By Engr. Biliyaminu Surajo
Biliyasuraj1980@yahoo.com
The unassuming building at House 37, Lobito Crescent, Wuse II, Abuja, may appear to be just another government office, but it houses one of Nigeria’s most powerful regulatory agencies. The Mining Cadastre Office (MCO), operating under the Ministry of Solid Minerals Development, is tasked with the critical responsibility of regulating solid mineral licensing in Nigeria—a function vital to the nation’s economic development and security.
However, over the years, this agency has become synonymous with corruption, bribery, and unprofessionalism. Many industry operators now claim that the MCO has become the single greatest obstacle to progress in Nigeria’s mining sector.
The June 19, 2025 Debacle
The June 19, 2025 virtual stakeholder engagement session, organized by the new Permanent Secretary to restore confidence in the mining sector, was nothing short of a disaster. What was intended as a collaborative dialogue devolved into a monologue from ministry officials until frustrated stakeholders demanded to be heard.
When finally given the opportunity to speak, industry participants unleashed a torrent of complaints about the MCO. These ranged from demands for fees when tenement holders couldn’t access their properties, to inexplicable delays in granting mining titles.
The Crisis of Overlapping Titles
The MCO’s fundamental responsibility is to issue valid mining licenses that provide holders with secure “good title” to their allocated areas. However, the reality is far from this ideal. The agency has developed a troubling pattern of issuing new titles over existing valid ones, creating a web of competing claims that has paralyzed the sector.
Community leaders frequently find themselves caught between multiple parties, each holding seemingly legitimate title documents signed by Director General Simon Nkom. This raises a critical question: how are these overlapping titles possible when applications require written consent from community leaders?
Investigation reveals a disturbing answer: for a fee, fake community consent documents can be obtained through MCO channels. Sources within the industry report that at least one MCO officer has supplied over 50 fraudulent consent documents, with each application processed successfully upon payment of the requisite bribe.
A Revenue Bonanza Built on Dysfunction
The overlapping titles crisis has persisted for three years, with public complaints falling on deaf ears. The MCO continues issuing licenses over valid titles while collecting fees from both new and existing title holders—creating what can only be described as a revenue bonanza built on institutional faipublic
The minister change the rule mid-game. You can not change the rules mid game like 12-fold increasement of annual service fees and other related fees mid year and ask for immediate implementation. Those instability is a turn off for investors.
This windfall was amplified by the Federal Ministry of Solid Minerals Development’s announcement on July 4, 2024, of a staggering 12-fold increase in mining rates and fees. The resulting revenue inflow of over ₦6.95 billion in the first quarter of 2025 was later celebrated by Director-General Engineer Obadiah Simon-Nkom as proof of his successful management.
Many tenement holders, however, take a different view—one that was expressed openly during the June 19, 2025 meeting with the Permanent Secretary and senior management. The MCO is not a revenue generation agency, and increased fees from applicants should not be considered a success story. The real question remains: where are the working mines? Not the environmentally destructive Chinese operations visible across the country, but genuine, sustainable mining operations.
The Facilitation Fee Culture
Beyond official fees, industry sources report a pervasive culture of additional payments to individual MCO officers. The CEO of a foreign mining company disclosed being asked for hundreds of thousands of dollars to expedite his tenement application—an incident that, while extreme, is not isolated.
The speed of tenement processing has become directly proportional to an applicant’s willingness to pay “facilitation fees.” Those who refuse to pay beyond scheduled fees face indefinite delays, while those who pay extra receive prompt service.
The MinDiver System Failure
The prevalence of overlapping titles is particularly puzzling given the implementation of the Mineral Sector Support for Economic Diversification Project (MINDIVER), funded by the World Bank with $150 million. This project was specifically designed to prevent such duplication through an automated cadastre system.
The contract for “Upgrading and Automatization of the Mining Cadastre Office for Online Applications, e-recording, Archiving and Establishment of Mining Cadastre Offices in the Six Geopolitical Zones” was awarded to GAF, a Munich and Neustrelitz-based German company with a relationship with the Nigerian MCO dating back to 2007.
According to Simon-Nkom, “All mineral title applications are now submitted exclusively through the EMC+ system. It’s an entirely online platform that offers transparency, efficiency, and real-time access.” However, many Nigerian tenement holders would dispute all three claims.
One mining company CEO described the multi-million-dollar system as “an absolute mess,” explaining that applicants can no longer rely on the cadastre system’s accuracy. “You might be awarded a title today only to find another company is awarded a title over your area next week. It depends on how much you are prepared to pay to the MCO. It never used to be like this.”
Ironically, Simon-Nkom received an international award as Nigeria’s “best public servant leader” in 2024 for overseeing this system—a recognition that industry insiders find bewildering given the widespread dysfunction.
The Lost Golden Age
Veteran operators in the industry recall a time when the MCO functioned effectively under manual processing. When coordinate overlaps or conflicts arose, officials would help applicants adjust their applications accordingly. Overlapping titles were rare, and the system generally adhered to the provisions of the Mineral Acts that clearly forbid such conflicts.
The question that haunts the industry is: why is this happening now, with supposedly superior technology and systems?
International Embarrassment
The MCO’s dysfunction extends beyond Nigeria’s borders, embarrassing the country at international mining conventions. According to multiple industry sources, the Ministry of Solid Minerals Development and MCO have never presented a world-class mining project at international conferences over the past 12 years, despite spending millions of taxpayers’ money on these events.
One operator noted: “I have been attending AfricaDownUnder in Australia for the past 10 years. It’s a shame what MSMD/MCO come here to tell us. It’s a remix of annual presentations. I wonder why they even show up. They fly halfway across the world for nothing.”
At the recently concluded PDAC 2025—North America’s largest mining convention held annually in Canada—Nigeria’s delegation was among the largest but had nothing substantial to present. While other African countries like Ghana, Cameroon, Chad, and South Africa brought mining company CEOs to showcase success stories and attract investors, Nigeria’s representatives were reportedly “just there sharing flyers.”
The story is the same for Mines and Money, London, United Kingdom and Mining Indaba, Cape town, South Africa. Annually we just go there for the funfair. Absolutely nothing has been added to the Nigeria mining sector.
Who debriefs these government guys when they return from such expensive trips?
The contrast with other African nations is stark. These countries use international platforms to present concrete achievements, helping to galvanize undecided investors. Nigeria’s consistent failure to do so represents a massive missed opportunity for economic development.
The Chinese Factor
The current administration’s reliance on Chinese mining operations has raised additional concerns. Unlike Western companies that participate in international conventions and contribute to state building, Chinese operations are primarily extractive. The lithium processing plants being constructed across Nigeria reportedly use obsolete technologies already rejected by Western countries due to recovery rates of only 50%.
Yet these operations are presented as success stories by ministry officials, raising questions about whether proper due diligence is being conducted or if palm-greasing is influencing decision-making.
The Path Forward
Legal challenges are mounting, but as one operator noted, “these people do not care. It’s the Federal government. Until individual officials are sued for their actions, we are not likely to get it right.”
The time has come for comprehensive reform. The building at House 37, Lobito Crescent represents more than just a government office—it symbolizes the need for fundamental change in how Nigeria approaches mineral resource development.
The nation’s mining sector cannot afford to continue operating under a system characterized by corruption, inefficiency, and international embarrassment. The MCO’s transformation from a functional regulatory body to what many consider a threat to national security demands immediate and decisive action.
It is not too late to start over. The question is whether Nigeria has the political will to begin the necessary reforms at House 37, Lobito Crescent, and restore the MCO to its intended purpose: serving as a catalyst for sustainable mining development rather than an obstacle to it.
The future of Nigeria’s solid minerals sector—and potentially the nation’s economic diversification—hangs in the balance.
DISCLAIMER
This opinion piece reflects the author’s views based on publicly available information and industry sources. While every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, some details are based on confidential sources due to the sensitive nature of the subject matter. The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not represent any official position of this newspaper. All individuals and organizations mentioned have the right to respond, and such responses will be given due consideration.