The Right to Self Determination is one of the cardinal
principles of the Universal Declarations of Human Rights 1948, as
adopted by the United Nations, as well as The African Charter on
Human and Peoples Rights, ratified by Nigeria in 1990,.
Thus, it is hypocritical for Section 2 of the 1999 Constitution
to declare that the Nigerian Federation is indissoluble. True,
under the Principle of Federalism, secession is usually denied.
Yet, having subscribed to binding treaties which hold the right to
self determination and freedom from alien domination inviolable,
its pathetic inconsistency to deny same through municipal law.
The question that arises, is the desirability of secession in
the Nigerian context.
Is secession inevitable for the political, economic , social and
general wellbeing of the nationalities within Nigeria? That is a
matter which is open to debate.
To my mind, secession is a lazy way out of a crisis which is
open to many options. The various Constitutions enacted by the
Military regimes including 1979,1989 and 1999 are no doubt,
autochthonous, but gravely flawed.
The military enacted the constitutions after their image and
likeness. The unification decree which transformed Nigeria from a
true Federal nation to a unitary state by the first Military
Government was merely to suit the command and control structure of
the military.
The age long principles of Federalism which were the product of
extensive and far reaching consultative and constitutional
conferences, traceable from 1914, through the 1940s 1950s
particularly the lead- up to the 1954 constitution and particularly
to the 1963 Constitution were eroded by military fiat.
Nigeria is still suffering from the military induced
quasi-federalism, which reduced the power and areas of competence
of the various components of the Federation.
The constitution vests exclusive legislative and executive
competence over the entire content of part 1 of the second schedule
thereof on the central government. The constitution also gives the
central government dominance and superiority in respect of masters
listed in Part 2 of the second schedule.
The nature, scope and spheres of Federal government operations
in Nigeria is different from true federalism as practiced by other
Nations of the world, and in particular, it is a far cry from the
true intentions of the various indigenous peoples Nigeria as
envisaged by the by the various constitutional conferences not
superintended by the military.
From the failure of the present quasi federalism and the strong
agitation for regional resource management, the lesson to be learnt
is that ” no- go- areas” in constitutional conferences lead to
artificial consensus. It leads to suppressed resentments for the
outcome .
Now, we have to restructure to realise the full potentials of the
constituent units of the federation.
On restructuring I stand !
Ewere Odiase Esq. is an Asaba based legal practitioner,
Human Rights activist and principal partner of Odiase Lawyers
Consulting, Asaba, Delta State
The Right to Self Determination is one of the cardinal
principles of the Universal Declarations of Human Rights 1948, as
adopted by the United Nations, as well as The African Charter on
Human and Peoples Rights, ratified by Nigeria in 1990,.
Thus, it is hypocritical for Section 2 of the 1999 Constitution
to declare that the Nigerian Federation is indissoluble. True,
under the Principle of Federalism, secession is usually denied.
Yet, having subscribed to binding treaties which hold the right to
self determination and freedom from alien domination inviolable,
its pathetic inconsistency to deny same through municipal law.
The question that arises, is the desirability of secession in
the Nigerian context.
Is secession inevitable for the political, economic , social and
general wellbeing of the nationalities within Nigeria? That is a
matter which is open to debate.
To my mind, secession is a lazy way out of a crisis which is
open to many options. The various Constitutions enacted by the
Military regimes including 1979,1989 and 1999 are no doubt,
autochthonous, but gravely flawed.
The military enacted the constitutions after their image and
likeness. The unification decree which transformed Nigeria from a
true Federal nation to a unitary state by the first Military
Government was merely to suit the command and control structure of
the military.
The age long principles of Federalism which were the product of
extensive and far reaching consultative and constitutional
conferences, traceable from 1914, through the 1940s 1950s
particularly the lead- up to the 1954 constitution and particularly
to the 1963 Constitution were eroded by military fiat.
Nigeria is still suffering from the military induced
quasi-federalism, which reduced the power and areas of competence
of the various components of the Federation.
The constitution vests exclusive legislative and executive
competence over the entire content of part 1 of the second schedule
thereof on the central government. The constitution also gives the
central government dominance and superiority in respect of masters
listed in Part 2 of the second schedule.
The nature, scope and spheres of Federal government operations
in Nigeria is different from true federalism as practiced by other
Nations of the world, and in particular, it is a far cry from the
true intentions of the various indigenous peoples Nigeria as
envisaged by the by the various constitutional conferences not
superintended by the military.
From the failure of the present quasi federalism and the strong
agitation for regional resource management, the lesson to be learnt
is that ” no- go- areas” in constitutional conferences lead to
artificial consensus. It leads to suppressed resentments for the
outcome .
Now, we have to restructure to realise the full potentials of the
constituent units of the federation.
On restructuring I stand !
Ewere Odiase Esq. is an Asaba based legal practitioner,
Human Rights activist and principal partner of Odiase Lawyers
Consulting, Asaba, Delta State