The Host Community Development Trust was created by the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) to fundamentally change the relationship between petroleum-producing communities and the companies operating within them. It was never intended to be another opaque development fund whose activities are known only to trustees, company officials and a handful of community leaders. It was designed as a structured mechanism through which communities could receive direct economic and social benefits from petroleum operations and build a more sustainable future. Section 234 of the PIA expressly identifies sustainable prosperity, direct social and economic benefits, peaceful coexistence and community development as the objectives of the framework.
That purpose cannot be achieved without transparency. Every HCDT should therefore publish, in a clear and accessible format, how much money it receives, where the money comes from, how much has been spent, what has been budgeted, which projects have been approved, who is executing them, how much each project costs and what remains unspent. This should not be regarded as an attack on trustees or an attempt to undermine the authority of the HCDT. It is simply good governance.
The law itself provides a strong foundation for this principle. Section 239 requires HCDTs to manage and supervise the annual contributions of settlors and other sources of funding, while also expressly authorising them to invest part of their available funds on behalf of host communities. Section 240 establishes the principal funding mechanism through the annual contribution from the settlor based on actual annual operating expenditure attributable to the relevant upstream operations. The law also provides for the accumulation of funds in the reserve structure.
Yet there is an extraordinary blind spot in public understanding: the investment component of HCDTs is hardly known to anyone. Section 244 provides for 20% of the annual allocation to be placed into a reserve fund, which is intended to be invested for the benefit of host communities when the settlor’s contributions eventually cease. Section 246 further provides for professional management of these investments and the returns they generate. Communities should know how much is sitting in these reserve funds, where the money is invested, what returns it is generating, who manages it and what fees are being paid. A community cannot plan for a post-oil future if it does not even know what financial assets it is accumulating today.
The PIA also makes the case for publication of project information. Sections 248 and 252 establish responsibilities around budgeting, contracting and development planning, including the identification of projects, timelines, budgets, objectives and implementation arrangements. Sections 254 and 255 provide for proper financial accounts, annual audits and reporting. These provisions create a governance architecture in which financial records and development activities should be capable of being scrutinised rather than hidden from the communities they are intended to serve.
This is precisely where Niger Delta DevTrack’s GRC module can play a practical role. The module is purpose-built to bring HCDT governance into one transparent, structured information environment, allowing communities and other stakeholders to track income, budgets, projects, funding sources, implementation status, trustees, audited accounts, reserve funds and other relevant governance information. Rather than waiting for disputes, rumours or allegations before financial information becomes public, HCDTs can use the platform to voluntarily demonstrate what they are receiving, what they are spending and what they are building.
We therefore invite every HCDT operating across the Niger Delta to share its data with Niger Delta DevTrack in the spirit of transparency and community development. This is not an invitation to embarrass trustees, question legitimate expenditure or interfere with the statutory responsibilities of HCDT boards. It is an opportunity for trusts to demonstrate that they have nothing to hide and to establish a credible public record of the development they are delivering. Where information is already available, publishing it should be straightforward; where it is not, the process of assembling it may itself reveal opportunities to strengthen governance.
The recent Federal High Court judgment in Uyo makes this conversation even more important. In the case involving the Incorporated Trustees of Esit Eket Youth Association and Seplat Energy Producing Nigeria Unlimited and others, Justice C. S. Onah struck out the suit after finding that the association lacked the requisite locus standi under the PIA framework. The case is a reminder that communities and community organisations cannot necessarily rely on litigation as the primary mechanism for obtaining accountability from HCDTs.
That makes proactive disclosure even more important. If legal standing can prevent a community association from pursuing accountability through the courts, then transparency should be designed into the everyday operation of the HCDT system. Communities should not have to become litigants before they can understand the finances of institutions created in their name.
Every HCDT should publish a quarterly or, at minimum, annual public dashboard showing income, expenditure, budgets, projects, contractors, implementation status, reserve investments and investment returns. Transparency should not begin only after allegations arise. It should be the normal operating principle of every HCDT.
These funds exist for communities whose land and resources underpin petroleum operations. The people should not have to fight to discover what is being done in their name. Publishing the numbers is not merely transparency; it is the foundation upon which trust, accountability and sustainable community development must be built.
