A Dissection Of The Law On Atiku’s Citizenship By Festus Ogun

Over the weekend, the All Progressives Congress boldly claimed
that the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party in the 2019
presidential election, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, is not a citizen of
Nigeria by birth and he ought not to have been allowed to contest
the election. Since the matter might set a perilous precedent, if
left unattended to, we have found it pertinent to make a resolution
of some of the key legal issues arising therefrom.

In a constitutional democracy, the different ways, by which
citizenship can be acquired, are clearly stipulated in the
constitution. By virtue of Section 25, 26 and 27 of the 1999
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2011 as amended, a
person can become a citizen of Nigeria by one of these three ways:
by birth, registration and naturalisation. Since the fulcrum of
this discussion is on citizenship by birth, the two other methods
of acquiring citizenship will not be discussed in detail.

Section 25 of the Constitution provides thus: The following
persons are citizens of Nigeria by birth, namely: (a) every person
born in Nigeria before the date of independence, either of whose
parents or any of whose grandparents belongs or belonged to a
community indigenous to Nigeria; provided that a person shall not
become a citizen of Nigeria by virtue of this section if neither of
his parents nor any of his grandparents was born in Nigeria.(b)
every person born in Nigeria after the date of independence either
of whose parents or any of whose grandparents is a citizen of
Nigeria; and (c) every person born outside Nigeria either of whose
parents is a citizen of Nigeria. (2) In this section, “the date of
independence” means the 1st day of October 1960.

It is true that the above constitutional provision can be easily
appreciated by a mind that is unpolluted with political prejudices.
In fact, the Supreme Court in Shugaba v. Minister of Internal
Affairs (1981) 1 NCLR 459 gave judicial approval and interpretation
to that particular section.

The next issue to be determined, therefore, is, owing to Atiku’s
ancestral link with Northern Cameroon, can he be said to be “born
in Nigeria before the date of independence”? Can it also be said
that his parents or grandparents belongs or belonged to a community
indigenous to Nigeria?

Before answers are given to these sacrosanct questions, let it
be said that for our laws to be properly understood, an
appreciation of the history before the advent of that particular
law, or that which led to the promulgation of such a law, must be
taken into consideration. On this issue, too, a quick sojourn into
the history of Alhaji Atiku Abubakar and that of his people must be
embarked on.

Atiku was born November 25, 1946 (before independence) in Jada
town in Adamawa. He is an indigene of the same town. As Premium
Times reported, Jada used to be in Ganye Local Government Area of
Adamawa State. This area was never part of Nigeria legally until
the February 1961 plebiscite in which the people of the then
Northern Cameroon voted to join Nigeria. Atiku’s father was from
Jada Village of the old Northern Cameroon.

Can someone born before independence outside Nigeria in a
community not indigenous to Nigeria become a Nigerian by birth? NO!
But Atiku’s case is different. After the plebiscite that made
Northern Cameroon part of Nigeria in 1961, all the people of
Northern Cameroon, whether born before or after 1960, were seen as
Nigerians and all the communities therein became indigenous to
Nigeria. Therefore, the legal implication of the 1961 plebiscite is
that all communities of the “British Cameroon” are deemed to be
communities indigenous to Nigeria. In fact, the people in Northern
Cameroon were not part of the Republic of Cameroon, but they
belonged to a geographical territory controlled by the British
Colonial masters.

To buttress the argument canvassed above, Section 10 of the 1963
Constitution is to the effect that those who became Nigerians by
virtue of the February 1961 plebiscite are deemed to be citizens of
Nigeria by birth and their communities are indigenous to
Nigeria.

From the above, it requires little or no imagination to detect
that Atiku and in fact, anyone from the communities that joined
Nigeria by plebiscite in 1961 are citizens of Nigeria by birth.
Consequently, they can eligibly run for the office of the President
of the Federal Republic of Nigeria under Section 131(a) of the 1999
Constitution and any political office, whatsoever, without any
hindrance once other constitutional requirements are met.

Lord Denning has long said that words are not instruments of
mathematical precision. Our courts have consistently posited that
where the strict application of the plain, ordinary and grammatical
meaning of words used in legislation will amount to absurdity,
inconsistency and miscarriage of justice, the court should modify
the words with a secondary meaning that is capable of bearing
(Okeke v. A.G. Anambra State (1992) 1 NWLR 60).

Several factors are put into consideration in the interpretation
of law. If by any means the application of the plain letters of law
to a set of facts will amount to absurdity or miscarriage of
justice, the court of justice will be quick to reject such an evil
attempt and stand on the firm side of law i.e. justice.

An attempt to twist history for the satisfaction of political
prejudices should not be allowed to stand. If the votes of those
“affected” areas can be counted as valid in elections, if those
areas are recognised by the Constitution under Section 3, if
revenue can be generated from that same area, why then should they
be treated as aliens in their country? This is brewing another
crisis in the country. The engine behind this controversy should
watch it.

Festus Ogun wrote in from Olabisi Onabanjo
University, Ago Iwoye, Ogun State