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:

i. 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.

ii. 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.

iii. 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.

iv. Naturally, a[b] Referendum[/b] 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.

v. Yet, the Federal Government is a[b] STATE APPARATUS[/b], 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.

vi. The Local Government exists as a territory within the state. 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.

vii. 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.

viii. 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.

ix. 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.

x. 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”.

xi. 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.

xii. 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