1. SYNERGY FOR THE PREVENTION OF NUISANCES
IN FCT
BY
OKOH CHUKWUEMEKA SMITH
BSU/PSY/MHM/14/7443
BEING A PAPER PRESENTED TO ABUJA ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION BOARD
(ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT)
MAY 2016

2. DEFINITION OF TERMS
SYNERGY: The extra energy, power or success that is achieved by two or
more people or companies working together, instead of on their own (Oxford
Learners dictionary)
PREVENTION: The act of stopping something from happening i.e to cause
not to happen or not to be made or done (Oxford Learners dictionary).
NUISANCE: A thing, person or situation that causes annoyance, trouble or
problems, thus giving offense to another person or to the community at large.

3. INTRODUCTION
The World Health Organization (WHO) defines health as “the state of complete
physical, mental and social wellbeing; not merely the absence of diseases or illness”. The
social perspective here refers to the intractability with the environment which incurs
environmental health options (promotive health).
Environmental Health (EH) as defined by UGA (2000), “is the scientific study of the
biological, chemical and physical agents introduced into the environment or occurring
naturally and their effect on human health and the ecological system, including human
activities which is a vital component of our complex ecosystem. It is noteworthy that WHO
in the first World Health Assembly gave same priority to EH as malaria, tuberculosis,
venereal disease, maternal and child health and nutrition, making the “Big Six” list and drove
it in article 2(1) of the constitution.
Also the irrevocable interrelation of population factors, socio-economic development
and environmental issues as critical to sustainable development informed the signing of the
National Policy on Population for Sustainable Development in January 2004, by Chief
Olusegun Obasanjo, then president of Nigeria.
The scientific criteria for establishing environmental health standards are the
quantitative relationships between the intensity, frequency and duration of exposure to
various environmental influences on the one hand, and the risk or magnitude of an
undesirable effect on man or his environment on the other hand. Such relationships derive
from toxicological, epidemiological or environmental studies, the latter of which is our
concern.
In the absence of precise information on the “dose-response” or “exposure-effect”
relationship, other criteria based on experiences and intuitive guesses have been and will
continue to be used by Public Health administrators to set EH standards. And the experience
accumulated by use of such standards will show whether or not the guesses were correct and
how the standards can be modified. Often, water, food and varied agro-products are made
safe for consumption by imposing standards of quality based on relatively general and vague
rules.
EH standards therefore are “acceptable” or “permissible” limits of concentration established
to protect a defined population from the undesirable effects of a specified exposure to one or
several environmental hazards.
JUSTIFICATION
The enormity of salient potentials and health benefits possible through multi-layered
interventions outside of the narrow spectrum of EH organ like the Abuja Environmental
Protection Board (AEPB) and its sector is not being optimally tapped.
At this juncture we reflect on the objectives of these whole exercises cum activities as
aptly captured by the mission statement of AEPB; Thus:

4. “To provide a clean, hygienic and sustainable environment
for the wellbeing of present and future generations”,
In line with the vision of Federal Capital Territory Administration (FCTA),”
To build a world class city comparable to other first class cities of the world”.
FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY (FCT) IN PERSPECTIVE
To eschew such encumbrances as situational challenges thus:
 Is the conduct or activity really a nuisance?
 If a nuisance, is it public or private?
 Does the type of activity negatively impact the entire community or only certain
individuals?
 Will we actively investigate nuisance conditions or will we rely on residents
complain?
 Don’t you need a warrant to enter my property? Etc.
We adopt the state of Minnesota (USA) statute definition of nuisances as “Anything injurious
to health, indecent or offensive to senses, or that obstructs the free use and comfortable use of
life or property”, as ought to be provided by the AEPB Act No 10, 1997.
While nuisances may often include people doing what they shouldn’t do (such as
accumulation of garbage) or negligent conduct (like failure to cut one’s grass), determining
whether the individual or body corporate failed to exercise due care is not always critical;
since consequence rather than intent is the primary concern.
The commonly reported nuisances in FCT as documented include but not limited to the
following:
 Street beggars/destitutes
 Bleeding manholes and odour pollution of the city
 Lack of or overflowing waste bins
 Open waste dumps
 Overgrown weeds, trees and hedges
 Noise from churches and mosques loudspeakers and generators
 Open defecation and urination
 Smoky burning of tires and solid wastes
 Makeshift shops in walkways and street hawking
 Shanties within residential areas
 Littering of construction materials on roadsides and nearby bushes
 Rearing of birds and fish (poultry and fish farms) in residential areas
 Automobile wrecking
 Hazardous buildings
 Cesspools and discharge of sewage into streams or adjacent land slopes
All of the above are classified under common nuisances subsisting under the ordinances of
each state, and relative to others such as “nuisance per se” (nuisance at law, at all time, all

5. circumstances) and “nuisance in fact” (nuisance based on location and modus operandi). We
may also at liberty group them into solids, liquids and gases according to states of matter.
Cardinally, in the event of response to nuisances in the city, organs such as AEPB
must firstly evaluate whether something is a public or private nuisance.
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE NUISANCES
Public nuisances are those that affect a considerably number of people: violate public
rights and produce common or general injury. They injure or annoy the portion of the public
that comes into contact with them. And because they harm the general public, they are
addressed through city actions as injunctions, criminal prosecutions or abatement actions.
While a private nuisance on the other hand, produces damages or injuries to only one person
or a few people: thence it’s prevention or abatement is the responsibility of the injured
individual through typical remedies of private civil actions.
However, nuisances can be both public or private at once e.g. An overgrown tree on a private
property could overhang both the public right of way and the adjoining private property.
PREVENTION OF NUISANCES (PUBLIC)
Though relatively simple in theory, nuisance prevention or enforcement can be much
more difficult in practice, striking a balance between competing interests of the defaulter’s
rights and the relevant statutes.
The sensitivity of approaches in the given circumstances invite the cloak of statutes which are
available to EH officers as thus:
 Public Health Law, 1917
 Breeding of Mosquitoes Notice, 1944
 Public Health Rule, 1948
 National Environmental Protection (Effluent Limitation) Regulation, 1991
 National Environmental Protection (Pollution abatement in industries and
facilities generating waste) Regulation, 1991
 National Environmental Protection (Management of solid waste and hazardous
waste) Regulation, 1991
 AEPB Act No 10, 1997
 Environmental Health Officers Registrations Act 11, 2002
 National Environmental Health Practice Regulations, 2007 etc.
The modus operandi as suitable to the EH officers to administer, in due evaluation of
every uniquely standing case would encompass the under listed; bearing in mind that the
location of the activities matter which connotes “Regulated and Unregulated premises”
Injunction: An order requiring somebody to stop doing something that harms e.g. generating
loud noise or odour.

6. Criminal Prosecution: A guilty defaulter of misdemeanour offense such as street peddling
of controlled substances such as marijuana weeds or roadside evening prostitutes. With no
specific sentence prescribed.
Orders of abatement: Requiring a harmful condition to be removed from the property (e.g.
draining of stagnant water).
This is the prevalent route of address of most cases and instructively ramifies into voluntary
abatement (at notice), prohibition and finally closure order (at noncompliance), which could
emanate from the judiciary, city or tenant remedy Act. This choice is strengthened by the fact
that an activity does not necessarily need to be unlawful to be a nuisance.
PARTNERSHIP
The objectives of human organisations in synergy is to combine parts into a whole
greater than their sum, thus bringing independent actors into mutual liaison, to maximize
access to resources, encourage specialization, increase competition and optimize options. It
leverages on increased flexibility, facilitate innovations and cause small organisations (like
AEPB) to flourish through mutual aid.
This sets the tone for our discussion and focuses on possible opportunities available to AEPB
as an organ. From the dimensions of potentials, hindrances and fulfilment we evaluate the
substances of different levels of affiliations to encompass:
 Intra-agency cooperation
 Inter-agency collaboration
 Inter-sector approach
 Civil society organisations (CSO) involvement
 Private sector role
 Inter –state cooperation
 Regulatory bodies contribution
 Community participation
1 INTRA-AGENCY COPERATION
The organogram of AEPB as provided captures seven departments and the critical
units:
 Waste management and sanitation department
 Enforcement department
 Environmental health and safety department (EH&S)
 Environmental monitoring, planning, research and statistic department
 Environmental conservation department
 Finance and account department
 Administration and supplies department
 Critical units (legal, servicom, internal audit and public relations).
All of these component departments must not only be said, but be felt and seen to be
complementary in roles to the functions of the pivot department as determined by the nature

7. of the nuisance in question, whether it be waste management department or EH&S
department. The function of each relevant player must begin where the other ends in a relay
race of the chain of events delivering the final overall objective “clean and safe”, of the
board.
Example: Where waste management staff on their site supervisions and monitor tag a
sanitary defaulter, EH&S staff will verify and serve abatement notice; the non compliance of
which will invite enforcement, a charge, conviction and fine. And in the event of dispute, the
public relations unit must portray the agency’s image in a positive outlook to the public.
2 INTER-AGENCY COLLBORATION:
The numerous government agencies and bodies to the extent that they too
generate waste (be it only papers), must responsibly give a hand to the task of clean and
healthy environment; as the slogan goes “Sanitum Sanitatum, Omnia Sanita!”. Such agencies
will include:
a) Federal Road Safety Commission (FRSC):
A nuisance like flooding such as occurred along Abuja-Lokoja road in the year
2014 piling garbages on the high-way or felled trees during stormy weather should in
solidarity be evacuated without waiting for AEPB.
b) The Nigeria Police (NPF):
This single most besought organ of state that thrives on civil actions, can fill a large
gap in nuisance prevention and abatement in addition to protective duties in the event
of civil assault on EHO’s. Also, in unity with FRSC provide security during road-walks
and rally for sanitary enlightenment.
c) Federal Fire Service (FFS):
The role of this body in the event of fire disaster and its attendant chaos leaves in
its wake a trail of litter and garbage which accord with AEPB will speedily remove.
d) National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA):
In such instances as building collapse, debrises and litters emanating from such
will have to be attended to by a unity of NEMA, AEPB, environmental control and any
other stakeholders.
e) National Environmental Sanitation, Regulations and Enforcement Agency
(NESREA):
The soil, water and air quality of the FCT city which is a direct correspondence of
the sanitary efforts, can well be attenuated by actions of NESREA as partners in
Environmental Impact Assessment and environmental auditing, and documented for
other information consumers.

8. f) Social Development Secretariat (FCDA):
This arm of the FCDA, in liaison with AEPB would contain the nuisance of street
beggars and destitutes, providing rehabilitation (as in Yangoji and Kuchikawa), abating
and repatriating by evaluation to home states of the destitutes.
g) Others such as the Satellite Town Development Agency (STDA) and AMAC carrying
on nuisance abatement in their areas of administration and conducting school health
inspections, market inspections, and general monitor of plastic-ware recyclers and scrap
metal dealers. Development Control Unit of the FCDA conducting building site
inspection and granting EIA certification.
3. INTER-SECTOR APPROACH
a) Ministry of Education:
The spiralling benefits of health education as taught at different levels of education
(both primary and secondary) can be specifically tailored towards nuisance prevention
and abatement by initiative curriculum modification, going beyond mere sanitation.
b) Ministry of Environment:
This, as the parent environmental regulation organ functions to dictate the runnings
of our environment. They provide seedlings for tree planting which gaseous
exchanges eliminate harmful substances and odour in its life cycle. It also attended to
oil spill in the areas of Gwagwalada-FCT in 2012 as abatement.
In conjunction with Ministry of Agriculture (produce inspection unit), ensure that sick
animals and diseased seeds do not become a burden on the city by deaths and infection
spread; and that abattoirs and meat conveyance are conducted safely
Also National Parks (Tourism) and Parks and Recreation (FCDA) promote greenery in the
city to diffuse the rampant automobile exhaust smokes. All efforts are geared towards
conservation of our ecosystem, with Ministry of Solid Minerals as concern quarries and
excavations.
4. CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANISATIONS (CSO) INVOLVEMENT:
All such organisations as “Market Women Association”, “Women in Sanitation”,
National Conservation Club and all other such NGO’s collaborate as broader horizon in the
creation of awareness on sanitation at such occasions as UN acclaimed days of “World Toilet
Day”, “World Sanitation Day”, “World Habitat Day” e.t.c.

9. 5. PRIVATE SECTOR ROLE:
This captures such companies as constructions (Berger, Gilmor, SCC and Setraco),
Telecom (MTN, Airtel, Etisalat and Globacom) and Quarry Operators (Zeberced). With loads
of heavy equipment as they are characterized (Caterpillars, Pay loaders and Lorries), loans of
such to AEPB should serve as their Cooperate Social Responsibility (CSR). While the
telecom ones can invest in waste receptacles provision which may be customized with their
logo, thereby defraying their cost for AEPB. Also the contractual city cleaners who cart away
the nuisances by concession arrangement.
6. INTER-STATE COOPERATION:
States bounding the FCT (Niger, Nasarawa, and Kogi) through their own relevants
agencies as AEPB can interface with it at dialogue, delineating boundary rights to solve
nuisance problems; considering that they harbour good fraction of workers in FCT as
residents.
7. REGULATORY BODIES CONTRIBUTIONS:
Such organs as Environmental Health Officers Registration Council of Nigeria
(EHORECON) and affiliate professional bodies like Environmental Health Officers
Association of Nigeria (EHOAN), National Environment Society and other public health
sects supervise, monitor and regulate the environmental health practices in FCT and Nigeria
at large, ensuring that prevention and abatement of nuisances is by trained personnel
engaging methodology and eschewing haphazardness.
They certify city cleaning contractors and modify school training curriculum for
environmental health discipline in response to the demands of modern environmental
realities.
8. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
The modern concept of project and program management has developed along the line of
community development, bequeathing a sense of ownership and inspiring shared vision; what
development experts have termed “Bottom-Top-Approach” (BTA). This means that the host
communities with AEPB Ro-ro bucket and other facilities for waste collection and disposal
will protect them, if they feel a sense of patriotism in being carried along.
FULFILLMENT
There exists nowhere, a blueprint for effective nuisance enforcement; therefore each city
responds to nuisance activity in its own manner, based upon city finances and manpower
needs as well as the community’s interest or concerns. However, approaches used must be
adopted city policy, specific enough to defend against claims of unequal treatment.

10. However, specific with AEPB function as the paramount organ of environmental health
and protection; are some observable deterrence which militate against efficient service
delivery. Chief among the push factors for unhealthy rivalry is revenue generation (IGR) and
job creation (Manpower). The instances of note exist between AEPB and (i) Public Health
Officers over who really licences for pest control (fumigation), (ii) NESREA over whose
primary responsibility it is to conduct environmental impact assessment (EIA).
This state of competition, rather than harness and harvest the benefits of synergy, have in my
opinion hampered it to the disadvantage of the noble general goal.
RECOMMENDATION
Every research is an addition to the body of knowledge, not an end in itself as some
schools hold. This work has sought to contribute in measures to prevent nuisances in all
places but with the FCT in mind. And to that end yet are these recommendations made:
I. Behavioural Change Communication Programmes (BCC):
Effort must be intensified to educate and encourage all people to embrace
promotive health habits. In the least, to separate waste into plastic/synthetic
and biodegradable factions, to compost the later and thus reducing the quantity
for discard at dump posts.
II. Advocacy:
All organs of government, formal and informal sectors must be made to
advocate promotions of the value of sustainable environment, being conscious
of the consequences of their activities.
III. Legislation:
Legislation in the direction of positive environmental impact must be
encouraged and demanded to forestall environmental harm that will await
future generations.
IV. Political Will:
Governance and its stewards must demonstrate a will in terms of resolve and
adequate resources to follow the trends of global best practices in
environmental concerns. It must enforce edict, implement UN resolutions and
refrain from interference in the affairs of its organs charged and mandated by
statutes to defend and conserve the environment.

11. CONCLUSION
Reflection on how little things matter. Air quality gives a picture of cases of death
from inhalation of smoke of power generating sets in suburbs of Lagos; and medical research
showing Pneumonia an acute Lower Respiratory Infection and a leading cause of death
among children under five years of age as attributable to indoor smoke from biomass fuels.
In as much as organs like AEPB have authority to define, penalize and abate public
nuisance activities and conditions; the authority must not be arbitrarily used as to declare
conditions to be nuisances which are in fact not; and must apply discretion in its interventions
over private nuisances.
It is popularly said that “An ounce of prevention is far better than a pound of cure”,
therefore stopping a happenstance is preferred to dealing with its consequence.
“Reactive approach is obsolete,
Being pro-active is the panache”.
We should embrace the A-ask
S-see
K-know model in our professional regime.
THANK YOU! for your attention

12. REFERENCES
Abuja Environmental ProtectionBoard Act 10, 1997
Community Environmental Health Assessment: Challenges and Successes in WA
States. WA State Board of Health, Seatle, WA.
Creese A.L. (1999) User charges for health care: A review of recent experience.
Health policy and planning 6(4):314
Environmental Health Officers Registration Act 11, 2002
Global Forum for Health Research (1999) The 10/90 Report on Health Research.
Geneva
Minnesota city Statute 617 (84)
Minnesota’s Public and Private Nuisance Laws (July 2008)
National Environmental Health Practice Regulations 2007
Nigeria Demographic and Health survey, 2013 pg. 3
Oxford Learners Dictionary
Public Health Law, 1963
Public Health Rules, 1948
WHO (2003), Five Decades of Challenges and Achievements in Environmental
Sanitation and Health, WHO Geneva, 2003
WHO (1970), Pesticide Residues and the Environment.
William Alonso (1971), “The Economic of Urban size” papers of the Regional
Science Association vol. xxiv, pg. 72

13. APPENDIX
PRE-TEST
1. Which of these statutes vests in an Environmental Health Officer the authority to
determine the duration of abatement of nuisances?
a) Public Health Rules, 1948
b) Breeding of mosquito notice, 1944
c) Public Health Law, 1963
d) National Environmental protection (effluent limitation) Regulation, 1991
2. Is an EHO by statute authorized to search a building?
a) Yes
b) No
c) Yes, but with a court warrant
d) Yes, but with a police Officer
3. Whose responsibility is it to address private nuisances? E.g over-grown pine hedges
over-hanging a neighbour’s private property.
a) AEPB by statute
b) The affected neighbour through civil action
c) Public Health Officers
d) The premises gardener
4. Which of these is a false statement?
a) Nuisances are typically location specific
b) All nuisances are unlawful
c) Nuisances impact the environment
d) Some nuisances have economic value.
5. Which of the following is not an instrument of measurement in environmental health
practice?
a) Gas analyser
b) Flute bar
c) Geiger counter
d) Noise meter