December 7. 2024
Bulletin #56

The Yoruba Referendum Committee has been consistent in its advocacy for “Nationality Referendums” as the pathway to Re-Federalizing Nigeria. For the Yoruba, this will be the “Yoruba Referendum”. Re-federalization is crucial because all the political and economic underdevelopment of Nigeria can be traced to the overthrow of the Federal System in 1966 and replaced with the current Unitary System, fraudulently labeled as Federation.  A Bill for a Law to conduct this Yoruba Referendum has been submitted to t he Lagos, Ogun, Oyo, Osun, Ondo and Ekiti Houses of Assembly and the respective Governors. Plans are afoot to resubmit the Bill as a reminder. 
This background is necessary as the context for issues on Nigeria's Federalism occasioned by steps taken by President Tinubu and the resulting fall-out we are witnessing.

Now that it has resurfaced in the form of the Tax Bills, the necessity to address the political cannot be more self-evident. This is why we are emphasizing  resolution of the “political”  as primary. 

As it stands now,(and there is nothing to suggest it will end here more so when it is a recurring decimal in Nigeria's political evolution) the stance of “Northern” leaders, Legislators and Governors is projected as protecting the interests of the North despite the fact that the “North” However defined, is inhabited by several Nationalities among whom are those who, like the Yoruba in Kwara and Kogi States as well as those in the Middle Belt, have repeatedly objected to being classified as “North”. This again shows the centrality of the “political” as we must first identify who is who after which pursuit of economic reforms can proceed.

Therefore, what is to be done, the “Ona Abayo”,  is for  Yoruba political leaders  and elders to  demand and pressurize our Houses of Assembly to pass the "Yoruba Referendum Bill" seeking a “Yoruba Region” into Law and conduct the Referendum. Even if “northern” Senators or leaders object in the National Assembly or their state Assemblies, they cannot override the Legitimacy of the rest of us to conduct a referendum in other regions

The Referendum Law of a State Assembly does not require the concurrence of 2/3rds of State Assemblies nor does it require the concurrence of the National Assembly. Such a law is its own Legitimacy. Indeed,  such a test of Legitimacy will become our contribution to reviewing the 1999 Constitution.

When new states are created in the "south", more will be created in the "north" creating an unequal quid pro quo. Otherwise no state creation in the South will scale the 2/3rds huddle, or only those states in the south willing to acquiesce to the North will get the nod. Besides, the argument that new states will "foster development" is a farce. If current states have not fostered development since their creation, it stands to reason that development has no correlation with state creation, more so in a "feeding bottle Federalism" in existence. This is not to mention the various newly minted "Development Commissions" supposedly aimed at "fostering development".. 

President Tinubu is welcome to endorse “Nationality Referendums”.

Editorial Board

Yoruba Referendum Committee.

BULLETIN 55
October 5, 2024

Yoruba Referendum: The time is NOW!

The Yoruba Referendum Committee is once again calling on our Governors and Houses of Assembly to step up and seize the opportunity now being presented by the National Assembly in its current attempt at reviewing the amended 1999 Constitution.

The Governors and State Assemblies can do this by passing into Law, the Bill for a Referendum in Yorubaland which has been sent to them. Passing the Bill into Law will enable them to begin preparations for conducting the Referendum as the precursor for a New and Federal Constitution for Nigeria.

This is necessary considering a member of the National Assembly's Constitution Review Committee's summary of their review as centered on “Federalism, State Police and Local Government Autonomy” as if they are separate issues.

On his part, the Senate Leader, Opeyemi Bamidele, stated that if Regionalism is to be addressed as part of Re-Federalizing Nigeria, “the political stakeholders, the civil society, as well as other stakeholders in 4the,2 country, would have to debate on it and come to a conclusion”.024

Of course, the Legitimate and peaceful path towards this is the Referendum Pathway.

Yet, some Yoruba propose going along with continuous amendments to the 1999 Constitution because they believe that the amendments can devolve more powers to the Federating Units.

The question of Federalism has been the fundamental issue for Nigeria, pre- and post- Independence. All other issues are subsumed under it. Therefore, it must be addressed directly.

We therefore proceed as follows:

1. It is not possible to amend a Unitary Constitution into arriving at Federalism. It will be tantamount to working to the answer. Unitarism and Federalism are opposites, in contradiction to each other. The amended 1999 Constitution being further amended is a Unitary Constitution by virtue of its centralization of all powers seized by military force after which allocations are distributed to the states and local governments. This is despite defining Nigeria as a “Federation of 36 States and FCT”.  If Nigeria is truly Federal, it ought to have been defined as a "Multi-National Federal State comprising x number of Nationalities organized into y number number of States. Regions, autonomous regions" as the case may be. Hence, it looked to make a “Nation-State” out of a multi-national society. This is why there will be continuous amendments because its foundation was not wired by Federalist principles.
2. A Constitution is the Grundnorm, the Basic Law, the Fundamental Law, because it is expected to have embedded the existential essence of a people/ society and therefore cannot become an object of serial amendments. Serial amendments mean we are yet to grasp the meaning of our existence. A Constitution defines the expectations and aspirations of a society, hence the vision embodied in the Constitution must be interrogated to decide its relevance to the expectations and aspirations of the people. Hence, we ask what the vision of the 1999 Constitution is?
3. It was and still is, the military vision of and for Nigeria anchored on ensuring that the balance of power remains within the military vision of a monolithic and homogenized Nigeria, neutralizing indigeneity as the precondition for Federalism, clothing it with the veneer of democracy through periodic elections as if elections, by themselves, determine the essence of democracy.
4. Democracy is the Anglicized contraction of two Greek words: “demos”, meaning “People” and “kratos” meaning “power”. Exercising power by the people implies that their existence is recognized, not an abstraction devoid of its material reality, but formed by specific social and cultural indicators.
5. Political parties come and go and are regulated by the people in government. Hence, the first expression of Democracy does not lie with electoral contests but with showing and recognizing the existence of a People who may organize themselves as kingdoms, states, provinces etc. according to their geo-political realities. This is the essence of the Referendum since it serves the purpose of proving indigeneity as the rightful foundation for Democracy with elections embedded as a matter of course, except if they choose to be governed by their monarchies. It is therefore incumbent on our Governors and State Assemblies to show or reestablish the centrality of the People in a democracy over the current tendency to limit it to periodic elections.
6. Furthermore, economic reforms do not necessarily enhance Democracy. If, after almost 40 years of economic "reforms" the Naira is yet to find its value, something must be wrong with the economic fundamentals or foundation of such "reforms". The global competition of currencies, occurring within the context of the global political economy, demands that the first steps in any reform are political. A political system incongruous with the economy cannot create a sustainable reform. In other words, a centralized state, as Nigeria is, cannot sustain a decentralized economy. One will have to yield to the other. And the centralized state cannot yield, hence the economic back and forth of the "reforms". Major currencies in the world are "floated” without creating upheavals in the local economy. This means there is a correlation between their economy and their settled political paradigm. The only way to "defend" or float the Naira and bring down inflation in all ramifications is political restructuring to Re-Federalize Nigeria.
7. The Yoruba Referendum has answered this question via its Annexure which states that: (a) Nigeria shall be a Federation/ Union of Constituent Nationalities with “a Federal Presidential Council, whose members will be selected or elected from each of the Nationalities as Federating Units and from whom a Head of State will be selected or elected as the primus-inter-pares with an agreed term. (b) Western/Oduduwa Region shall be a Constituent Unit of the Nigerian Union. (c) Western/Oduduwa Region shall adopt a Parliamentary System of government. (d) The Central Government of the Union shall have no power to interfere or intervene in the affairs of the ODUDUWA REGION, save as shall be agreed to by three quarters of the members of the Region’s Parliament. (e) There shall be a Division of the Federal Armed Forces in the Region, 90% of which personnel shall be indigenes of the Region. The Divisional commander shall be an indigene of Oduduwa Region. (f) The Judicial power of the Region shall be vested in the Supreme Court of the Region, Court of Appeal, High Court, Customary Court and Other lower courts as the Parliament may establish. There shall be a Court of Appeal in each of the provinces. There shall be, in each province, a High Court from which appeals shall lie to the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court of the Region. Western/Oduduwa (g) Region shall have its own internal security system. (h) Each Constituent Unit of the Nigerian Federation shall control primary interest in its own resources with an agreed Tax Model for the Federation.
8. The above can be adapted by other Nationalities based on their realities thereby providing the basis for Federalism via a democratic paradigm strengthening the existence of the Demos(people) who will be able to exercise and defend their “kratos” (power) and enhance electoral paradigms. What is therefore needed is the boldness of our political leaders, the Governors and members of the State Houses of Assembly to tackle this political necessity.
9. Without such a Referendum we would have given our heads to be shaved in our absence as we have been doing since 1979. The National Assembly does not and cannot stand for the collective aspirations of Yoruba people or any other people of Nigeria. Its members stand for the interests of their political parties, and which do not stand for the interests of any Nationality. This is the import of the Senate Leader's statement.
10. Furthermore, the amendment will have to be endorsed by at least 24 states. The Yoruba say " eyi wunmi ko wun o ni omo iya fi n jeun l'otooto”. So, what is acceptable to the Yoruba may not be acceptable to any other, therefore the fate, expectations and aspirations of one cannot be made dependent on the other. Nevertheless, a spirit of compromise and unity is engendered because of the recognition of differences. There is no need to subject for determination by other non-Yoruba states whether we, as Yoruba, in the 6 states (and the Yoruba in Kogi and Kwara states) want to be a Region. Same goes for other peoples of Nigeria. The Yoruba cannot make such a determination for them.
11. With all the above, isolating “state police” and local government from the fundamental issue of Federalism amounts to a disservice to the Peoples of Nigeria as such a “state” police force will necessarily be an adjunct to existing national police just as the current state Judiciary is. To have any impact or meaning, the "state police” must be accompanied by a "state Judiciary" up to a State Supreme Court; otherwise, the “state police” will become a glorified and toothless vigilante. A Local Government exists because it is part of a larger entity. This entity is not and cannot be the Federal Government. This is even unwittingly acknowledged by the 1999 Constitution which specifically designated Abuja as the “Federal Capital Territory” which was forcibly appropriated from the indigenes. With this, the Federal Government cannot give autonomy to what it does not have. The aberration of the 1999 Constitution provides it with the opportunity to give what it does not have. Therefore, converting both as separate issues from Federalism itself does not do justice to Federalism.
12. On its part, “Devolution” already takes away the ownership and administration from the indigenes and vests it in a central authority which goes ahead to distribute the power as it pleases hence the saying that “whoever devolves power also has the power to take away”. We are seeing this with the so-called Local Government Autonomy. “Devolution” is not synonymous with and cannot lead to Federalism. The UK is a good example because it was not only our colonizer but also provided the template for Nigeria's governance. The English is the dominant Nationality exercising its Hegemony over the rest just as the Fulani/ North were placed over the rest of us.
13. Power was devolved to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. There are regional and Metropolitan police forces as well as Regional Parliaments. Yet the UK is a Unitary State, so much so that when Scotland, with its devolved powers voted against Brexit and England voted for it, Scotland was forced to go along because the Brexit vote was a UK vote.
14. The various Constitutional Conferences in Nigeria enabled the Political parties, roughly corresponding to the Nationalities, to decide their preferred mode of governance which directly led to the Federalist 1954 Lyttleton Constitution in repudiation of the Unitary 1951 MacPherson Constitution, and which eventually led to Independence. The 1954 Lyttleton Constitution was the basis for the 1960 Independence Act of the British Parliament. We can therefore see that the Regions-as-Federating Units CREATED the Federal Government, despite colonial power. This is the ESSENCE of Federalism. The Federating Units create a Center to serve their purposes. Not the other way round and not by “devolution”.
15. From the foregoing, it is incumbent on you to rise to this occasion and prepare the ground for our “Demos” to show their “kratos”. As the Yoruba National Anthem which you have endorsed says, we (Yoruba) are the light of the Black Race. This is the opportunity for you to put it to practice because the “Democratic Question” in Nigeria applies to all “Black” Africa.

Editorial Board

Yoruba Referendum Committee

Bulletin #54:
August, 11, 2024

The President, “The Patriots” and a new Constitution

“The Patriots”, a group of eminent Nigerians led by the former Commonwealth Secretary-General, Chief Emeka Anyaoku, visited President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and gave the President a proposal for Constitutional Re-Formation of Nigeria.

The President promised to review both The Patriots’ proposal as well as other options, once his priority, his economic reforms, are in place. Other options in circulation range from a return to the 1963 Constitution, a change to the Parliamentary System, an adjustment to the current Presidential System, including what some have characterized as Nigeria’s “home grown democracy” etc. all of which can also be placed under “Constitutional Review”, since none of these options can come to fruition without a review of the Constitution.

Based on both the President’s promise as well as the Patriots’ proposal, the Yoruba Referendum Committee asserts as follows:

1. The only way for the President’s economic reform to “be in place” is through political reforms, also known as Restructuring/True Federalism. This is because both the economic and the political space complement each other. The cumulative effect of substituting the principle of “derivation” with the principle of “allocation” is the cause of Nigeria’s economic (and political) problems. Therefore, to address it involves a reversal. Thus, the twin issues of fuel subsidy removal and floating the exchange rate, as the immediate causes of the current crisis would have taken a different turn had the President not been fixated with sustaining extant economic paradigm. All that the President needed to do was to keep the subsidy and exchange rate mechanism for a period while simultaneously embarking on a reversal of the economy from allocation principle back to the derivation principle.
2. This could have been done through a Review and complete overhaul of Section 162 of the 1999 Constitution to vest control of mineral, land and water resources (including the sea) in the states as Federating Units. All other options mentioned above would be attached to it. Even if the fuel subsidy is removed and the exchange rate floated, during this Review process, their impact would be reflected differently across the country and the economy will not go into a tailspin as it has done. Hence, there would be no need for proposals from different organizations as everything would have been subsumed in this reversal process.
3. On the part of “The Patriots”, they seek “the convening of a national Constituent Assembly with the mandate to produce a draft people's democratic Constitution”. This presupposes that members of such an Assembly already have the mandate of the areas or people they stand for, even before they are elected. In the alternative, they have already been vested with the capability of knowing what is best for their electors. Yet, there is no opportunity for these electors to express their expectations from a Constituent Assembly. For “The Patriots”, it is enough for a contestant to merely promise to be in the Assembly for the purposes of producing a Constitution. This is a claim that can be made by anyone. Therefore, for an election into a Constituent Assembly to serve a useful purpose, the contestant must have a mandate beyond his or her promises.
4. “The Patriots” propose that the Constituent Assembly “could be made up of 3 elected individuals, on a non-political basis, from each State” and that the Constituent Assembly “should be aided by seven constitutional lawyers, one drawn from each of the six geo-political zones and the FCT. The deliberations of the Constituent Assembly should take into full account the 1960/63 Constitutions, as well as the recommendations of the 2014 National Conference and indeed of the various national conferences that considered the Nigerian Constitutions”.
5. Since a Constitution is a political document, a non-political Constituent Assembly cannot draft a Constitution for a political entity. A Constitution must reflect the political reality of the society to which it becomes its Fundamental Law. Hence, the Uniformity of Nigeria’s military informed on the Unitary Constitution it imposed on the country, serving its Unitarist, military purposes. It did not work, and it could not have worked for the civilians who took over in 1979 and 1999. This is because the civilian dispensation reflected Nigeria’s natural diversity yet using a Constitution which denies and is incongruous with it. The participants at the various Constitutional Conferences which led to Independence were political leaders standing for Nigeria’s natural diversity, hence were able to devise a Constitution reflecting such diversity, despite quite a few of them being lawyers by profession. Lawyers, with or without specialty in Constitutionalism are therefore not a prerequisite for producing a Constitution.
6. Furthermore, a non-political election into a Constituent Assembly will automatically create a conflict between currently elected officials, who stand for the political aspirations of the electors and those expected to be elected to the Assembly, for these potential Constituent Assembly members must campaign for their election. This will throw up the question of the basis for contesting in the first instance. To avoid which there must be a political basis for the election.
7. “The Patriots” proposal to put the Draft Constitution to a National Referendum will merely compound the problems because Nigeria’s diversity compels and reflects different realities. Thus, many in the East are seeking their own Referendum based on their experience in Nigeria; the situation in the Middle Belt invalidates the “One North” paradigm; the Niger Delta is still agitating for Resource Control; Herder invasion and destruction of farmlands; the recent anti-government protests with its geo-political expressions etc., all of these reflect the natural diversity of the country.
8. With all these, a "National Referendum Question", even if based on accepting or rejecting the conclusions of a Constituent Assembly, will be difficult if not impossible to arrive at; and that is if such a Constituent Assembly will arrive at a conclusion acceptable to Nigeria’s natural diversity. A “National Referendum” will deny the aspirations and expectations of the various Constituents, thereby neutralizing Federalism as a co-equal relationship between the National and the subnational since the “National Referendum” already denies the existence of the subnational as a Constituent by the denial of our multinationalism, multilingualism, and multiculturalism, which has led to the architecture of State as a direct competitor of, and in opposition to, the aspirations and expectations of the people/citizens. All the above means any Referendum must be based on our particularities or diversities.
9. This is why the instrumentality of the Nationality Referendums is the pathway towards Restructuring/True Federalism through which the People, as the Federating Unit, will address all issues about all the options earlier summarized which the President promised to review. The “Nationality Referendum” combines political restructuring and economic reforms and guarantees a proper foundation because it provides the platform for a Constitutional Convention to arrive at a new Constitution for a re-Federalized Nigeria.
10. Nationality Referendums also serve the following purposes:(a) serving as the bulwark against any untoward political happenstance as it already prepares a legitimate response because they are at once a Legitimate expression as well as a negation of any unwanted or unwarranted illegitimate assumption of power from any quarter or region (b) being a democratic process providing the platform for an immediate, practical and practicable response to any eventuality; (c)becoming the standard by codifying Re-Federalization or Restructuring as Nationality-specific, attractive to various sectors of the society and the international community;(d) embedding the relevant socio-cultural “ethos,” by weaving it into the aspirations and expectations of the Peoples toward a new Constitution where the People make decisions, even at the lowest level of governance.
11. With the above, the subnational becomes the focal point of the Referendum. Therefore, the new Constitution is to be anchored on the subnational governments confronting the problem head-on by creating a law that enables policymaking via Referendum, preparatory to conducting a state-wide Referendum on the preferred structure for relations between the state and the central government.
12. A Constitutional Convention to arrive at a Re-Federalized Nigeria will culminate the Referendums conducted within the various Nationalities as Federating Units and their Convention delegates will be bound by the Referendum decisions since these will be anchored on the Legitimate and Legal results of the various Nationality Referendums, which will become the foundation for the architecture of the new Nigerian State as a Multi-National State, more so when the various Nationality Referendums would have Legitimized, Confirmed and Legalized the Peoples aspirations and expectations.
13. The National Assembly’s role will be limited to legislating on meeting the Constitutional Convention, to hold after the conclusion of the various Nationality Referendums. Such Referendums are to be conducted by the various State Electoral Commissions or in the case of smaller or balkanized Nationalities, by their preferred method. The State Assemblies or any preference by atomized nationalities in Nigeria provide the most peaceful pathway towards a new Constitution. Hence, the decision must rest with the Nationalities as the Federating/Constituent Units.
14. In conclusion, it is noted that what eventually saved American democracy on January 6, 2021, was the fact that the “electors” were the states, whose decisions were to be confirmed by US Congress and which the “storming” of Congress sought to prevent and did not achieve. The confirmation of the “electors” from the States makes up a major pillar of Democracy in the United States. In a comparable manner, the Federating Units will become the “electors” to select or elect their representatives to a Federal Council and whose decisions cannot be overturned except by the Federating Unit itself.

Editorial Board,

Yoruba Referendum Committee

Bulletin #53
August 9,2024

To: The 33 Local Government Chairmen and Residents of Oyo State





 

From: The Yoruba Referendum Committee.

ONA ABAYO

This Letter acknowledges the position you and the Oyo State Governor have taken in respect of the Supreme Court’s judgement on Local Government funding.

Contrary to allegations of criminality or illegality on the part of the Governor and all of you as Local Government Chairmen, we make bold to say that there is no criminality involved and no criminality can be imputed. This is because neither the Governor nor the Local Government chairmen can stop the Supreme Court judgement from taking effect. The Governor or the Local Government chairmen are not making the payments for or by themselves. The payment is to come directly from the Federal Government and directly into LG Accounts. The worst the LG Chairmen or Governor can or will do is not to touch the money. There is no crime in this.

So, what the governor is doing is challenging the Unconstitutionality of the judgement. He has the right, and the obligation, to do so.

This is because the judgement and the position you have taken, touches on the fundamental question of Federalism in Nigeria, more so when they occur at a time when a series of amendments/alterations to the 1999 Constitution is being contemplated.

We must assert that this is not simply a question of Law. It is a Constitutional matter. There is a major difference between the “law” and the Constitution. This is why the Constitution is described as the “Fundamental Law” of the land. The Constitution prescribes the law. The Constitution is also superior to the “law”, which is why laws which are not consistent with the Constitution are not valid.

Therefore, let no one intimidate us about the law. We are dealing with a Constitutional matter. This is why we propose the Referendum as the way to address and review the Constitution. It is our hope that you and the Governor will throw your weight into encouraging the Oyo State House of Assembly to pass the Bill for a Referendum into Law.

You may want to ask what the connection is, between Oyo State position on the Supreme Court judgement and the “Yoruba Referendum” especially when the process of amending the Constitution is already underway where we can simply send a memo to the National Assembly Committee on Constitution Review.

We do not need to send a Memo to the National Assembly for the following reasons:

1. We all know that the National Assembly alters the Constitution every four years, since 1999. This shows that something is fundamentally wrong with the Constitution if it must be altered every four years, since the Constitution is the fundamental Law binding all of us together. That this is being done, once again, requires a fundamental look at the Constitution itself, to figure out how it can become Nigeria’s guiding light, which a Constitution should be. Such a guiding light cannot continue to be altered every four years. Having to alter it every four years means there is something fundamentally wrong with it.
2. What then is this fundamental problem?
3. The Constitution was not properly made: (a) Its basic declaration of what Nigeria is; the foundation of Nigeria as said in the Constitution is fundamentally flawed. We all know that “We, the People” did not make the Constitution, as it claimed in the Preamble. (b) It declared that Nigeria is a Federal Republic. A Republic implies that there are no kings or chiefs in society, yet Traditional rulers and institutions are recognized by the Government at all levels, where elected and appointed government officials are also traditional title holders, in one form or another (c) It says Nigeria is a Federation of States and FCT. It goes on to list the States. There is no mention of Local Governments as part of the Federation. If the Local Governments are a tier in the Federation, they should have been listed in the Section which listed the States and FCT as the Federating Units. It did not do so. Rather, it created another section where the Local Governments are listed. This is fundamentally wrong because the states must have existed before the Federation could exist, therefore, the state must have had their local government system in place before the Federation came into being. We all know the history of Nigeria hence we will not dwell on this. (d) More importantly, the Federal Government has no land of its own, no mineral resources, yet the Constitution gives it the power to control the mineral resources of the Local Governments and the States. We can go on and on, pointing out the fundamental flaws of the Constitution but we believe these are sufficient for the purposes of this Letter.
4. Governor Seyi Makinde rightly said that elected officials swore to uphold the 1999 Constitution. Upholding it means abiding with its provisions and correcting any anomaly. The anomalies are so much that they require to be altered every 4 years.
5. According to Senate Leader, Senator Opeyemi Bamidele, the current Review exercise is “not just undertaking another review as the Parliament of the Federal Government. Rather, we are undertaking this national assignment as the Parliament of the Federal Republic of Nigeria”. He further stated that Section 4(1-4) of the 1999 Constitution vests the National Assembly with the power to specifically “make laws for the peace, order and good government of the Federation or any part thereof…” just as Section 4(7) also similarly empowers the State House of Assembly “to make laws for the peace, order and good government of the State or any part thereof…”The Senate Leader concluded by saying: “This power, as enshrined under the provision, distinctly includes the power to amend, review or even produce an entirely new federal constitution that will decisively address our current socio-economic and political realities".
6. The above implies that the People of Nigeria must have a definitive say in the entire Review process. We know that, from 1999, various Conferences had been held in the name of the People of Nigeria with nothing to show. This means we must investigate why this is so while simultaneously designing another process which will satisfy the aspirations and expectations of the People.
7. Our answer is that those conferences got nowhere because the attendees did not participate in the Conferences based on a clear mandate given to them by the people they claim to represent. This is why the government, as the conference organizer, was able to ignore the conference decisions.
8. Hence, for the People of Nigeria to have a say in the on-going Constitutional Review, a Referendum becomes necessary and vital because it provides a clear mandate. It is also recognized globally as the proper, legal, legitimate and valid process of manifesting the aspirations and expectations of the People where the People make decisions, even at the lowest level of governance. A Referendum is holistic and will take care of all the anomalies of the 1999 Constitution without constant “alterations”. There is no law for or against this type of Referendum, hence it becomes a political choice for all of us, more so when it can also become a template for other states in Nigeria, especially Ogun, Lagos, Osun, Ondo and Ekiti States whose Governors have even adopted a “Yoruba Anthem” which will be meaningless if we cannot decide how to govern ourselves. These combined efforts will become the basis for the new Federal Constitution for Nigeria.
9. Therefore, the state Houses of Assembly can jumpstart the process leading to a Referendum. The National Assembly can also inspire, encourage and enable the State Houses of Assembly to pursue this path, if it is to live up to its billing as declared by the Senate Leader.
10. With this, the Yoruba will be providing a service of historic proportions, becoming a beacon for not only other States in Nigeria but also the rest of Africa where comparable Constitutional questions exist and has led to continuous wars and conflicts. This will aid in the resolution of such conflicts.

Thank you.
Editorial Board
Yoruba Referendum Committee

July 21,2024   

Bulletin #52

Time is of the essence (4): For the attention of all Yoruba groups and leaders.

“O’nbo, O’nbo……….”

1. To date, calls for Restructuring have assumed that its opponents will be able to see the logic in the demand and act accordingly, hence the expectation that "reasoning" will prevail. “Reasoning” has not prevailed, and it will not! Restructuring of Nigeria will begin to have practical meaning and impact when it is taken from the realm of "reasoning" and placed within the context of practical politics, hence, for the Yoruba, the need for the Yoruba Referendum.
2. This is so because the Referendum provides a Legitimate and Legal path towards engaging Yoruba political leadership of all political tendencies to confirm the historical Yoruba quest for True Federalism, more so when other strategies embarked upon since 1999 led nowhere. These strategies revolved around government sponsored Conferences by which their conclusions and implementation were left to the vagaries of political exigencies, and this is possible because those strategies were not of our own making, even though Yoruba individuals were active in those conferences. This has happened over and over such that it will be meaningless to expect a different outcome from another round of conferences.
3. Moreover, the Tinubu Administration will not go that route because it has shown its hand by the spate of actions and decisions, anchored on utilizing the Legislative power of the National Assembly to drive home its agenda which clearly shows the move towards cementing the continuous de-Federalization of the country. This is euphemistically projected as part of the “Renewed Hope Agenda” beneficial to “the people of this country at all levels, irrespective of faith, tribe, gender, political affiliation, or any other artificial line they say exists between us. This country belongs to all of us”; yet denying the same people of this country the democratic right to determine the Constitution of the country, even if it means validating the military-imposed Constitution.
4. With the above, our efforts should be recalibrated. This is not the time to reinforce our different organizational formations. What is needed is an overall strategy that will directly confront the creeping Unitarist/anti-Federalist agenda. We cannot be fiddling on Yorubaland’s roof when we are being emasculated by the combined efforts of the central executive, legislature and the judiciary.
5. Therefore, our immediate task is to address this affront, also in a legitimate manner. The way to go about this is via the executive, legislature and the judiciary of Lagos, Ogun, Oyo, Osun, Ondo and Ekiti states. This will show, as the Oyo State Governor said, that “the FG is not superior constitutionally to the state government”. Therefore, it is incumbent on us, either in our personal or organizational capacities, to endorse the "Yoruba Referendum", to challenge and be in opposition to the ongoing Unitarist measures. Hence, the "Yoruba Referendum” should be our rallying call. NOW.
6. At this point, we must acknowledge the mistake of our recent past when “Amotekun” was set up. Despite the state laws setting up the outfit, the central government refused to acknowledge those laws, reiterating the superiority of federal laws over state laws. The battle raged until the federal government “allowed” “Amotekun” to exist, with conditions. This conundrum came about because we reduced the essence of “Amotekun” to legalities instead of the political necessity that it is. That is, the quest to ban open grazing and its attendant security implications are/were of a political nature and not simply legal. Political in the sense that open grazing was a political decision taken by the colonial power to perpetuate a particular form of cultural/political economy.
7. Now, we stand the risk of repeating the mistake, with our Governors embarking on region-wide endeavors, including the wearing of Yoruba attires and using Yoruba Language for Legislative sessions at certain days of the week, and now with the “Yoruba National Anthem” with its roots in the social welfare philosophical pursuit of the Action Group, thereby making it a political decision, all of which have no Legitimate context save the pronouncement of the governors and which can, at best, become a form of tokenism.
8. Therefore, it is necessary to interrogate the nature of the Nigerian Post-Colonial State as it affects the various Peoples of Nigeria, with a view to ensuring adequate response more so when the current administration is strengthening the Post-Colonial State at the expense of our Democratic rights and responsibilities.
9. Africa’s post-colonial experience has been one of perpetual conflict between the Post-Colonial State and the various Peoples anchored on the separation between the People and the State, with control and dominance of the State being dependent on the hegemony of one Nationality over the other even as this is couched in “national” terms, and this, taking precedence over all other existential matters; social and cultural existentialism of the Peoples play no part in the Architecture of the State, thus making the State a “foreign” entity. This separation is reinforced by the fact that the Centralized Post Colonial State controls all the land and mineral resources of the people while “allocating” some to the people and telling them what to do with such allocations.
10. This is what is expressed and objected to, by the Yoruba aphorism, as “shaving one’s head in his/her absence”. The 1999 Nigerian Constitution shaved our heads in our absence; the main reason for the societal dysfunction being experienced in Nigeria and the only way to remedy the situation is for the Yoruba to, in a Referendum within Yorubaland, determine the framework for their aspirations and self-actualization which then becomes the foundation for Restructuring.
11. It may be asked why a Yoruba Referendum when there is a National Assembly through which the Restructuring will go ahead via Constitutional Amendment. This route has been shown to be unworkable, and not beneficial to us. Considering how the current Administration has rammed through its Unitarist and anti-Federalist agenda, asking us to look forward to some legislation or Constitutional Amendment from the National Assembly towards True Federalism will be waving a flag at the problem; for, the current Constitution is the problem that must be resolved.
12. Furthermore, the process of amending the 1999 Constitution abridges the democratic right of the people and therefore of True Federalism in that the required concurrence of 24 states already denies the democratic rights of the Constituents, for, these states may or may not share similar existential prerogatives with others, hence asking one to determine the course of the other jeopardizes the other’s existence.
13. The National Assembly’s pursuit of and the current Administration’s use of a “Constitutional Review” denies the faulty foundation of the 1999 Constitution; an attempt at filibustering the quest for True Federalism; grab domestic and international headlines, while promoting itself as “representatives of the Nigerian People”.
14. The discourse on and advocacy for the Restructuring of Nigeria must therefore be put within the context of Peoples’ Democracy; the reason the Yoruba Referendum Committee is asking you all to join us in demanding that the Lagos, Ogun, Oyo, Osun, Ondo and Ekiti States’ Houses of Assembly pass the Referendum Bill into Law and organize conducting the Referendum in their states.

Editorial Board,

Yoruba Referendum Committee

July 18, 2024                                          
Bulletin # 51: Time is of the essence(3)
Governor Seyi Makinde: Clearing the confusion

Oyo State Governor Seyi Makinde addressed Oyo State stakeholders on the recent judgment of the Supreme Court on Local Government Administration. As should be expected, he reiterated the activities of the Oyo State government while also concluding that the disconnect between the law and the Constitution has created a lot of confusion which means there is a problem with the structure (that is, the Constitution) thus behooving on them to remove the confusion as soon as possible.

The Yoruba Referendum Committee agrees with this conclusion, many of which are obvious to all the operators of the Constitution, which are nothing more than addressing the law while leaving the Constitution as it is, thereby creating more confusion, another round of which is ongoing. The Governor highlighted this confusion amid ongoing efforts at another series of “alterations” to mandate a once-and-for-all interrogation of the confusion and putting forth a pathway to a resolution.

Hence, the Yoruba Referendum Committee declares as follows:

1. Although any state in Yorubaland can absolve itself from some of the justification that has now created the confusion while tending to address aspects of the law, each state carrying its own cross as a separate entity will translate into rendering null and void the expectations from having a “Yoruba National Anthem” as well as other measures aimed at ensuring “Regional development” as each state carrying its cross will become a permanent feature at every turn of any future confusion.
2. Now that the National Assembly is echoing the Federal Attorney-General’s desire to scrap the State Electoral Commission and have INEC conduct elections to the Local Governments, it is incumbent on the states to address this question. If the Attorney-General is quoted as having said that changing the National Anthem requires the "buy-in" of the citizens, it follows that the Constitution itself (the Grundnorm) must undergo a similar "buy-in" from the people.
3. From this, the ball is now in your court to jumpstart the process for “stakeholder” involvement. You have started well with your meeting with Oyo State stakeholders. It must be followed up with Yorubaland’s stakeholders to give meaning and Legitimacy to the Yoruba-wide efforts you and fellow Governors of Yorubaland have embarked upon by providing those efforts with corresponding institutional, legal, legitimate, and valid guarantees as the bulwark against further erosion of the collective aspirations and expectations of Yoruba People, at home and abroad.
4. Naturally, a Referendum is the proper means to ensure that stakeholders’ involvement does not become sidetracked because of lack of Legitimacy, a major defect of the 1999 Constitution, which has been attested to by most commentators. Furthermore, we have experienced, since 1999, stakeholder involvements without a corresponding influence on later decisions such that the involvements end up meaningless. A Referendum will remedy this situation.
5. Yet, the Federal Government is a STATE APPARATUS, with the Federal Government as its administrator. It has NO territory of its own. It exists because the components, in this instance, the territories which made up the Colonial Protectorates, later becoming Regions and now “states”, as administrative and territorial entities, came to, or were forced together to create the Nigerian State. Beginning with the 1914 Amalgamation overseen by British colonial power and ending with the 1960 Constitution anchored on previous 1951 and 1954 Constitutions which formally recognized the territories as the lands belonging to the peoples inhabiting them while ensuring a common administration for all and for which it was called the Federal Republic of Nigeria, whose Sovereign authority is accompanied with the monopoly of the means of enforcement.
6. The Local Government exists as a territory under the state’s administration. Hence, a local government, either territorially or administratively, cannot become a “tier” of the Federation. It can only be within the Federation because the state is. The Federation Account itself is derived from the sub-units or territories of the states, from where the under and above-ground resources are exploited, and proceeds remitted to the Federation Account to sustain the Federation.
7. Therefore, a “third tier” of the federation, in this instance, is simply the manifestation of the military-induced consciousness legitimized by its 1979 and 1989 Constitutions both of which formed the foundation for the 1999 Constitution, upon which every other function rests, hence curing the confusion cannot result from another series of confusions requiring serial alterations. This is the core issue.
8. It must be noted that Nigeria’s quest for Independence pitted forces who wanted to deny the diversity of Nations making up Nigeria (Unitarists) and those who wanted to recognize it and plan accordingly (Federalists). The Federalists won, despite the backing and encouragement of the Unitarists by Britain, hence the formation of Nigeria as a FEDERAL STATE.
9. The Military with the 1976 Dasuki “reforms” inserted local government administration into the Constitution to tie it into the Federal Government's apron strings, following the intent and footsteps of British colonial power with its 1946 Richards and 1951 McPherson Constitutions. As the Federalists resisted Britain’s intention and eventually succeeded in the formation of Nigeria as a Federal State, it is up to us to act like the pre-independence Federalists by addressing Unitarism from its Constitutional foundation. The first republic ran its local councils and its regional governments before the military neutralized them, even though it (the military) could not come up with a superior form of governance.
10. This shows that Unitarism is its end, and its after-effects are what we are experiencing today. That's why the Federal Government, as the administrator, does not have any political or economic reference point in all its years of administration. All our reference points are in our regional experience. Even its major supporters, like General Obasanjo, cannot but admit its inadequacies and now think it fit to call for “Restructuring”.
11. Reinforcing the confusion is the process of its alteration, where the concurrence of the National Assembly with 24 State Legislatures is considered sufficient. Yet, the Federalism that led to Independence was accompanied by direct elections, with results approximating the multi-ethnic nature of the country.
12. Therefore, the way to clear the confusion is by way of a New Constitution derived from a Constitutional Convention, itself preceded by “Nationality Referendums”, which, for the Yoruba, will be the “Yoruba Referendum” as the most peaceful, legitimate, and valid way to address the confusion. What exists now is the opportunity for you and fellow governors of Lagos, Ogun, Osun, Ondo, and Ekiti States to embark on this pathway through the instrumentality of the Houses of Assembly. The Draft Bill for a Yoruba Referendum has already been sent to all the Governors of Yoruba States, the Speakers, and members of the House of Assembly.

Editorial Board,

Yoruba Referendum Committee

  July 13, 2024
Bulletin # 50:  TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE(2)

                       

   

1. Whereas a Yoruba truism says that one’s head cannot be shaved in his or her absence.
2. Whereas there is a current attempt to shave our heads in our absence by the Federal Attorney-General touting scrapping the State Electoral Commission, with the Supreme Court endorsing the desire of the President Tinubu Administration to place Local Government Administration under the Central Government by controlling its finances.
3. Whereas the President, towards this end, emphasizes that the onus is now on local council leaders to ensure that the broad spectrum of Nigerians living at that level are satisfied that they are benefitting from people-oriented service delivery.
4. Whereas the President says “By virtue of this judgement, our people - especially the poor - will be able to hold their local leaders to account for their actions and inactions. What is sent to local government accounts will be known, and services must now be provided without excuses”.
5. Whereas the President says the Renewed Hope Agenda is about the people of this country, at all levels, irrespective of faith, tribe, gender, political affiliation, or any other artificial line they say exists between us.
6. Whereas the President says that the Supreme Court judgement stands as a resounding affirmation that we can use legitimate means of redress to restructure our country and restructure our economy to make Nigeria a better place to live in and a fairer society for all our people,
7. Whereas the President affirms that the decision of the Supreme Court to uphold the constitutional rights and ideals of local governments as regards financial autonomy, and other salient principles, is of historic significance and further reinforces the effort to enhance Nigeria's true federal fabric for the development of the entire nation.

Be it noted and it is hereby noted that:

8. We know (presumably) the amount of money that comes into the Federation account from which allocations to local governments are made. Despite this knowledge, the Federal Government has not been known for good service delivery to the people, otherwise Nigeria will not be what it is today with the Regional era of development becoming the reference point, almost 60 years after. Therefore, knowing the amount of money sent to the local councils does not necessarily guarantee any service delivery more so with the lopsidedness in the “allocation formula” which does not address any peculiarities in expected services but simply made a uniformity out of them. Furthermore, even with any uniformity, the Federal Government directly funding Local Governments is anti-thetical to True Federalism. We have the Awolowo Era or the Western Region era, which has become known as our “Golden Era”, as a guide. They did not depend on any “allocations” to either the local or Regional governments from the center. Rather, the Region at one point lent money to the Federal Government.
9. A notable Yoruba elder, Ambassador Yemi Farounbi, in his response to the issue, made the following comments, to wit: (a) "Alexander Hamilton said "the Constitutional principle on which a Federation is based is the division between two levels of government: federal and states ".(b) K. C Wheare, one of the earliest and greatest authority on the concept of federation... wrote of two tiers of government: the center and the federating units. He said the two tiers must be equal and counter balancing. (c) When Regions were abolished in 1966 by the Unification Decree, some people celebrated. The people were the ones who fought a secession war and are still clamoring for secession. (d) In 1977-78, those who championed the overburdened center and centralized federalism during the CONFAB spent the later days of their lives in regret and agony. (e) Those who are clamoring today for an autonomous third tier of government will live to regret this greatest assault on the concept of true federalism in Nigeria. (f) They will live to regret this obstacle they are creating on the need to restructure Nigeria to allow for the multi - diversity in Nigeria to become our strength as is Switzerland. (g) They will soon discover that when you forcefully impose uniformity on diversity you create the rationale for forceful resistance. (h)They will soon realize that by the schedule of LGAs in the constitution, Lagos State will forever remain 20 LGAs, even though the old Kano State that used to have 20 LGAs like Lagos State now consists of Kano and Jigawa States both with 89 LGAs. (i) Of course, today's political leadership are not men like Hamilton or Jefferson of USA. And the leadership in the Judiciary are not men like Charles Warren of USA or Lord Dening... they are non- patriots who have forgotten the concept of federalism that they were taught in POL. SCIENCE 101 in whatever university they attended."
10. A " legitimate means of redress to restructure our country and restructure our economy " can only be achieved via a new Constitution to be arrived at through a Constitutional Convention of Nationalities as Federating Units and preceded by Nationality Referendums, and which for the Yoruba, is the Yoruba Referendum. This ensures a direct engagement and resolution of the issues at hand by creating a Legitimate, valid and Legal pathway towards the expected Restructuring of the country.
11. The National Assembly’s Review Committee sidelines the Peoples of Nigeria as “stakeholders”, balkanizing them into different economic and social categories while the 1999 Constitution it seeks to amend does not recognize them as the Federating or Constituent Units, substituting them with the administrations of the States and Local Governments, just as the required concurrence of 24 states already denies the People, where, for example, the time-honored values of the Yoruba which drives her civilization is simply made dependent on choices favored by other Peoples.
12. This Yoruba Referendum will allow the Yoruba to ensure a fundamental intervention in Re-Federalizing Nigeria, now entering a new phase, with the National Assembly’s Constitutional Review Committee and the assault on Federalism by the current Administration amid calls from prominent personalities, various sectors and sections of the country for Restructuring and returning the country to the Parliamentary, Regional model of Governance, which had been beneficial, and providing the example for development.
13. The current assault also shows the different currents of opinion within Yorubaland at home and the Diaspora on what should be the Yoruba Response, manifesting the overall Yoruba preference for multiplicity of views and opinions, reflected in several Yoruba aphorisms; all combined, giving a specificity to Yoruba Existentialism. This Cultural Existentialism is embedded in the resolution of social contradictions and translated onto the economic and political spheres through the establishment of a Social Democratic, Welfarist Region experienced during our “Golden Era”.
14. The Yoruba have the capability to resolve the current differences through the combination of her Cultural experience and the internationally recognized Referendum mechanism, already used in many instances all over the world, including Scotland, which played a key role in the colonization of Nigeria by the United Kingdom.
15. The Yoruba in Kogi and Kwara States have expressed their desire for a Referendum to decide the acceptability or otherwise of their desire to become part of the Yorubaland and its Geo-Political space.
16. The Yoruba Referendum Committee is therefore asking you, as the Governors of Lagos, Ogun, Oyo, Osun, Ondo, and Ekiti States as well as the Speakers of the Houses of Assembly, to begin the process of re-Federalizing Nigeria by passing the Bill for a Referendum into Law and conduct the Referendum. The Bill had been sent to the Speakers, for action.

Editorial Board,

Yoruba Referendum Committee.


 

Bulletin #49: Time is of the essence (1)
Open Letter to Governors Biodun Oyebanji; Dapo Abiodun; Babajide Sanwo-Olu; Seyi Makinde; Lucky Ayedatiwa, Ademola Adeleke and Speakers of Ekiti, Ogun, Lagos, Oyo,Ondo and Osun States’ Houses of Assembly.

Recent developments in Nigeria, especially the moves by the current Administration, show that Nigeria is moving towards a Centralized and Unitarized State contrary to the interests of the various Nationalities making up the country. It is worse for the Yoruba because it will erase everything the Yoruba stood (and still stands) for, from the formation of Egbe Omo Oduduwa whose main goal is to collaborate with others in Nigeria to establish Nigeria as a Federal State, as stated in its founding Constitution. This quest for True Federalism is not only at the heart of Yoruba politics in Nigeria’s context but has also remained a constant.

The Administration is taking these steps because it knows the political and economic importance. The Administration’s economic policies, aimed at correcting the underdevelopment of the past, and which have caused major dislocation in the economic well-being of the people, need political measures to sustain it.

We make bold to say that this necessarily implies the creation of a supra-national state. Supra-national here is in the sense that all ethno-national centers of power would have to be neutralized as a necessary pre-condition, which directly translates into reducing the influence of State governments by controlling the Local Government from the center. This has been the recurring decimal in Nigeria since Independence, starting with the Coalition of the NCNC and NPC with the dual aim of neutralizing the AG and imposing their Hegemony. The battle for Hegemony between them led to the first military coup, resulting in the ban placed on socio-cultural groups and the abolition of the Regions. Eventually, the military substituted itself for the national center of power, becoming the alternative and/or new power base.

This is now being cemented by what is being called “Local Government Autonomy” as well as the call by the country’s Attorney-General to scrap the State Electoral Commissions and transfer their operations to INEC.

These moves strike at important aspects of Federalism, hence we are calling on you to rescue Yorubaland by pursuing “True Federalism.” It is so named only because what currently obtains and is being pursued by the current Administration is False Federalism.

You have a critical role to play in the sense that your office is now at the cusp of history, to wit: whether you want to see Yorubaland and everything the Yoruba had stood for, since the anti-colonial days, go to waste under your watch.

Hence, we urge you to consider the following:

1. You have embarked on a series of actions aimed at integrating Yorubaland, prominent among which are the enabling of the “Yoruba National Anthem,” regional economic cooperation, especially on Agriculture as well as strengthening collaborations between the states. These are well-intentioned moves without any evidence of sustainability. They are dependent on the ability of current occupants of the offices of Governors without corresponding institutional, legal, legitimate, and valid guarantees that may be susceptible to any political changes, more so when “Local Government Autonomy” would have whittled away some of your powers as executive governors.
2. Yet, what is called “autonomy” for the local government is a negation of the principles of Federalism recognized and applied all over the world. A Federal State is a coordinate relationship between the Center- (the national)- and the Federating Unit- (the subnational), where the internal dynamics of the subnational is entirely of its own making. The 1999 Constitution even recognizes Nigeria as a “Federation of states and federal Capital Territory” thereby making the inclusion of all the local governments in the same Constitution an aberration. Such cannot be cured by adding another layer of aberration.
3. Problems with Local Governments arose through the implementation of the 1976 Dasuki Committee on Local Government Reforms. We all know that the contest for controlling the Center has been the recurring decimal in Nigeria’s political firmament and has given rise to quests for control of the natural resources, first, of the Regions and later, of the States and the weapon of choice in the control of Local Governments by both military and civilian gladiators.
4. This was started via the gradual reduction of Regional/State resources to the current situation where the Federal Government now controls the largest part. Furthermore, this resulted in the replacement of the “derivation” principle which existed at Independence to what currently operates as “allocations” and which has led to distortions in Census figures; “allocation” of Local Governments to states, which ensured Lagos State with a much bigger population than Kano State has less Local Governments-- just as the current suit by the Attorney-General is anchored on "allocations." We believe it is not necessary or logical to make local government autonomy a precondition for payment of federal transfers due to local governments. In other democracies including the United States, transfers from federal governments to state and local governments do not involve the creation of autonomous entities at the grassroots level. The simplest thing to do is to amend the constitution that says federal transfers must go to joint-local government accounts.
5. This is where the problem is. Manipulated Census figures gave birth to territorial “allocations” which made Northern Nigeria the largest and which gave rise to misplaced allocations which gave birth to Constitutionally mandated Local Governments and which in turn gave birth to the war to control the center. These distortions invariably gave birth to the myriads of problems now associated with Local Governments and these cannot be cured by getting the Federal Supreme Court to deny the organic or umbilical connection between grassroots communities and the nationality units that house grassroots communities.
6. The Attorney General says some experts advised the scrapping of State Electoral Commissions without telling us who these experts are and how they arrived at their conclusions. We make bold to say that an expert, in the person of Prof Auwal Yadudu, presided over the drafting of the current 1999 Constitution which had been and is still being subject to “alterations.” This shows the limitations of experts who donated the ideas that have been driving the Federal Attorney General. 
7. Yet, in the Attorney-General's intervention on the issue of changing the National Anthem, he said: “In some cases, the national anthem emerges from open national competition among interested citizens. In other instances, the proposed national anthem is subjected to a plebiscite or referendum before its eventual adoption or declaration. Consequently, it is my considered view that the decision to change Nigeria’s National Anthem whether by replacing it with the old one or a new one, should be subjected to a wider process of citizen participation through zonal public hearings, resolutions of the Federal Executive Council, Council of State, National and State Assemblies, etc.”
8. In the same vein, it is also our considered view that the National anthem embodies or is supposed to embody the "spirit, soul, and body" of the country. Since the Attorney General is now saying the process of arriving at a new anthem must get the "buy-in" of the citizens, it follows that the Constitution (the Grundnorm) of the country must undergo a similar "buy-in" from the people.
9. We can go on faulting these moves by the Federal Government, but this is not about any critique but a call to preventive action as these issues fall within our existential necessities.
10. We need not rehash the fact that our existence as a Region provided the foundation for our development and the series of interventions by notable and “unsung” Yoruba governance icons like the late Mr. C.S.O. Akande, who, as the Secretary to the Western State Military Government ensured the survival of what we now know today as “Oodua Investments,” arguably the flagship of our Regional achievements.
11. Just as we also know that the Region was atomized to ensure her underdevelopment as part of de-Federalizing Nigeria, the Yoruba played a major part in this process even though some came around to regret their actions when it was too late. The most prominent of whom is General Olusegun Obasanjo, who spent his tenures as military Head of State and civilian President neutralizing Federalism and has now joined the clamor for Restructuring/True Federalism.
12. We are therefore asking you to choose where you want to belong.
13. We are calling on you to utilize your powers and influence with the State Legislatures to advance the cause of re-Federalizing Nigeria and openly speak against de-federalizing the country from administration to administration while looking away from referendum to hear from the people.
14. We are saying, as the Yoruba aphorism says, that our heads cannot be shaved in our absence. Therefore, the road open to you is for you to aggregate the wishes of Yoruba People within the context of the ongoing Constitutional Amendment process to address, finally, the problem plaguing Nigeria—the failure to obtain a conducive structure for functioning federal governance.
15. Since the 1999 Constitution says, Nigeria is a “Federation of States and FCT’, it follows that the states can Legitimately decide, for and among themselves, their administrative preferences; hence they can either keep their current atomized status or seek to change it in a Legitimate manner.
16. This is why we are asking you to support and enable a Yoruba Referendum to be conducted by the State Electoral Commissions after the Bill has been passed into Law by the Houses of Assembly. The Referendum will provide a Legitimate and Legal basis for your collaboration and will prevent such a regional effort from being derailed by unforeseen political situations. It will also help in setting the stage for Re-Federalizing Nigeria.
17. Time is of the essence. The push to scrap the State Electoral Commissions is not only to completely disenfranchise the People but also to de-Legitimize your authority. You have the authority, power, and Legitimacy to ensure this does not happen. 

The Draft Bill for a Yoruba Referendum has been sent to you and the State Houses of Assembly.

Here is a copy, for the benefit of readers.

Editorial Board,

Yoruba Referendum Committee.

DRAFT BILL FOR A REFERENDUM LAW

 
A Law of Ekiti State House of Assembly, Ogun State House of Assembly, Osun State House of Assembly, Oyo State House of Assembly, Ondo State House of Assembly and Lagos State House of Assembly for the holding of a Referendum on the proposal to Federate Ekiti State with Ogun State, Osun State, Oyo State, Ondo State and Lagos State and constitute same into Oduduwa Region of Western Nigeria, within the Federation of Nigeria.

A: REFERENDUM ON FEDERATION OF EKITI STATE WITH OGUN STATE, OSUN STATE, OYO STATE, ONDO STATE AND LAGOS STATE AND CONSTITUTION OF SAME INTO ODUDUWA REGION IN A FEDERATION OF NIGERIA.

1.     On the…………. Day of ……… 202, a Referendum shall be held in Ekiti State, Ogun State, Osun State, Oyo State, Ondo State and Lagos State of Nigeria on:

(i)                 Whether the Governments of Ekiti, Ogun, Osun, Oyo, Ondo and Lagos States should negotiate with each other with a view to forming a FEDERATION of STATES to be known as the ODUDUWA REGION OF WESTERN NIGERIA and (ii) whether the said REGION should negotiate with the Government of Nigeria and the remaining 30 states or any group of states that have also agreed to Federate  and the administration of the Federal Capital Territory to achieve AUTONOMY/SELF-DETERMINATION for the said REGION within a Federation of Nigerian Constituent Units.(ANNEXURE)

2.     The questions or propositions to be voted on in the Referendum and form of the ballot paper to be used for that purpose are to be in the form set out in the schedule herein contained.

3.     Those entitled to vote in the Referendum are the persons who, on the date of the Referendum, would be entitled to vote as electors at a local government election in the electoral area/ward of the State in which they live and/or conduct business.

4.     The Governor of Each State shall appoint a Chief Electoral Officer who shall appoint an electoral officer for each Local Government Area.

5.     Each Local Government Electoral Officer shall (a) Conduct the counting of votes cast in the area under his/her authority in accordance with any directions given by the Chief Electoral Officer and (b) Certify the number of ballot papers counted by him/her and the number of votes cast for each question/proposition.

6.     The Chief Electoral Officer must certify:

(a)    The total number of ballot papers counted for the whole of Each State and (b) the total number of votes cast for each proposition/question for the whole of the State.

7.     The result of the Referendum shall constitute the entire position of the people of Ogun State, Oyo State, Osun State, Ekiti State, Ondo State and Lagos State (WESTERN/ODUDUWA REGION OF NIGERIA).

8.     In the event of a YES vote on the Referendum, the Governors of each State shall appoint members into a Constitutional Council of Western/Oduduwa Region.

9.     The Constitutional Council of Western/Oduduwa Region shall include not more than twelve (12) other members chosen at random throughout the Region and four (4) members from Kwara and Kogi States.

10.The Constitutional Council of Western/Oduduwa Region shall be vested with powers to present and represent the views of Western/Oduduwa Region and negotiate on behalf of the Western/Oduduwa Region with all the agencies of the Nigerian Government and non-Governmental organizations involved in the process.

B:               The short title of this Law is “Referendum Law of Ekiti State, Ondo State, Osun State, Oyo State, Ogun State and Lagos State”.

                                                                                                                          SCHEDULE

FORM OF BALLOT PAPER:  Ekiti State House of Assembly, Ondo State House of Assembly, Osun State House of Assembly, Oyo State House of Assembly, Ogun State House of Assembly and Lagos State House of Assembly, have decided to consult the People of Each State on this ………. Day of ………, 202 on the proposal to Federate the Government of Ogun State, the Government of Osun State, the Government of Oyo State, the Government of Ekiti State, the Government of Ondo State and the Government of Lagos State with a view to constituting a REGION of Western Nigeria within a Federation of Nigeria.

 THUMBPRINT in the box containing:                     (YES)

1.     I AGREE that the  Governments of Ekiti  State, Ondo State, Oyo State, Osun State, Ogun State and Lagos State should negotiate  with each other with a view to forming a FEDERATION of STATES to be known as the ODUDUWA REGION OF WESTERN NIGERIA which shall  negotiate  with the  Yoruba persons in Kwara and Kogi States, whether they want to be part of the ODUDUWA REGION or not;  shall further negotiate with the Government of Nigeria and the remaining 30 states and the administration of the Federal Capital Territory to achieve AUTONOMY/SELF-DETERMINATION for the said REGION within a Federation of Nigeria.

  OR

                                                                                  (NO)

2.     I DO NOT AGREE  that the  Governments of Ekiti State, Ondo State, Oyo State, Osun State, Ogun State and Lagos State should negotiate  with each other with a view to forming a FEDERATION of STATES to be known as the ODUDUWA REGION OF WESTERN NIGERIA  which shall negotiate with the Yoruba in Kwara and Kogi States as to whether they want to be part of the ODUDUWA REGION or not, and further negotiate  with the Government of Nigeria and the remaining 30 states and the administration of the Federal Capital Territory to achieve AUTONOMY/SELF-DETERMINATION for the said REGION within a Federation of Nigeria.

                                                                                                                                   ANNEXURE

• A Federal Nigeria, through a valid Federal Constitution, to be known as The Union of Nigerian Constituent Nationalities,OR (COMMONWEALTH OF NIGERIA) with a Federal Presidential Council, whose members will be selected or elected from each of the Nationalities as Federating Units and from whom a Head of State will be selected or elected as the primus-inter-pares with an agreed term.

• Western/Oduduwa Region shall be a Constituent Unit of the Nigerian Union.

• Western/Oduduwa Region shall adopt a Parliamentary System of government.

• The Central Government of the Union shall have no power to interfere nor intervene in the affairs of the ODUDUWA REGION, save as shall be agreed to by three quarters of the members of the Region’s Parliament.

• There shall be a Division of the Federal Armed Forces in the Region, 90% of which personnel shall be indigenes of the Region. The Divisional commander shall be an indigene of Oduduwa Region.

• The Judicial power of the Region shall be vested in the Supreme Court of the Region, Court of Appeal, High Court, Customary Court, and Other lower courts as the Parliament may establish. There shall be a Court of Appeal in each of the provinces. There shall be, in each province, a High Court from which appeals shall lie to the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court of the Region.

• Western/Oduduwa Region shall have its own internal security system.

• Each Constituent Unit of the Nigerian Federation shall control primary interest in its own resources with an agreed Tax Model for the Federation.