blueseacats:
It shouldn't be that way, but you know we are black people and unfortunately don't obey the laws of decent humans. So I will say yes you will lose those properties. Those Yorubas begging ibos to leave are the less fortunate ones who hope they will become property owners after ibos leave. Meanwhile those ibos screaming Biafra everywhere are mostly lazy ones who are less fortunate and has nothing to their name in ibo land let alone outside Igbo land. They blame all their problems the state of Nigeria not realizing that a lazy man is always a lazy man.

blueseacats:
It shouldn't be that way, but you know we are black people and unfortunately don't obey the laws of decent humans. So I will say yes you will lose those properties. Those Yorubas begging ibos to leave are the less fortunate ones who hope they will become property owners after ibos leave. Meanwhile those ibos screaming Biafra everywhere are mostly lazy ones who are less fortunate and has nothing to their name in ibo land let alone outside Igbo land. They blame all their problems the state of Nigeria not realizing that a lazy man is always a lazy man.

Lifestone:
Biafra will be landlocked if the Niger Delta does not follow them
They are desperate to have Niger Delta for two main rwasons:
1. Access to sea and international trade.
2.Access to crude oil and hence FX
That's why I believe there won't be Biafra without Niger Delta, and it's obvious why the Ibos are desperate to annex ND.
The other issue my Ibo brothers should know is that the present land area can not take their population, South East is almost fully built up and land locked .

GrandGarcon:
You see, you don't know what you are talking about, do you know we are talking about almost all banks in present nigeria? The money that belongs to the nigerian banks will still belong to the nigerian banks even if Biafra comes. We are not usurpers like you people, but if Nigerian government does anything funny, we will nationalize those banks.

DoTheNeedful:


Some of you are just ignorant. Igbos are mainly traders and they have the current Nigerian space as their Market because they are citizens. If Biafra become materialized their market space will shrink by at least 70%.
I don't know how they will make their wealth back in 5 years. You will sell mainly among yourself which is like selling an ice-block to a Canadian. Your so-called wealth is made from profit you make from trading with over 170 million Nigerians.
Mind you almost all developing countries don't tolerate foreigners opening small and medium scale businesses in their countries. This area of business is what is employing millions of Igbos.
Kindly recall the trade rift Nigeria had with Ghana, Zambia and some African countries. It bordered on the small and medium scale businesses our Igbo brothers wanted to start in those countries. They refused and insisted that any foreigner must have a business that is worth at least 500,000 dollars and must employ like 10 indigenes or so.
When you call other people parasites, know that we all benefit from ourselves. The Nigerian population has benefited the Igbos more.



http://independent.ng/2014/09/association-says-ghana-will-regret-sacking-nigerian-traders-markets/

Dumaknesset:



You are correct, Nigerian government can enter into a valid agreement with foreigners but not a stateless person or unrecognized nation like Biafra, neither can they ratify such existing contract as same will have been vitiated by their act of secession, since they stopped being Nigerians. They are no longer persons in law.

allrightsir:

This is very true and everyone recognizes the enterprise of the Ibos man but let's rewind: you are the richest, the smartest (that's debateable considering the senseless way you are going about alienating yourselves for a cause that will never materialise) and the most successful economically, so why are you complaing of marginalization?


Is your real problem not greed and a desire to dominate everybody else? How can the richest, smartest and the most successful tribe claim to be marginalised?

seunmsg:


Don't get it twisted at all, the day Biafra secedes legally, all Igbos living in any part of Nigeria will be doing so illegally. Government may round up all of them and throw them into prison or dump them at the Onitsha bridge depending on how the break up occurred. Nigeria's breakup will either be violent or on very hostile terms if violence is not involved. You people will be entitled to absolutely nothing once you succeed in breaking up the country. I will advice you all start selling your belongings now and relocate the ones that can be relocated to the east before it is too late. Igbos will not be allowed to own a pin in Nigeria once Biafra secedes. You cannot eat your cake and still have it.

Kay17:


It depends on how the question of citizenship is settled.

To be a Nigerian, one must have either Nigerian parents or Nigerian grandparents. So if a Biafran has a Nigerian parent or grandparent he automatically remains a Nigerian except if the Constitution is altered to reflect otherwise. This position will apply whether or not Biafra secedes violently or through diplomacy.

Now if there is a violent secession the Nigerian government will not recognize the new state of Biafra nor its citizens. In its eyes the Biafran citizens remain Nigerians with all the rights and obligations owed to a Nigerian.

Similarly the constitutional rights remain guaranteed irrespective of the civil war except a state of emergency is declared within a territory or state.

blueseacats:
It shouldn't be that way, but you know we are black people and unfortunately don't obey the laws of decent humans. So I will say yes you will lose those properties. Those Yorubas begging ibos to leave are the less fortunate ones who hope they will become property owners after ibos leave. Meanwhile those ibos screaming Biafra everywhere are mostly lazy ones who are less fortunate and has nothing to their name in ibo land let alone outside Igbo land. They blame all their problems the state of Nigeria not realizing that a lazy man is always a lazy man.

monex:


you do realise that there are igbos who will not denounce their Nigerian citizenship and chose to remain with Nigeria right?

or are you saying there will be an official ethnic purge of Nigerian Igbos?

una arguments (both the pro-biafra and anti-biafra) dey make me laugh

PROUDLYAFONJA1:
Ofcos big yes, your 44 trillions investment in north is a goner lol

fulanmafia:


Get your emotions in check for the purpose of clarity, and to avoid getting knocked back in the face with the labels you're flinging around.

How about the thousands of northerners over the years that have been innocently killed by your armed robbers, kidnappers, ritualists, cultists, fake drug merchants etc.? You're comparing apples and oranges.

The fact that instead of tact and diplomacy, your agitation chose to employ crude, cheap and lazy blackmail against the very same parties you need to peacefully secede, remains the Achilles heel of your agitation and which will lead to its calamitous failure.

seunmsg:


I am not too sure you understand the subject of discussion deeply. A violent break up is very possible. If Nigeria goes to war again with Biafra and the later wins, they will have their country and there is nothing anybody can do about it. The war can also end in a stalemate that will necessitate an amicable settlement where the contending parties will breakup the country into as many parts as the contenders want. Don't assume that Nigeria will always win in the event of a civil war.

Now to the issue of citizenship, trust me, no single IBO person will be allowed to own a pin in Nigeria (if the country still remains) once Biafra is achieved. Forget about the deceit of constitutional or international law. IBOs have already made themselves enemies to every tribe in Nigeria with the way they are going about their agitation. People will be so happy to see them go and not a single of them will be allowed to stay. IBO is IBO irrespective of whatever relationship the person has with people of other tribe. They cannot be allowed to remain in Nigeria under any guise.

seunmsg:


There will be no Nigerian IBO after Biafra is achieved. Any IBO person that wants to remain in Nigeria should work towards ensuring that there is no breakup.

Pavarottii:

Av u watched that video of nnamdi many. All these rubbish u av been saying is like u r discouraging ibid from leaving. He said whether Adama as an iibo girl decides to stay in Lagos. That's not his business. U r talking as if they are no human beings leaving in d SE and its only Lagos that they are. My brother wake up.

webcalculator:

So brexit will make u.k loose all their properties in other part of the EU? Which kind lawyer are you?

slydog:


The international lenders will also not be quick to lend to a new country because evidence shows that every new independent country must have its own share of civil war

Kay17:


You are proceeding on the assumption that a Nigerian or the Nigerian government cannot enter into a valid legal agreement with a foreigner. Which if true, implies that the scores of MoUs signed with foreign investors are consequently invalid

UDIOK:
And you think Igbos have more investment in the North than Northerner 's investment in the south just one oil block in the south is more than the whole spare part shops in the North...The northerner's will loose much if you don't know....checkout TY Danjuma investment in PLANTGERIA,SEPLAT etc SS, what about ATIKU at ONNE, INTELS, PRODECO, check out the numbers of Northerner owning oil block and investment in the SS....lets go ahead and see who will loose and by how much

Lies and half-truths.

1. The major conflict in South Sudan now is the civil war. Read what caused it here -- http://www.aljazeera.com/blogs/africa/2017/04/clear-winners-south-sudan-war-170420093525610.html --, and not your dreamy pipeline issue. Rating: LIE.

2. The Yugoslav wars were not primarily because of the fate of the Serbs. It was an inter-ethnic war that had heavy involvement of most of the ethnicities. In fact, most of the wars ended in treaties (meaning no clear winner-takes-all scenario), and the wars ended in 2001 after 10 years. Today all seceding parts are bona fide countries recognized by the International community--Serbia, Montenegro, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Macedonia. Rating: HALF TRUTH

3. Pakistan and India is irrelevant to this discourse as both countries broke away and have been apart since then.

The biggest error by the Nigerian side is not realizing the difference between 1967 and 2017, and thinking a civil war today is a foregone conclusion with a Nigerian victory. That is naive and myopic.

War is not won on paper. I am yet to see any intelligent review of a possible war timeline that results in an absolute victory for the Nigerian side. The number of variables are too many and interests too varied, that the blood and death you refer to will be commonplace across all of present Nigeria, not just the SE. Blood and death awaits both the secessionists and the unionists.

It is a classic case of carrying your casket to a war, because you'll either return with it or in it.

Three months ago seemingly frustrated by widespread indifference to the topic, I said that peaceful restructuring was highly unlikely, today it is violent restructuring that is highly unlikely.

Fear-mongering would not quench the call for secession. Only reason and fairness would.

Niger Delta does not need Nigerian protection.

And this talk about securing oil and gas assets is balderdash.

If the Nigerian government will confiscate all properties owned by the Biafrans, the Biafran government will confiscate Nigerian oil and gas assets. Tit for tat.

The only time the Nigerian government moves in is if they resist the secessionist efforts with force like in 1967. If they do not and let Biafra go without violence, then they have no claim to oil and gas assets, even those owned by the NNPC. In fact, these assets would constitute a Biafran bargaining chip for Biafran properties in Nigeria. If Nigeria enters Biafra under any guise after Biafra has been recognized by the International community, it is a contravention of International Law and Nigeria would be pressured to abandon that quest or face sanctions. The bloodier that war gets, the poorer Nigeria becomes. With no oil and pressing International sanctions, Nigeria will go into a recession, causing more agitation from other groups, which could set off a chain reaction that leads to an implosion.

Moreover, most of the oil and gas assets in Biafra are owned by foreign companies, which means all the Biafran government has to do is null the JVs and royalties paid to the Nigerian government, then enter new agreement with the companies. It happened in 1967 when Shell-BP (the largest oil exploration company in Nigeria at the time) paid the Biafran government until the British Government advised them not to in return for assurance that the Crown would help the Nigerian side win the war.

If you think Nigerian forces would stroll in Niger Delta Republic to seize oil assets, then you must be drunk. We'll not only repel Nigerian forces, we'll make the Lagos ports inoperable and give you guys the same treatment you guys gave the Biafrans in 1967. A bloody blockade. And before you laugh that off, ask yourself which territorial waters are the third most pirate-infested in the world after Indonesia and Somalia, then ask yourself who these pirates are?

The Nigerian Navy cannot patrol the entire coastline of the South South, but our pirates can make any ocean going vessel think twice about going to the Lagos ports.

Be careful what you wish for. Except you think the oil wells in Lagos and Ondo would fund a war with the 6th/7th largest oil producing region in the world. And by the way read about the 2015 U.S. Nigerian-Breakup War Game and find out which region had the U.S. military support.

All this chest-beating on NL is childish. Restructuring or breakup. If it does get to breakup, violence or not, Niger Delta Republic will not cede a km of South-South land to any alien. Niger Delta has never lost any armed conflict against the Nigerian government, it wouldn't start when we get our own country.

The Biafrans would not make the mistake of encroaching into SS land like they did in '67. It is suicidal and there's practically no reason for them to do so.

In the beginning, this thread was informative but it has since gone off the rails with folks like you engaging in fear-mongering.

Aragon:


Even Europeans that are supposed to be Civilized, we dey plan to show UK pepper because of BREXIT how much more wetin Naija go take Biafrans eyes see. The saddest part of this is most of these Youths actually believe that Biafra is Utopia. They believe deep in their mind that Biafra will be second heaven. And my question has always been, will the Politicians suddenly Change from being Corrupt, Greedy and Wicked because they Change the name of where they operate? Are the Igbos suddenly going to Love, Trust and treat each other's right cos they Change their name? Why are people so Lazy to think?

doskie:

you wrote that immediately the status of a person changes from a nigerian, he has automatically annulled the agreement with the state.

let me ask..

if mr Obi is from the east, and through a referendum, igbos secede, even though mr obi has not officially declared himself a biafra through any legal document, does the law automatically recognise obi as a biafran or he remains a nigerian until he personally decides to change nationality. is it a personal or general thing?

Dumaknesset:



What I have written is beyond what your 2 mb brain can understand . Do you mean, how will Nigerians forfeit their money. You cant even string a sentence with making elementary mistakes, yet you have the temerity to advice me to go back to school. Ecowas law, are you kidding me! I said Baifrans will forfeit their monies not Nigerians. This pipsqueak that is comprehension is sub zero is pontificating. wonders will never cease. You just show you are not only slow but uneducated, better don't kill yourself on what you can't comprehend.

Finally, So is your Biafra a member of Ecowas, I can imagine the hare brain shit cauterizing in your brain, just don't lose it.

Iti!

sddiamond:

Truth is bitter, keep given yourself a false hope of owning a property, don't go and work hard. lazy bone

Mujtahida:

First it is wrong to say ownership of land is placed SOLELY in the hands of the State Governments. Here's the preamble to the Land Use Act 1978 cap L5 LFN 2004 which reads in part thus: An Act to Vest all Land compromised in the territory of each State (EXCEPT LAND VESTED in the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT or its AGENCIES ) solely in the Governor of the State , who would hold such Land in trust for the people....
In order words land is vested in both the Federal and State Government. Granted the preamble used the words solely but that is in respect of state land(what is state land is defined in the provisions of the State lands acquisition laws of the various States) see Osho v Foreign Finance Corporation (1991)4NWLR pt 184 or LSPDC v Foreign Finance Corp (1986)1NWLR pt 50.We know there are federal government lands throughout the federation.


Second, as per your first paragraph I'd opine that it's not so straightforward nor is it cast in black and white as far as our EXTANT citizenship laws are concerned because once a person declares allegiance to Biafra it does not AUTOMATICALLY translate to such a person ceasing to be a Nigerian EXCEPT
1) such a person renounces his citizenship by way of declaration
2)our laws are changed to reflect your position.
I am of this view because a citizen of Nigeria includes any person born in Nigeria after independence either of WHOSE PARENTS or GRANDPARENTS belongs or BELONGED to a community indigenous to Nigeria. And that practically covers all potential Biafrans who can stake a claim to Nigerian citizenship through their parents or grandparents (particularly those either of whose parents and grandparents are deceased) and this is even more so since our laws recognise dual citizenship. These are issues, questions and arguments that could be tested in court and judicial pronouncements made to determine their status.

Third, foreigners can and do acquire property in Nigeria without resort to proxies. Acquisition of real estate in Nigeria is regulated by the provisions of the Acquisition of Lands by Aliens Act for FCT Abuja(corresponding laws exists in all the States) and under that law aliens can acquire property in Nigeria subject to certain conditions like Governor's consent etc. However in the immediate context of a situation where Biafra is declared these laws will not apply to determine the status of property ACQUIRED when they (Biafrans) were still Nigerians and before they ceased to be Nigerians. It can only apply if after the declaration of Biafra, a Biafran seeks to acquire property in Nigeria.

So in sum I'd say there are legal angles to this issue which have to be sorted out by amendments of our laws and judicial pronouncements but based on our existing laws I do not think anything in relation to this matter is automatic. Perhaps there are international treaties and conventions which Nigeria is signatory to which regulates such situations I do not know. Cheers

Restructuring Nigeria

I have often told those who care to listen to even define what they mean by restructuring and I can't seem to get answers. Or where we get, the answers are discordant and often tending toward federalism resource control and such.

What I understand it to mean is that we operate a truly federal system of government where every component part controls their resources, have their domestic laws, have their own police, the legal system, their own tax systems etc.

The states should be federating units donating some of their powers to the FG to hold and use in trust for them on matters of common interest such as defence, foreign affairs, citizenship, immigration, currency and economy etc
Let us adopt the USA model. USA practices federalism.

Restructuring or federalism are totally different from the call for cannibalisation of the country. Restructuring or federalism howsoever called is not the same as secession.

Suffice to say that when Lagos State Government took the federal government to the Supreme Court several times to insist on the practice of federalism from control of physical planning, local government administration that led to the withholding of Laos State revenue allocation, to issue of land abutting the waterways, control of inland waters, VAT, and many other issues , those states and zones where the call for restructuring are the loudest today sadly all opposed the position of LASG at the Supreme Court on the altar of politics. We may go back and read those judgements for confirmation.

LASG won 12 of such cases and against the FG at the Supreme Court. That was the beginning of some elements of federalism and restructuring without calls to war or secession.

I recall that I had to lead speak on behalf of LASG in the company of Dr Akeem Olajide Bello , then an adviser to the governor on Legal matters at the Senate hearing on the National Inland Waterways Authority Act and made a robust presentation for state control of Inland Waterways and total repeal of the Act on behalf of Lagos State .

A then top ranking and very outspoken and visible Senator from Enugu State was the most vociferous opponent of our position. He even said publicly at the hearing that Lagos State was being too cantankerous and asked insultingly if Lagos was the only coastal state or with waterways in the country that it was so cantankerous on the issue. This is a man whose state has rivers that could be of economic benefits to his state and people. I educated him before his colleagues and the public in a fine and polite language that he was not fit to be a Senator. I also recall telling him that if he and his state don't know the rights of his people and state, we in Lagos did and would assert same using the law. I asked him if he was proud that by the National Inland Waterways Authority Law his people in Enugu state will need to travel to Lokoja to obtain licences to own and operate fishing canoes on the rivers and streams in the state. I felt he was very disappointing and was betraying his people.

The senator, who sought to be Governor, is today one of the major voices and sponsors of secession and restructuring mixed up.

Lagos State House of Assembly subsequently repealed the National Inland Waterways Authority Act and promulgated the Lagos State Inland Waterways Authority Act and took control of the Lagos Lagoon and its intrastate waters. There were objections and protests from such bodies as Nigerian Ports Authority and NIWA. Lagos called their bluff and challenged them to go to court. Lagos used the instrumentality of the law, legislature and intellect to take its destiny in its hands and assert it's rights. It was the series of litigation by LASG that has now effectively handed physically planning and land ownership back to the states.

Before then, the FG was giving planning permits for buildings in places like Banana Island and Osborne Foreshore and in many states of the country on lands that they called federal land contrary to the provisions of the Land Use Act. Before then the FG was issuing Certificates of Occupancy on land in the states. Before then the FG made a decree which vested and made it to own all lands that were within 100 metres from the shore of lagoons, rivers and ocean including the palace of the Oba of Lagos and all lands on Marina, around Bar Beach, River Niger and Benue , Oji River, River Imo, Oguta Lake , Kaduna River to mention a few. Before then, FG had absolute control over even water streams and rivers in the villages and states. Before then FG had land registries in the states. Before then, the FG acquired land in states without resort to the state governments.

I even recall that the FG was planning to develop the 2nd phase of Banana Island. It was going to sand fill some waters of the lagoon. Lagos insisted that it must get a permit and environmental impact assessment approval from it. The FG insisted that it can reclaim the water because it had control over the outer waters in Lagos State. Lagos then told the FG that once the water is reclaimed and becomes land, it will be vested in the Governor of Lagos State by virtue of the Land Use Act. The FG simply disappeared with its tail between its legs. That is using the law and the brains.
Today, if the FG acquires land in Lagos, it must obtain the governor's consent;
Today, if the FG wants to build in Lagos, it must obtain LASG approval;
Today, the FG cannot regulate adverts on federal highways or roads in Lagos, it is the LASG;
Today, the Lagos waterways are busy with boats, yachts and hovercraft registered and licensed by Lagos Inland Waterways Authority;
Lagos has had a consumption tax in place without allowing VAT stand in its way. It used the law and brains;
Lagos collects Wharf Landing fees from all sea and land ports in Lagos State;
Lagos collects advertisement income from all federal highways and roads in Lagos along with the local governments;
Lagos used the law and good thinking to acquire all lands and open spaces under bridges from the FG. They are all today beauties to behold from the days when FG allowed all sorts to happen under them when they were let out as garages and car parks.

But for the good thinking and law, Lagos may not have been able to recover Oshodi. And all these also bring in substantial revenue to the state and yet we still wonder why Lagos State has a monthly Internally Generated Revenue Income of well over 30 billion Naira. Over 6 times more than what it gets from the federal allocation that some others are crying over as their sole source of revenue. And we still wonder why it is the 2nd largest economy in West Africa, only after Nigeria and self-sustaining?

Let all states put on their thinking caps and use the law, legislature, judiciary, intellectual power to achieve the control of their destinies and resources and not by beating drums of war and secession. It shouldn't be by force or might. Let's use our brains and intellectual resources to achieve federalism.


Restructuring Nigeria

I have often told those who care to listen to even define what they mean by restructuring and I can't seem to get answers. Or where we get, the answers are discordant and often tending toward federalism resource control and such.

What I understand it to mean is that we operate a truly federal system of government where every component part controls their resources, have their domestic laws, have their own police, the legal system, their own tax systems etc.

The states should be federating units donating some of their powers to the FG to hold and use in trust for them on matters of common interest such as defence, foreign affairs, citizenship, immigration, currency and economy etc
Let us adopt the USA model. USA practices federalism.

Restructuring or federalism are totally different from the call for cannibalisation of the country. Restructuring or federalism howsoever called is not the same as secession.

Suffice to say that when Lagos State Government took the federal government to the Supreme Court several times to insist on the practice of federalism from control of physical planning, local government administration that led to the withholding of Laos State revenue allocation, to issue of land abutting the waterways, control of inland waters, VAT, and many other issues , those states and zones where the call for restructuring are the loudest today sadly all opposed the position of LASG at the Supreme Court on the altar of politics. We may go back and read those judgements for confirmation.

LASG won 12 of such cases and against the FG at the Supreme Court. That was the beginning of some elements of federalism and restructuring without calls to war or secession.

I recall that I had to lead speak on behalf of LASG in the company of Dr Akeem Olajide Bello , then an adviser to the governor on Legal matters at the Senate hearing on the National Inland Waterways Authority Act and made a robust presentation for state control of Inland Waterways and total repeal of the Act on behalf of Lagos State .

A then top ranking and very outspoken and visible Senator from Enugu State was the most vociferous opponent of our position. He even said publicly at the hearing that Lagos State was being too cantankerous and asked insultingly if Lagos was the only coastal state or with waterways in the country that it was so cantankerous on the issue. This is a man whose state has rivers that could be of economic benefits to his state and people. I educated him before his colleagues and the public in a fine and polite language that he was not fit to be a Senator. I also recall telling him that if he and his state don't know the rights of his people and state, we in Lagos did and would assert same using the law. I asked him if he was proud that by the National Inland Waterways Authority Law his people in Enugu state will need to travel to Lokoja to obtain licences to own and operate fishing canoes on the rivers and streams in the state. I felt he was very disappointing and was betraying his people.

The senator, who sought to be Governor, is today one of the major voices and sponsors of secession and restructuring mixed up.

Lagos State House of Assembly subsequently repealed the National Inland Waterways Authority Act and promulgated the Lagos State Inland Waterways Authority Act and took control of the Lagos Lagoon and its intrastate waters. There were objections and protests from such bodies as Nigerian Ports Authority and NIWA. Lagos called their bluff and challenged them to go to court. Lagos used the instrumentality of the law, legislature and intellect to take its destiny in its hands and assert it's rights. It was the series of litigation by LASG that has now effectively handed physically planning and land ownership back to the states.

Before then, the FG was giving planning permits for buildings in places like Banana Island and Osborne Foreshore and in many states of the country on lands that they called federal land contrary to the provisions of the Land Use Act. Before then the FG was issuing Certificates of Occupancy on land in the states. Before then the FG made a decree which vested and made it to own all lands that were within 100 metres from the shore of lagoons, rivers and ocean including the palace of the Oba of Lagos and all lands on Marina, around Bar Beach, River Niger and Benue , Oji River, River Imo, Oguta Lake , Kaduna River to mention a few. Before then, FG had absolute control over even water streams and rivers in the villages and states. Before then FG had land registries in the states. Before then, the FG acquired land in states without resort to the state governments.

I even recall that the FG was planning to develop the 2nd phase of Banana Island. It was going to sand fill some waters of the lagoon. Lagos insisted that it must get a permit and environmental impact assessment approval from it. The FG insisted that it can reclaim the water because it had control over the outer waters in Lagos State. Lagos then told the FG that once the water is reclaimed and becomes land, it will be vested in the Governor of Lagos State by virtue of the Land Use Act. The FG simply disappeared with its tail between its legs. That is using the law and the brains.
Today, if the FG acquires land in Lagos, it must obtain the governor's consent;
Today, if the FG wants to build in Lagos, it must obtain LASG approval;
Today, the FG cannot regulate adverts on federal highways or roads in Lagos, it is the LASG;
Today, the Lagos waterways are busy with boats, yachts and hovercraft registered and licensed by Lagos Inland Waterways Authority;
Lagos has had a consumption tax in place without allowing VAT stand in its way. It used the law and brains;
Lagos collects Wharf Landing fees from all sea and land ports in Lagos State;
Lagos collects advertisement income from all federal highways and roads in Lagos along with the local governments;
Lagos used the law and good thinking to acquire all lands and open spaces under bridges from the FG. They are all today beauties to behold from the days when FG allowed all sorts to happen under them when they were let out as garages and car parks.

But for the good thinking and law, Lagos may not have been able to recover Oshodi. And all these also bring in substantial revenue to the state and yet we still wonder why Lagos State has a monthly Internally Generated Revenue Income of well over 30 billion Naira. Over 6 times more than what it gets from the federal allocation that some others are crying over as their sole source of revenue. And we still wonder why it is the 2nd largest economy in West Africa, only after Nigeria and self-sustaining?

Let all states put on their thinking caps and use the law, legislature, judiciary, intellectual power to achieve the control of their destinies and resources and not by beating drums of war and secession. It shouldn't be by force or might. Let's use our brains and intellectual resources to achieve federalism.

Babatunde Ogala Esq
Babatunde Ogala Esq

thesicilian:
As a lay person I do not think secession should affect personal property unless the owner decides to leave his property behind and move home. That Biafra is now a separate country does not mean all Igbo's have to leave the North, West or South. I think it is just the barbaric nature of many Nigerians to reap where they do not sow that will make them want to take advantage of the situation to loot and force people out of their own homes.

stagger:

It was 20 pounds. You don't even know history.