According to The Nation newspaper of 21 October 2024, Nigeria’s government in response to Igboho submitting a letter to the British government on 12 October 2024 regarding Yoruba self-determination, says it would not entertain the balkanisation of any part of the country, there was no room for secession, and living together was an obligation, not an option. The newspaper reports Mohammed Abubakar, Nigeria’s Minister of Defence as reaffirming the ‘indivisibility’ of Nigeria during a peace meeting in Plateau State. Both the government and the minister are mistaken and misinformed.
First of all, Nigeria’s government is practising a form of government that the people did not approve. Recognising their diversity, the people in 1954 agreed to exist as distinct and separate, autonomous territories, regions or sovereignties, but to federate or collectivise these sovereignties into one country, the ‘Federation of Nigeria’. The people affirmed this pluralist arrangement in the Independence Constitution of 1960 (Section 3(1)), and then reaffirmed it in the Republic Constitution of 1963 (Section 3 (1)). In January 1966, a group of military opportunists murderously took over Nigeria in a coup d’état, and thereafter introduced unitary government. To keep their ilk in power, they imposed a Unitarist Constitution on Nigeria on 5 May1999.
Second, Nigeria is a democracy in which the people are free. It is for the people, not for politicians, to decide for themselves their living arrangement. The 1999 Unitarist Constitution even acknowledged and recognised this at Section 14:
‘(1) The Federal Republic of Nigeria shall be a State based on the principles of democracy and social justice.
(2) It is hereby, accordingly, declared that:
(a) sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria from whom government through this Constitution derives all its powers and authority…’
The constitution reaffirmed it at Section 40:
‘Every person shall be entitled to assemble freely and associate with other persons, and in particular he may form or belong to any…other association for the protection of his interests…’
Third, as member since 7 October 1960, not entertaining any derogation or reservation, Nigeria agreed to be bound by the UN Charter. UNGA Resolution 2625 is the international Law of Self-determination to which Nigeria subscribed. That law makes clear, and unambiguously, that in the matter of self-determination, the State had only a passive role, that is:
1. ‘…to promote…realization of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples…’
2. ‘…to render assistance to the United Nations in carrying out the responsibilities entrusted to it by the Charter regarding the implementation of the principle…’
3. ‘…to promote universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms…’
4. ‘…to refrain from any forcible action which deprives peoples…of their right to self-determination and freedom and independence…’
If the citizenry was indeed superior to the constitution as asserted at Section 14 and Section 40 of the 1999 Unitarist Constitution, then ‘living together’ is a question of choice, an option, not an obligation. A country’s constitution is rule book for government; it is not rule book for the people. The ‘indivisible’ and ‘indissoluble’ tags at Section 2 (1) of the 1999 Unitarist Constitution was instruction to central government to govern the country as one unit. It imposed no obligation of ‘living together’ on the peoples themselves. Accordingly, we Yoruba are entitled to seek our own living arrangement and exit Nigeria altogether.