Restructuring, Self-Determination, Biafra and Nigeria: Brief Legal and Political Insights

It appears that Nigeria has never from time immemorial been a ‘Nation’ – in a simple notion ‘it is simply boundary contrivance by the West’ – different nations were brought together for the convenience of the Colonial Masters. The citizens of Nigeria (including all the past leaders) have tried to massage this entity (Nigeria) to become a nation, but all to no avail – in fact ‘an abysmal failure’. One may be right to argue that many Nigerians love Nigeria; but love is bound to fail in a diametrically divided nation. When a husband and a wife are completely divided, the marriage arrangement is bound to collapse. Even those referred as Founding Fathers may suggest that there is nothing like Nigeria:

– “Since 1914 the British Government has been trying to make Nigeria into one country, but the Nigerian people themselves are historically different in their backgrounds, in their religious beliefs and customs and do not show themselves any signs of willingness to unite… Nigeria Unity is only a British Inventions” – Sir Tafa Balewa (a man with a golden voice) Speaking at the Legislative Council in 1948.

– “Nigeria is not a nation. It is a mere geographical expression: There are no ‘Nigerians’ in the same sense as there are ‘English’, ‘Welsh’, or ‘French’. The word ‘Nigeria’ is mere a distinctive appellation to distinguish those who live within the boundaries of Nigeria and those who do not”. – Obafemi Awolowo in Path to Nigerian Freedom (London: Faber & Faber, 1947) pp.47-48.

– “It is better for us and many admirers abroad that we should disintegrate in peace and not in pieces. Should the politicians fail to heed this warning, then I will venture the prediction that the experience of the Democratic Republic of the Congo will be a child’s play if ever it comes to our turn to play such a tragic role”. – Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe (The Zik of Africa) 1964.

This suggests that the founding fathers of Nigeria knew that the Nigeria’s unity appears to be as weak as a balloon – even if you left it untouched, it will still burst and you decide to massage it, it must still burst. The trends of events in Nigeria since the past 55 years, more so, the last two years laid credence to this. It worth to remember recently that there have been clamours to re-arrest Mazi Nnamdi Kanu (the IPOB leader) by the majority of Northern youths and elders and, the Federal Government has taken steps in this direction, relying on the reasons that he flouted his bail conditions. Similarly, the majority of Eastern elders and youths criticise this development; they state that the leaders of the Arewa youths were not arrested in relation to the quit notice they issued to the Ibos, say they least, putting them in detention and bail them with stringent bail conditions (just like Kanu). Also, the Yorubas have been agitating for the Oduduwa Republic and appear not to be in support of the Ibos or Hausas/Fulanis. More so, the level of human rights abuses by the various governments and the security agents, particularly the way human lives are wasted daily in Nigeria; the devastating rate of corruption, particularly by our political leaders – which is common because nobody sees Nigeria as a nation; thus the urge to loot as much money as possible; and the total neglect by the government of the youths and children (this group has no real prospect in Nigeria). In fact, the Nigerian past leaders (all) since 1966 have failed the majority of Nigerian citizens – including exhibiting serious cases of political corruption and/or mismanagement/cluelessness at different levels; ‘mismanagement/clueless’ is as bad as corruption, if not worse (for an in-depth analysis of political corruption & mismanagement in Nigeria, See Ikejiaku, B. ‘Political Corruption, as a Critical Governance Problem besieging the Nigerian State: comparative assessment of various regimes, JOAPS, online www.academia.edu).

This equally suggests that the Nigerian peoples have demonstrated no signs, no sprits, or qualities of existing as a one united indivisible entity (Nigeria). When this is assessed in line with the political and legal principle of self-determination – a cardinal principle in modern international law (i.e. jus cogens law), binding, as such, on the United Nations as authoritative interpretation of the Charter’s norms. While, the UN Charter (Chapters XI to XIII UN Charter) refers to the principle of self-determination in the part concerning colonies and other dependent territories, Self-determination includes the right of a people of an existing State to choose freely their own political system and to pursue their own economic, social, and cultural development. Thus, the driving force of the principle of self-determination manifests itself in recent suggestions to focus more on ‘internal self-determination’ (just as the present agitations in Nigeria. e.g., by Biafra). In this perspectives, it is suggested to interpret self-determination as a people’s ‘right to be taken seriously’ in internal affairs.

The key question that readily comes to mind in this direction is: are the constituents units that make up the Biafra taken seriously in Nigeria?

The ability to give a simple yes or no answer to this question determines whether the struggle for self determination in Nigeria by Biafra is justifiable or not. Also, the objective assessment of the following statement would assist us in drawing the right answer: “The influence which a nation exerts, the respect which it enjoys, and the prestige accorded to it on the world scene, depend on two important factors: the size of its wealth and the calibre of its leadership. Granting an incorruptible, courageous, public-spirited, enlightened and dynamic leadership, the wealth of a nation is the fountain of its strength. The bigger the wealth, and the more equitable its distribution among the factors and agencies which have helped to produce it, the greater the out-flow of the nation’s influence and power” Obafemi Awolowo in London 1961.

In as much as the above factual submissions have been made, there are notable instances where our fore fathers have preached unity and one Nigeria; for example, making strong emphasis to the Northern Nigeria:

– “In my opinion, the Northerners are perfectly entitled to consider whether or not they should secede from the indissoluble union which nature has formed between it and the South, but it would be calamitous to the corporate existence of the North should the clamour for secession prevail. I, therefore, counsel Northern leaders to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of secession before embarking upon this dangerous course.” Nnamdi Azikiwe (Zik of Africa’s) speech on Session in 1953 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1961).

Thus, the North was asked to consider whether secession was their best option and not that they should secede. Many Nigerians presently, have also made speeches that suggest Nigeria should remain as a one united entity; however, the majority of this group clamour for absolute ‘restructuring’ of the country (Nigeria). They argue that most, if not all federations globally operate a high level of autonomous units – in this respect, the essence and spirit of self-determination (in the guise of ‘restructuring’) would be well served if a certain measures of cultural or even political autonomy were granted within the States that make up the lager entity (in this case, something like 45% autonomy to the federating States and 55% to Nigeria at the centre).

The author of this short piece concludes that if absolute and objective restructuring is not practicable, secession through the mechanism of ‘civil disobedience’ (currently employed by the IPOB in its quest for ‘referendum’) becomes the inevitable. Please, we should not think about war because it is a bad wind that blows no good to anybody within the polity. It is documented that many countries became dismembered without a full-fledged war and continued to co-exist & co-operate bilaterally as different countries (e.g., Norway & Sweden in 1905; Bangladesh seceded from Pakistan in 1971; in 1992/93 Czechoslovakia parted their ways into what is known today as the Czech Republic and Slovakia that is the ‘Velvet Divorce’; in 1991 due to the policy of Glasnost & Perestroika the USSR was broken into several countries; and in 18 March 2015, the UK conducted a referendum in Scotland for a possible peaceful secession of Scotland) – there have been enough blood-spilt, blood-shed, inter-tribal / ethnic conflicts, political persecutions, and religious violence & bigotry in Nigeria. The Nigerian State and polity as presently constituted, in spite of its natural endowment has failed – it is a laughing stock in the eye of the international community. Let us decide wisely now or never.

Short Bio: Dr. Brian-Vincent Okey IKEJIAKU

Is a Nigerian trained Lawyer & Political Scientist, who holds a PhD from the Keele University, UK. He has taught Law & Politics in both Nigeria and the UK, and presently teaches Law with the British Institute of Technology, England.