Babatunde said the intervention was driven primarily by the need to protect lives in areas dangerously close to high-tension power infrastructure. “Clearing high-tension corridors is a safety requirement across Lagos State,” Babatunde said. “The action taken in Makoko is consistent with what has been done in other communities.”
He stressed that the state remained committed to improving living conditions in vulnerable communities, while balancing development pressures with environmental protection and public safety. According to him, Makoko’s situation has been the subject of extensive planning debates for years, with multiple redevelopment options considered before the current approach emerged.
One such proposal—the shoreline extension plan—was eventually abandoned after environmental impact assessments raised red flags. Babatunde disclosed that studies conducted by technical experts, construction firms, and international partners warned that pushing development further into the lagoon could disrupt water flow, damage marine ecosystems, and degrade aquatic life. Those findings, he said, led the state to discontinue the plan entirely.
What remains, according to the government, is the Water City Project, a regeneration model designed to upgrade Makoko in situ. The project aims to improve sanitation, drainage, housing quality, and access, while preserving the fishing-based economy that defines the community. Officials insist that the recent demolitions are not linked to luxury real estate development or private commercial interests, noting that the cleared areas fall strictly within safety corridors and do not overlap with the designated footprint of the Water City scheme. “We need to do what we have to do,” Babatunde said. “If we don’t, then we are endangering the lives of the people. However, we need to do it in a systematic way. We have to do it according to international conventions.”
He revealed that the Sanwo-Olu administration committed $2 million in 2021 toward the redevelopment of the Makoko waterfront to meet international standards, with expectations of an additional $8 million in counterpart funding from the United Nations. While global funding constraints have slowed disbursements from donor agencies, Babatunde said the state was looking inward and appealing to international partners, donor organisations, and the private sector to support the project. “The United Nations delegation visited Makoko in 2021,” he said. “It is not an area we are joking with at all. It is an area where we want to do the needful and improve living standards.”
Babatunde also cited past regeneration efforts as evidence of the government’s approach. He pointed to the relocation of residents in Okobaba, Adeniji-Adele, and Dosunmu, which he said were achieved through consultation, negotiated agreements, and compensation. In Okobaba, he noted, residents were relocated to Agbowa, where the state provided hundreds of houses, large parcels of land, and equipment worth billions of naira. “We moved them without any noise,” he said. “We relocated them to a prime area and provided facilities they did not have before. This administration is very much interested in the welfare of the people.”
Beyond electricity hazards, Babatunde cited recurring fires, structural collapses, and the absence of access routes for emergency services in densely populated settlements as further justification for enforcing building codes, minimum setbacks, and land pooling in regeneration areas. Unsafe housing conditions, he argued, ultimately expose residents to greater danger. Commissioner for Information and Strategy, Mr. Gbenga Omotoso, addressed the protests that followed the demolitions, acknowledging citizens’ constitutional right to protest while cautioning against actions that infringe on public order. “Protest is a fundamental human right,” he said. “But it should not obstruct public roads or prevent people from accessing medical care or going about essential activities.” He added that emotions surrounding the Makoko issue were understandable, but urged the public to separate sentiment from facts. “People believed the demolition was anti-people,” Omotoso said. “People are entitled to their emotions, but there are facts and figures.”
In this article