The basis of Cross River’s claims 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 these wells, they say, were drilled in the 1950s and 1960s by multinational firms such as Shell Petroleum Development Company 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.

Officials argue that advancements in technology and changing market conditions could make these fields commercially viable today. More importantly, they insist that the existence of such reserves underscores Cross River’s status as a legitimate oil-bearing state. 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.

According to the state government and legal experts, the ruling did not transfer the entirety of the Bakassi territory. They argue 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. A legal review by former state assembly speaker, John Gaul Lebo maintains that Cross River retains a functional maritime corridor to the Atlantic Ocean through the Akwayefe River and adjoining estuaries.

This, the argument goes, preserves its status as a littoral state under international maritime law, including provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. From this standpoint, Cross River contends that its exclusion from the list of oil-producing states is both legally and geographically flawed. The 76 oil wells controversy The dispute is not entirely new.

It echoes the long-standing disagreement over 76 offshore oil wells, which were the subject of litigation between Cross River and Akwa Ibom. In a decisive judgment, the Supreme Court of Nigeria ruled in favour of Akwa Ibom, effectively transferring control and the associated derivation revenue of those wells to the state. However, Cross River now argues that the ruling addressed only those specific offshore wells and did not extinguish its claims over other onshore and nearshore resources.

Officials say fresh findings indicate the presence of at least 67 oil wells within its territory, separate from the previously adjudicated 76 wells. “Our 67 oil wells derivation is sacrosanct,” a senior government official said, signalling a renewed determination to pursue recognition through legal and political channels. Complicating the dispute is a broader geopolitical concern involving Nigeria’s maritime boundaries with Cameroon.

Reports of alleged encroachment by Cameroonian interests into mangrove islands in Mbo Local Government Area of Akwa Ibom have heightened tensions. The area, rich in oil and gas deposits, is said to host thousands of wells. Nigerian authorities, including the Senate, have initiated investigations into the situation, underscoring fears that unresolved internal disputes could weaken Nigeria’s territorial claims externally.

For stakeholders, this intersection of domestic rivalry and international boundary sensitivity makes the Cross River–Akwa Ibom dispute more than a routine resource disagreement. But the question the above has raised is what makes it a policy issue. At its core, the conflict raises fundamental questions about Nigeria’s resource governance framework.

The derivation principle, which allocates a percentage of oil revenue to producing states, has long been a source of contention. Determining what constitutes an “oil-producing state” is therefore not merely administrative; it is deeply political and economically consequential. Moreover, the dispute exposes gaps in Nigeria’s approach to managing abandoned oil assets. Many wells drilled decades ago were left idle due to technological or economic limitat