Tuesday, April 12, 2016


THE BILL FOR AN ACT TO PROVIDE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE NATIONAL GRAZING RESERVE (ESTABLISHMENT AND DEVELOPMENT) COMMISSION FOR THE PRESERVATION AND CONTROL OF NATIONAL GRAZING RESERVES AND STOCK ROUTES AND OTHER MATTERS CONNECTED THEREWITH, IS A BID TO LEGISLATE THE SULTANATE OF NIGERIA INTO BEING!

Sub-Theme: The moment the slave resolves that he will no longer be a slave, his fetters fall. He frees himself and shows the way to others. Freedom and Slavery are mental states - Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948)


The Bill for an Act to provide for the Establishment of National Grazing Reserve (Establishment and Development) Commission for the Preservation and Control of  National Grazing Reserves and Stock Routes and other Matters Connected therewith, which has passed through the second reading in the National Assembly is one of the biggest affront the Muslim Hausa-Fulani has inflicted on Nigeria since 1914. Reason is in the intention of Bill, which is a desperation to effectively convert Nigeria to the Sultanate of Nigeria. This Bill is a re-incarnation of Senate Bill No. SB. 114 and House Bill No. 11.10.30 with same title killed by patriots after Second Reading in 2011.

The genealogy of the Muslim Hausa-Fulani movement to effectuate the Sultanate of Nigeria is as follows:
The Tiv riots of the 1960s was as a result of the well-organized Tiv resistance to Islamization. Chief Joseph Sarwuan Tarka effectively led that struggle under the political organization United Middle Belt Congress (UMBC). Unfortunately he joined the oligarchy to fight Biafra and after the war lost focus. He thought that the Middle-Belt travail was over with the death of Sir Ahmadu Bello and the Middle-Belt sitting on the same table to share the booty of defeating Biafra. He was caught down to size and died on 30th March 1980, perhaps with a lot of lesson learnt.
The Western Nigeria crisis of 1961-66 was the Yoruba dimension of that scheme - the Action Group crisis, the Coker Commission of Inquiry, the treasonable felony trial and the Chief Obafemi Awolowo conviction, imprisonment and the shenanigans of the Chief Justice of Nigeria - Sir Adetokunbo Ademola to trade with Awo's physical confinement with the psychological; the rigged 1964-65 federal and regional elections in Western Nigeria; the revolt in operation wetie; and the January 1966 coup d'état which halted Nigeria's slide.
 The May riots of 1966, the kill-back coup of July 1966, the pogrom of October/November 1966, the denial of federal allocation and relief for 1.129 million internally displaced persons who escaped from the killing fields of the rest of Nigeria to Eastern Nigeria as refugees; other denials that provoked and drove Eastern Nigeria to rebellion into Biafra, thereby giving the oligarchy the opportunity to teach the East a lesson for daring to halt the move to colonise Nigeria; the 1967-70 Jihad (otherwise branded Civil War, even though everything about the war was uncivil); and the ultimate victimization of the SouthEast to permanently silence the zone's opposition to the Islamization project.
The empowerment of charlatans in the South-East to confuse the politics of the zone.
The 1986 unilateral entry of Nigeria into the OIC ( Organization of Islamic  Conference, later Cooperation) - an Organization formed  in 1969 by the Islamic world to fight Israel for the liberation of Al-Aqsa Mosque, Islam third holiest site (lost in the 1967 Six-Day War); in spite of the over 55% Nigerians who are Christians and traditional worshippers Who have no grouse with Israel
The Federal Government-sponsored Abuja1989 Islam-in-Africa Conference Resolutions most of which ignored the multi-religious nature and Constitution of Nigeria and set the ball rolling for the overt efforts at Islamization of Nigeria; some of the most outrageous of the resolutions being:
 To eradicate in all its forms and ramifications all non-Muslim religions in member nations (such religions shall include Christianity, Ahmadiyya and other tribal modes of worship unacceptable to Muslims);
(b) To ensure the appointment of only Muslims into strategic national and international posts of member nations;
(c) To ensure that only Muslims are elected to all political posts of member countries;
(d)To support the establishment and application of the Shari'a to all Muslims;
(e)To ensure the declaration of Nigeria (the 24th African and World member of the OIC) a Federal Islamic Sultanate at a convention on any day from 28th March 1990, with the Sultan of Sokoto enthroned the Sultan and Supreme Sovereign of Nigeria;
(f) To ensure the ultimate replacement of all western forms of legal and judicial systems with the Shari'a in all member nations before the next Islam in Africa Conference.
 In addition hundreds of millions of USDollars of Nigeria's resources were invested by General Babangida in the Conference, it's Abuja permanent headquarters and the London operations office.
7. General Sani Abacha unilateral registration of Nigeria as a member of D-8 (Developing-8), an organization formed in 1996 for development "cooperation among major Muslim developing countries" - Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Malaysia, Pakistan, Turkey and Nigeria.

8. As a follow-up to the Abuja Islam-in-Africa 1989 Conference, the 1999/2000 proclamation of Sharia in Twelve States of the North in clear contravention of Section 10 of Nigeria's Constitution which states: The government of The Federation or a State shall not adopt any religion as State Religion. This was greeted by riots and President Obasanjo who was installed by the oligarchy reneged in his duty to crush the obvious rebellion against the Nigerian Constitution. Instead, he rationalized his lack of political will to defend the Constitution by declaring the Sharia proclamation political. Of course it is ordinarily known that Islam is a highly political Religion whose Doctrine demands total possession of body and soul of adherents;and is territorial, requiring to regulate life totally in any geographical space where it reigns. This the reason behind the permanent turmoil in Nigeria. Saudi Arabia and all other fundamentalist Islamic States adopt Quran, the Holy Book of Islam and Sharia Law as their organic law.

9. Proclamation of Sharia in Nigeria has the very stoutest of support by all Moslem leaders of the Northeast and Northwest. Southern apologists of the oligarchy deceive themselves when they rationalize exclusions of prominent leaders known to them from the two zones.

, “I will continue to show openly and inside me the total commitment to the Sharia movement that is sweeping all over Nigeria . . . God willing, we will not stop the agitation for the total implementation of the Sharia in the country."

“It is the legal responsibility which God has given us, within the concept of one Nigeria, to continue to uphold the practice of Sharia whole heartedly, and to educate non-Muslims that they have nothing to fear, . . . What remains for Muslims in Nigeria is for them to redouble their efforts, educate Muslims on the need to promote the full implementation of Sharia law.”
   
(Former Head of State, Gen. Muhammed Buhari ( now President) in a seminar organized by the Supreme Council for Sharia in Nigeria in Kaduna, August 2001).

In the light of the forgoing, the reaction of President Buhari to any Bill from the National Assembly  proclaiming Sharia all over Nigeria is unlikey to need a second guess.
10.  Following on the popularity of Sharia in the North in 2002, Mohammed Yussuf established Boko Haram in Borno and the sole objective was to compel Sharia implementation, first all, over the North, and subsequently all over the Federation.
The oligarchy is highly sophisticated and stealthy in execution of Jihadism in its Islamization program, but the ordinary folk is not. The oligarchy often will use Jihad of Words and Deception (political maneuvering ) and would stealthily employ Jihad of the Sword (violence - riots and warfare) using the ordinary folks, whenever Jihad of Words and Deception fail. This is how the rampage and brutality which Boko Haram brought in its wake, particularly after its leader was extra- judicially murdered, followed. However, the feudal lords later felt threatened when Boko Haram started killing Emirs & enthroning their own Emirs, after it got internationalized by affiliation with ISIS.

By 2012 when it became obvious that the "infidel "occupying Aso Rock was reneging on his 2011 undertaking not to contest the  2015 election , the North's political class found and exploited  Boko Haram as very potent weapon for the election.

11. ISMAT - Saudi Arabia-led Coalition against ISIS: In 2016 President Buhari announced that Nigeria is joining ISMAT, a Saudi- led coalition of Sunni
Islamic countries to fight ISIS. Not a whimper from Non-Moslem leaders in Nigeria. Section 12 of the Nigerian Constitution requires any external treaty made by the executive branch to be ratified by the National Assembly (NASS).  Reaction of the NASS is awaited on this bigoted presidential decision. Non-Moslems of Nigeria must mobilize to oppose this rape of Nigerian Constitution.
12. Cattle Fulani Herdsmen Militancy:
    Militancy of Cattle Fulani herdsmen became a nation-wide scourge from about 2011 and increased in intensity from year to year. Presently, Cattle Fulani herdsmen militancy is the most ominous threat to national security, by far more than Boko Haram, because it is nation-wide.
Organized and registered as Miyetti Allah Breeders Association of Nigeria (MACBAN), their chief patron is the Sultan. It is hoped that General Buhari, on becoming Head of State of Nigeria, has resigned as a patron of MACBAN. The owners of the cattle ranging all over Nigeria are the most prominent and influential Fulanis – traditional and religious leaders, top political and administrative office holders, foremost security officers including generals etc. The herdsmen are mere minders and therefore enjoy unlimited protection from their owners. The herdsmen seem to obey no laws of Nigeria and even refuse to attend peace conferences in communities where they commit these atrocities for which the security agencies never arrest them.                                                        

On 24th February, 2014 Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association of Nigeria (MACBAN) exhibited how much above the Law the Cattle Fulani herdsmen are by  writing then President Goodluck Jonathan a highly provocative letter titled, “Mr. President, Call Governor Suswan to Order Before It is Too Late” in which they not only threatened to deal with Governor Suswan of Benue State in his home State for allegedly assisting the Tivs of the Middle Belt to limit the herdsmen’s murderous activities in the Middle Belt. They also pejoratively reminded the President that their ranging across the country with their cattle is covered by Section 41, (1) of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees freedom of movement and settlement in all parts of Nigeria to all citizens of Nigeria. On10th March 2014, after an exchange of gun shots failed to get the Governor in a convoy, they attacked Mr. Suswan’s ancestral village, killed 25, and sacked the village plus 29 other communities within 25 kilometers radius. MACBAN had deliberately ignored in their letter to the President, the fact that the freedom of movement guaranteed by S.41 (1) refers only to Nigeria citizens and definitely not cattle, an item of trade whose movement is subject to regulation for society’s safety, comfort and convenience.  Besides, the right to freedom of movement under reference is not absolute since Section 45(1) of the same Constitution subordinates those rights to any reasonable law enacted in “the interest of defense, public safety, public order, public morality or public health; or for the purpose of protecting the rights and freedom of other persons.” Imagine Cattle rearers and their owners threatening a State Governor in his own State through the President of the Country and being able to execute that threat! The audacity of it - above the law MACBAN.

For the avoidance of any doubt, Nigeria is not a major Cattle breeding nation of the world. According to 1990/92 Nigerian Livestock Resources (RIM) Survey estimates, Nigeria had less than 13.90 million cattle.  Major cattle breeding countries of the world, by 2009 figures have as high as 285 million cattle in India; 187,087,000 in Brazil; China 139,721,000; U.S.A. 96,669,000; EU 87,650,000,Argentina 51,062,000; Pakistan 38,300,000; Australia 29,202,000; Mexico  26,489,000. Pastoralism or free ranging of cattle is not practiced in most, if not all, of the above major cattle breeding nations, in the interest of economy, public safety and health. Pastoralism is therefore primitive, outmoded, uncivilized, and uneconomic; and has been long discarded by the civilized and productive world. No doubt pastoralism is one of the major factors that has held  North East and North-West Nigeria down as the poorest and most illiterate zones of Nigeria.
Thus by the Fulanis insisting on cattle breeding by pastoralism, they probably wish to return Nigeria to the Middle Ages and ipso facto  spread poverty and illiteracy. Nigeria, may be wishes to return to where USA was at the height of Cow Boy machismo, before ranching became compulsory under U.S. Law.
The North knows that more meat and milk can be got out of cattle bred in ranches and knows also that cattle breeding is business and therefore cattle breeders ought to buy their ranches and government should not award ranches to ranchers.

The Bill for an Act to provide for the Establishment of National Grazing Reserve (Establishment and Development) Commission for the Preservation and Control of  National Grazing Reserves and Stock Routes and other Matters Connected therewith,  is therefore not any thing about business.

It is an act of DOMINION. It is an Act that seeks to legalize the declaration of Nigeria (the 24th African and World member of the OIC) a Federal Islamic Sultanate . . . , as resolved in Abuja-Islam-in Africa Conference of 1989.

The details of that bill, is not as relevant as its intent. The arrogance in the intent of the sponsors of this Bill is obvious.

By 2013, the Fulani population in Nigeria was estimated at 7 million out of 150 million estimate for Nigeria.
Fulanis are nomadic and very protective of their cattle. They have no regard for people's right to life, property and decency. They therefore kill, maim, rape and destroy property indiscriminately. They are invariably armed with military assault weapons contrary to Nigerian Law; and therefore very dangerous to society.
The intended Bill is therefore intended to legitimize the impunity of a tiny minority of Nigerians in criminality.
The arrogance and impunity intended in this Bill is most manifest in a section of the Bill which provides as follows: No Court of law shall carry out execution of its judgment or attachment of court process issued against the Commission in any action or suit without obtaining the prior consent of the Attorney General of the Federation. The Bill wishes to subordinate Nigerian Courts to the Executive branch in issues concerning the Fulani, contrary to the Constitution, contrary to application of the law to over 95% of Nigerians!

The Cattle Fulani herdsmen, armed with military assault weapons have over the past five years been killing, maiming, raping Nigerians in their ancestral homes with careless abandon in obvious connivance with the Nigerian Army and Police who overlook the illegality of the weapons they carry and back them up whenever they are overwhelmed in counter-attacks by farmers/villagers. The case of 76 villagers allegedly kidnapped by the Army in Ugwuneshi community of Awgu LGA in Enugu State, transported across state lines, and thereafter illegally arraigned in Abia magistrate Court, is a typical of the Army and Police complicity with the herdsmen.
Establishing grazing reserves in every State of Nigeria for Cattle Fulani herdsmen, would therefore amount to granting and legalizing sanctuaries for herdsmen from which they would subdue communities as they may be directed by MACBAN and/or their patrons, any time it pleases the overlords. Plateau, Nassarawa, Benue, Taraba and Southern Kaduna are all now experiencing this level of invasion. Agatu in Benue State with 300 dead in the hands of the herdsmen and subsequent occupation plus over 10,000 cattle, protected by soldiers, is a nightmare no one would wish himself in his own ancestral home!

The long-term implications of this Bill is unfathomable. The satellite Fulani communities the grazing reserves will generate, would in 25-50 years time  generate enough population to contest LGA chairmanship elections that would be determined by orgies of violence. With the Hausa/Fulani tradition, average family size is 20-28 against ours which is 5-7. The Jos - North experience of 2008 would be playing out nation-wide. Hausa/Fulani loss of Jos-North LGA 2008 chairmanship election resulted in the hriot with 500 deaths (126 Igbos) because a Berom candidate assisted by Igbos, won. Fifty rioters arrested under Inspector-General of Police,  Mr. Ogbonna Okechukwu Onovo, were ordered to be taken to Abuja where they were instantly and unconditionally released on arrival. President Yardua was in Aso Rock.

With the grazing reserves providing a safe staging ground, the Fulanis would always use ceaseless riots & indiscriminate massacre to intimidate change of policies anywhere they establish substantial presence, given their proclivity for violence; and  the domination of local security agencies by their kinsmen. It has just been confirmed that the Divisional Police officers in Awgu LGA and neighboring Abia State DPO who are both of the same stock with the herders, along with the soldiers and security zonal commands, played major roles in the recent kidnap and trafficking of the 76  Ugwuneshi -Awgu villagers to Umuahia.

13. The Apparent Silence of  South-East Political Elite in the Rampage of Fulani Herdsmen and other Acts of Violence:
The empowerment by outside influences of South-Eastern businessmen and politicians is a major constraint on representation of South-East views in the Nigerian polity - outside influences on election/ selection/appointment  to public offices. The fear of arrest and prosecution by Federal Security Agencies for those who compromised themselves whilst in office is another factor. The same time, major Igbo businesses who need licenses or patronages from the Centre would not wish to engender their businesses by speaking out or supporting the oppression of their people.
An irony plays out. Governor Ayo Fayose and Chief Femi Femi Kayode, both Yoruba, now become the only two prominent voices against the oppression of the Igbo in Nigeria.

14. The Inexplicable Silence/Failure of Nigerian Church Leaders particularly in the South-East
Nigerian Church leadership has neither an Archbishop Desmond Tutu nor a Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. They all seem to be playing it safe whilst Muslim leaders got away with OIC, D8, Sharia proclamation and all the other extreme provocations. Confronted, a Bishop called for prayers and I quickly reminded him that prayers are not enough. Positive action is urgently required. The Parable of Talents in Matthew 25:14-30 teaches all Christians that God is not God of the indolent. Prayers alone would deliver no returns hence the heroism of  Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King and Arch-Bishop Desmond Tutu. Ndigbo si na onye alachara  onu ya, ugulu alachalu ya  (the harmattan would lick the lips of any one who fails to lick his, during the harmattan).
The churches should invest some of the billions of Naira they use in building Cathedrals, expensive parsonages for priests and Bishops and duplication of Church halls in mass mobilization of option in and out of Nigeria by means of advertorials, publications, press conferences, sponsored TV discussions, demonstrations; and local/international litigations and other forms of reactions against violations of human rights of Christians and other Nigerians, Sharianisation of Nigeria, indiscriminate trampling on the Nigerian Constitution and destruction of the spirit of the federation by various governments of the Federation. If they are afraid to publicly do so, surrogates are easily available. The faith the Chritianity suffered in the hands of Islam in Europe before the Crusades could be that of Christianity in Nigeria.

15. ACTION PLAN AGAINST GRAZING RESERVE BILLS

It was Edmund Burke (1729-1797) the British statesman and conservative political theorist who said, “the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”. Mr. Nadezhda Mandelstam (1899-1980) Russian writer and educator, in his memoir about his live with his poet wife in the gulag under repressive Stalinist regime titled “Hope Against Hope” (1970) enjoined all good people that “if nothing else is left, one must scream. Silence is the real crime against Humanity”.

The grazing reserve movement has been defeated before in 2011 but the climate in Abuja was changed by the 2015 election. One their own - the MACBA N is in Aso Rock and no chances need be taken.

Publicity of oppression of any kind and violations of fundamental human rights and Constitution is therefore important. Tyrants are not only enemies of freedom but also thieves of liberty. The world of today is much more humane than the 1950-60s Cold War world. Information against tyrants can break down walls of indifference in world opinion. Today information rules the world.
Advertorials in prominent national newspapers, publications, press conferences, sponsored TV discussions, demonstrations are imperative to woo world against tyranny, religious intolerance and human rights violation.

 Local and International Litigations
The monster before us is Jihadism and Jihadists never let go. They fight to death believing as Jihadists that death in the Holy War is passport to paradise. Islamic doctrine teaches all Moslems that those who die in the holy war (Jihad) are guaranteed paradise.
“The person who participates in Jihad (Holy Battles) in Allah’s cause and nothing compels him to do so except belief in Allah and His Apostle, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward or booty (if he survives) or will be admitted to paradise (if he is killed).” (Hadith/Sunnah Vol. 1:3).

Fundamentalist Col. Muammar Gaddafi of Libya and Saddam Hussein of Iraq, both fought to death.

16. Litigation Option
 After sensitization, some superior force is required to compel change in the Jihadists dominating Nigerian polity.
The only available force to Ndigbo is Action in both Municipal and International Courts.
Those who do not believe that the price of liberty is eternal vigilance and that non-violent change requires perseverance and patience, will simplistically dismiss this option saying:
 (a) Nigerian courts are dominated dominated by Hausa-Fulani and will delay suits to death; and
 (b) external litigation is expensive and could go on forever.
To these two reactions I question: What is the alternative cause of action to compel tyrants to mend their ways? Duck under the table, make all the money and fake life enjoyment in the midst of the mental torture of enslavement which is where Ndigbo unfortunately are today; and the end of the day, bequeath enslavement to posterity!

Famous and late indefatigable human rights lawyer, Chief Gani Fawehinmi, whilst representing me in a suit to free me from being jailed by Governor Jim Nwobodo in 1979/80, told me that he used to take governments to court repeatedly, not because he hoped to win all the time, but that sworn affidavits in suits enable him expose the ugly under-belly of people in government (disclosures which otherwise would have been libelous).
Finally and most importantly, well- documented evidence can and will always result in victories in courts locally and internationally.

17.  Successful litigations against government of Nigeria and world leaders.

For Odi massacre of 20th November 1999 in which 1,000 to 2,500 were killed, Odi community sued the Federal government for 1,000 lives lost and destruction of the community, claiming 100billion Naira compensation, an order of the court to rebuild the community and an apology. The court awarded Odi 37.6billion Naira compensation and a London Court compelled Nigeria to negotiate and settle for 15billion Naira prompt payout.
In the case of Zaki Biam, Massacre of October 2001, the Zaki Biam community sued the Federal Government for 100-200 lives lives lost and several thousands displaced asking for compensation of 200billion Naira. The court awarded 41.8billion Naira. A settlement of 8billion Naira was negotiated and paid.
In the case of Chief Anthony Enahoro, Dr. Arthur Nwankwo, Femi Aborisade, Owens Wiwa, Chief Gani Fawehinmi, and Hafsat Abiola, Plaintiffs-appellees, v. General Abdulsalami Abubakar, Defendant-appellant (408 F.3d 877 7th Cir. 2005, Annotate this Case U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit - 408 F.3d 877 (7th Cir. 2005), Argued January 10, 2005, Decided May 23, 2005), the plaintiffs had sued Nigeria's three former Military Heads of State and Chief Ernest Shonekan for torture, death, unlawful detention and violations of fundamental human rights. After the Appeal Court ruled that General Abubakar, who was the only of the four properly served while receiving honor done to him by Chicago State University, was not covered by any immunity out of office and therefore should answer the charges, the Federal Government of Nigeria was compelled, on advice by U.S. State Department, to negotiate settlement with Chief Arthur Nwankwo and Hafsat Abiola (on behalf of Abiola family), the two subsisting plaintiffs in the suit, the others having defaulted in appearance/or deposition. Chief Nwankwo confirmed to me that EKWENCHE Organization of Chicago (a reputable and established Igbo irredentist group) was instrumental to success of the suit by ensuring personal service of Gen. Abubakar through the organization's attorney.
18. Convictions by International Courts for Acts of Genocide:
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia: June 2010 after several plea bargains and some convictions that were successfully challenged on appeal, several of the accused were found guilty of committing genocide, conspiracy to commit genocide and aiding and abetting genocide. Several      members of the Bosnian Serb security forces were also found guilty of genocide by the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Slobodan Milošević, as the former President of Serbia and of Yugoslavia, was the most senior political figure to stand trial at the ICTY. He died on 11 March 2006 during his trial where he was accused of genocide or complicity in genocide in territories within Bosnia and Herzegovina; so no verdict was returned.                                                                                                         Radoan Karadzic, the former Bosnian Serb leader, was convicted  on March 24, 2016 of ten of the eleven charges laid against him and sentenced to 40 years in prison for genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity by a United Nations tribunal on Thursday, March 24, 2016 for leading a campaign of terror against civilians in the deadliest conflict in Europe since World War II. Mr. Karadzic, 70, was sentenced to 40 years in prison for his role in lethal ethnic cleansing operations, the siege of Sarajevo and the slaughter of 8,000 Muslim men and boys in Srebrenica in 1995, in proceedings that were likened to the Nuremberg trials of former Nazi leaders. The trial was the most important in the 23-year history of the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, and a defining test for the entire system of international justice.
Karadzic conviction is a forceful manifestation of the international community’s implacable commitment to accountability. The conviction offered a note of closure to the bloodiest European conflict since World War II, a civil war that tore apart the former Yugoslavia and left more than 100,000 people dead.
(I International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (1994 to present)
The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) was a court under the auspices of the United Nations for the prosecution of offenses committed in Rwanda during the genocide which occurred there during April 1994, commencing on 6 April. The ICTR was created on 8 November 1994 by the Security Council of the United Nations in order to judge those people responsible for the acts of genocide and other serious violations of the international law performed in the territory of Rwanda, or by Rwandan citizens.
So far, the ICTR has finished nineteen trials and convicted twenty seven accused persons. On 14 December 2009 two more men were accused and convicted for their crimes. Another twenty five persons are still on trial. Twenty-one are awaiting trial in detention, two more added on 14 December 2009. Ten are still at large. The first trial, of Jean-Paul Akayesu, began in 1997. In October 1998, Akayesu was sentenced to life imprisonment. Jean Kambanda, interim Prime Minister, pleaded guilty and was convicted.
(iii) The International Criminal Court
Since 2002, the International Criminal Court can exercise its jurisdiction if national courts are unwilling or unable to investigate or prosecute genocide, thus being a "court of last resort," leaving the primary responsibility to exercise jurisdiction over alleged criminals to individual states. Due to the United States concerns over the ICC, the United States prefers to continue to use specially convened international tribunals for such investigations and potential prosecutions.
(a) Darfur, Sudan
In March 2005, the Security Council formally referred the situation in Darfur to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), taking into account the Commission's report but without mentioning any specific crimes.
In April 2007, the Judges of the ICC issued arrest warrants against the former Minister of State for the Interior, Ahmad Harun, and a Militia Janjaweed leader, Ali Kushayb, for crimes against humanity and war crimes.
On 14 July 2008, prosecutors at the ICC, filed ten charges of war crimes against Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir: three counts of genocide, five of crimes against humanity and two of murder. The ICC's prosecutors claimed that al-Bashir "masterminded and implemented a plan to destroy in substantial part" three tribal groups in Darfur because of their ethnicity.
On 4 March 2009, the ICC issued a warrant of arrest for Omar Al Bashir, President of Sudan as the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I concluded that his position as head of state does not grant him immunity against prosecution before the ICC. The warrant was for war crimes and crimes against humanity. It did not include the crime of genocide because the majority of the Chamber did not find that the prosecutors had provided enough evidence to include such a charge. Omar Al Bashir, President of Sudan remains a wanted criminal in ICC  records and could be arrested any time. Last year he managed to escape arrest in South Africa whilst attending AU meeting  because the South African government collaborated in his escape.
(b) Conviction of Charles Taylor by I.C.C.
The first African president to be prosecuted at the International Court Court, Charles Taylor, was in April 2002 found guilty on 11 count charges for aiding and abetting war crimes and crimes against humanity and for supporting rebels who carried out atrocities in Sierra Leone in return for "blood diamonds".The historic judgment leaves Charles Taylor, the former president of Liberia, facing a lengthy term in a British prison and has set a precedent that Heads of State can no longer consider themselves immune to international justice.
After four years of hearings at the UN-backed special court for Sierra Leone in the Hague, the former warlord was convicted on 11 charges including murder, rape, sexual slavery and enforced amputations.
                                               
19. WORST  ENEMY OF NDIGBO IN THE FIGHT FOR LIBERATION:
The worst enemy of NDIGBO in the struggle for liberation is complacency and acceptance of the statuesque by Igbo political, intellectual & business elite, quite often resulting from absence and/ or lack of information.
As people defeated in a war, Igbo elite seem to resign themselves to present enslavement which has now attained its apogee with the Bill for an Act to Establish the National Grazing Route and Reserve Commission, to establish and control Grazing Routes and Reserves in all parts of Nigeria; and for Other Matters Related Thereto (HB. 388 sponsored by Karimi Steven). This Bill must not see the light of the day. It violates various aspects of the Nigerian Federal Constitution. The government of Nigeria must be brought to justice for Igbo mass killings from the 1966 pogrom till date, including recent IPOB mass murders.

20. Proposed measures:                                                                                                (a) Location of markets and movement of cattle within States fall under the residual functions of States. States should therefore enact laws limiting movement of cattle by road to motorized transportation and/or rail; and their sale only in designated markets.
Twelve northern States from 1999-2000 enacted Sharia laws criminalizing movement, sale and/or consumption of alcohol in their various States and these laws are being enforced with even Sharia Police (Hizbah) created by state law in states like Kano, in flagrant violation of Section 10 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended); Cattle should be bred in the savannas of the North and transported to markets in the South, not on hoofs, but in vehicles.
 The Cattle Fulani herdsmen, whose proclivity for violence is at pick with non-Moslems, need orientation on the rights of every Nigerian citizen to life, property and decency before they venture outside their home States;                                                                                                                                      
(b) The Churches and wealthy businessmen must mobilize demonstrations, vigil, advertorials, sponsored editorials and articles, sponsored TV and radio discussions by well-informed discussants, against this bill; and funding of litigations by organized groups. Those who are afraid to be identified as sponsors should consider use of surrogate bodies or institutions.
(c) The Nigerian Police must enforce the existing laws on sophisticated weapons carried by these herdsmen and also enforce state laws on movement of cattle, whenever such laws are enacted;                                                                                                                                                                                          (d) States in the SE zone must reinvigorate animal husbandry as initiated by Dr. Michael Okpara’s Eastern Regional government of the 1960s to produce more live stock from within.                                                                                                                   (e) There shall be an Igbo Institute where dedicated thinkers should be permanently addressing Igbo issues like the Jewish Institute.                                                                                                           Thinkers are imperative for every (particularly the endangered) ethnic nationality.  (f) The Federal Government must assist states in the establishment of ranches and enhanced animal husbandry.                                                                                                                              (g) All political, religious and traditional leaders in the North who are sincere on indivisibility or indissolubility of the Nigerian Federation must openly condemn the nefarious activities of Hausa/Fulani herdsmen whose activities threaten Nigerian federation even more than Boko Haram.
(h) If Nigeria must survive, efforts must be made by all concerned in the North to reform Islamic fundamentalism, as it is practiced in most of the North-West and North-East, to liberal or moderate Islam as it is practiced in such progressive Moslem nations as Turkey and Malaysia and in the South-West zone of Nigeria. Islamic fundamentalism, NOT ISLAM per se, is antithetical to federalism in a religiously plural state. It is intolerant of any other Religion and both are mutually exclusive. Let us stop deceiving ourselves. Wherever they mix, there is constant friction resulting in violence. It is my profound view that Criminal Code Sharia Law, the bedrock of Islamic fundamentalism, is antithetical to Common Law and therefore inconsistent with secular democracy. Controversies in managing the two have resulted in Muslims being involved in over 90% of all the wars and terrorism in the world of today.
(i) Ndigbo must reclaim a liberated OHANAEZE NDIGBO to serve Igbo interest and not any parochial interests.
21. READ MY NEXT POSTING ON HOW TO MAKE NIGERIA PAY FOR ACTS OF GENOCIDE AGAINST THE IGBO FROM1966 UP RECENT IPOB KILLING THROUGH SUPPORT FOR LITIGATIONS LEAD BY EKWENCHE & International Society for Civil Liberties & the Rule of Law, Onitsha, Southeast Nigeria. Check them out at  EKWENCHE at www.ekwenche.org and Intersociety @ www.intersociety-ng.org

Friday, March 18, 2016

AGITATION FOR THE RIGHT TO SELF DETERMINATION IS LAWFUL & PROTEST AGAINST ENSLAVEMENT

AGITATION FOR THE RIGHT TO SELF DETERMINATION IS LAWFUL & PROTEST AGAINST ENSLAVEMENT

Sub-Theme:This nation cannot survive half slave and half free - Abraham Lincoln.

Separatism or the advocacy or practice of separation of a certain group of people from a larger body on the basis of ethnicity, religion, or gender is in both Nigerian and international law inherent and inalienable right of the peoples of Nigeria.

Self Determination Provisions in the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (UN ICCPR)
The United Nations General Assembly on 16th Dec. 1966,  in a bid to minimize the abridgment of minority rights by over-bearing majorities in member states , adopted the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) which came into force on 23rd March 1976. Nigeria ratified this Covenant on 29th July, 1993.
The first article of ICCPR emphasizes the premium the UN places on peoples’ right to self determination in unions in member states.
Part I, Article 1 provides that “All peoples have the right of self-determination.” And “By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.” Part II, Article 2 (1) binds “Each State party to the Covenant to undertake to respect and ensure to all individuals within its territory and subject to its jurisdiction the rights 
recognized in the present Covenant, without distinction of any kind . . . .“ Article 2 (2) further binds
all parties to the Covenant, to domesticate the provisions of the Covenant into their national laws and
“adopt such laws or other measures as may be necessary to give effect to the rights recognized in this
Covenant.” Article 2 (3) compels each state party to undertaking to ensure remedy for its citizens
whose rights under this Covenant have been violated or denied.”

Self Determination Provisions in the African Charter on Human and Political Rights (ACHPR)
Finding the UN ICCPR as a very critical document for stabilizing unions in Federations, the Organization of African Unity (OAU), now African Union (AU), on 27th June 1981, in its Summit meeting in Banjul, Gambia, adopted its on charter to regulate civil and political rights in the African continent. This is what is now known as the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) (also called Banjul Charter). Article 20 of the Charter is centered on the Right to Self Determination of constituents of member states.
 (1)”All peoples shall have the right to existence. They shall have the unquestionable and inalienable right to self-determination. They shall freely determine their political status and shall pursue their 
economic and social development according to the policy they have freely chosen.”
(2)”Colonized or oppressed peoples shall have the right to free themselves from the bonds of 

domination by resorting to any means recognized by the international community.”
(3)”All peoples shall have the right to the assistance of the State Parties to the present Charter in their liberation struggle against foreign domination, be it political, economic or cultural.”
The ACHR came into effect in all AU member nations on 21st October 1986 when over 50% of AU member states had ratified it. Nigeria signed the charter on 31st August 1982, ratified it on 22nd June 1983 and deposited it with the African Commission on Human Rights on 22nd July 1983. The African Human Rights Commission headquartered in Banjul, Gambia, regulates the ACHR and serves as a court on violations of its provisions by member States.

Domestication of ACHPR by Nigeria:
Nigeria further domesticated ACHR as its own municipal law by its enactment of the African Charter on Human and peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act 1983 (now Cap. 10 Laws of the
Federation of Nigeria, 1990).
Separatism or aspiration for separation from a Nigeria is therefore within the laws of UN, AU
and Nigeria.

Salutary Effect of Provision for the Right to Self-Determination:
The essence of entrenching the right to self-determination in the laws of federations is not necessarily to cause disintegration. The provision at the end of the day, helps in fostering more genuine unity and strengthens longer lasting and peaceful polity than unity forced on an entity by laws which pay no regard to the feelings and reactions of the divergent peoples of a federation.
Entrenching the right to self determination in the laws of any federation and the option of its assertion, therefore helps to curb the excessive arrogance of the majority (like the oligarchy in Nigeria) by ensuring equality of all before the Law.  It thus ensures that minority rights are protected.
Equality and mutual respect between the peoples comprising it, are two inherent principles of
federation, in the absence of which there is acrimony and alienation, as is prevalent in 201 Nigeria.
Assertion of the right to self determination therefore compels mutual respect in federations between
minorities and the majority groups. The absence of that right results in enslavement of minorities and
consequent alienation.
The resolution of two Separatist agitations in Canada and UK, confirm that the exercise of the right to self determination, does not necessarily lead to secession.
 It is this right that entitled the French Roman Catholic Canadians of Quebec province who constitute only 23.07% (8.10 million) of Canada’s 35.1 million (2014) to twice freely test in referenda (1980 & 1995) their wish to separate or remain with the rest of English-speaking CanadianProtestant Pentecostals. By  Official Languages Act (1969), Canada adopted English and French as official languages of Canada.  The 1960 Canadian Bill of Rights was the country's first federal law to protect human rights and fundamental freedom. Considered groundbreaking at the time, it was eventually superseded by the 1982 Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. These Acts among other things,
further helped to reassure protection for minorities' rights.  It is worthy of note that Mr. Joseph
Philippe Pierre Yves Elliott Trudeau, a Quebecer and  the 15th Prime Minister of Canada  (1968
-1979 & 1980-1984) and 5th of eleven  Quebecers who have been Prime ministers, was in office
during the 1980 referendum.  Quebecers found no reason to leave Canada and therefore chose to remain. Rejection of secession was again repeated in the 1995 referendum.

The Scottish Independence referendum of Sept. 18, 2014 for the Scots, who make up only 8.32% of the UK population, is one of the most patent demonstrations of a liberal world’s assertion that “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” (United Nations Declaration of Human Rights - UDHR Article 1) and of UK's compliance with Article1 of United Nations International Convention on Civil and Political Rights ( UN ICCPR): “All People have the right of Self Determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status . . .”
The British Prime Minister took time after the vote to explain that Britain had no legal framework for
 the referendum but on account of the human rights implications of the Scottish agitation, he had to
introduce an Order-in-Council which was supported by all political parties, and that enabled the
referendum.  London and Scottish Parliaments ratified the Order-in-Council, thereby setting up the
vote. The government of United Kingdom set up an all-party committee and ensured that most Scottish grounds for separation were ameliorated or removed. On September 18, 2014, the Scottish Nation Party, the promoters of Scottish separatism, consequently lost the vote.

IPOB and MASSOB Agitation is Lawful 
IPOB and  MASSOB are therefore breaking no laws by agitating for separation. Indeed, they are following international and Nigerian laws by peacefully expressing their dissatisfaction with failing Nigeria and their separatist wish. IPOB and MASSOB are doing what regional politicians did in
Quebec and Scotland, and what Catalonian politicians are presently doing in Spain. Most Nigerian
politicians, perhaps, out of fear of exclusion from dipping in the honey pot, invariably do not openly
identify with their people's aspiration. Besides, Nigerian electoral Act forbids registration of regional
parties whose sole purpose, like in Scotland, Quebec in Canada and Catalonia of Spain, would be
regional autonomy  or separation.

Rightful Reaction of the Federal Government of Nigeria to Separatist Agitation:
It is therefore the binding duty of the National  Assembly to enact a Bill authorizing Referendum in any area that might wish to exercise its right to self determination. Such enactment must provide that it is a vote in the State Assembly/Assemblies covering the area under separatist agitation that would
activate a referendum; and not the National Assembly any more.  A specified percentage majority vote in such State Assembly/Assemblies of the separatist area/areas   Must be required to activate
referendum. If the bill passes the area's legislative houses, then referendum must be conducted to
ascertain the people's definite preference.

Shooting Separatist Agitators is an International Crime Against Humanity:
Shooting agitators for separatism whilst demonstrating peacefully or praying for their aspiration, is therefore an international crime against humanity for which the Federal Government of Nigeria must
be held accountable to the International Criminal Court, and to other UN Commissions/Committees under protocols of other UN charters/ covenants; to the African Commission on Human Rights; and courts of various UN members under varying protocols of their municipal laws.
Nigeria's Indivisibility Bogey
Nigeria cannot claim indivisibility after allowing Bakassi to be excised from it and awarded to
Cameroon for the the assistance it gave to Nigeria during the war. Not even governments are allowed
in international law to approbate and reprobate. "Quod approbo non reprobo" (that which I approve, I
cannot disapprove).

The Supreme Courtof Nigeria Ruling on ACHPR (Ratification and Enforcement) Act 1983
(now Cap. 10 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1990).
The Supreme Court of Nigeria put to rest the issue of superiority of international treaties ratified by
Nigeria over national/municipal laws. In Appeal no. 44/1997, between General Sani Abacha,
Attorney-General of the Federation, State Security, Inspector-General of Police (appellants) versus
late indomitable Civl Rights Crusader, Chief Gani Fawehinmi (respondents) determined on Friday, 28th April 2000, in the lead judgement delivered by Hon. Justice Michael Ekundayo Ogundare. J.S.C, that ACHPR being a multi-lateral treaty, and having been enacted into law by the National Assembly, and incorporated into Nigeria's municipal (i.e. domestic) law by the African Charter on
Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act 1983, now Cap. 10 Laws of the
Federation of Nigeria 1990, became binding and our Courts are bound to give effect to it like all other
laws falling within the Judicial power of the Courts. By Cap. 10, the African Charter is therefore part
of the laws of Nigeria and like all other laws, the Courts must uphold it. The Charter gives to citizens
of member states of the Organisation of African Unity rights and obligations, which rights and
obligations are to be enforced by our Courts. The Supreme Court further determined that Cap. 10 being a statute with international flavour that whenever there is a conflict between it and another
statute, its provisions will prevail over those of that of other statute for the reason that it is presumed
that the legislature does not intend to breach an international obligation and that to this extent the Charter possesses "a greater vigour and strength" than any other domestic statute except the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, which is Nigeria's grand nun.

President Buhari's Declaration that he will not Tolerate Biafran Agitators:
The reaction of President Muhammad Buhari on issues of Self Determination underlines the
enslavement of our people in Nigeria.
Late in February 2016 in Qatar in answer to a question by a well-informed Martine Dennis in Al
Jazeera television studios on why Nigerian troops were massacring Biafran agitators for self
determination, President Buhari did not bother to deny the massacre of unarmed protesters, but appeared to have justified the killings.
"At least two millions Nigerians were killed in the Biafra war. And for somebody to wake up maybe they weren’t born. Looking for Biafra after two millions people were killed, they are joking with the 
security and Nigeria won’t tolerate Biafra,” declared President Buhari who appeared very angry that he had to answer questions on Biafrans being slaughtered  by his security agencies.
The ordinary dictionary definition of the word "tolerate" is  "allow the existence, occurrence, or practice of (something that one does not necessarily like or agree with) without interference."
For example "a regime unwilling to tolerate dissent" as expressed by President Buhari. Common
synonyms of the word "tolerate": allow, permit, condone, accept, swallow, countenance.
By uttering those words in the circumstance, the President of Nigeria outrightly asserted Nigeria's denial of Biafran agitators' fundamental rights to life, dignity of human person, personal liberty,
freedom of thought, of conscience, of expression, of peaceful assembly and association, of
movement; and from discrimination, all of which are guaranteed in Chapter IV of the Nigerian
Constitution; and further guaranteed by provisions in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UN UDHR), the UN International  Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (UN ICCPR) and  the African Charter on Human and Political Rights (ACHPR), all of which are ratified and domesticated
by Nigeria. Any human denied all of the above rights is no more a normal human, but a slave.

President Buhari Declares Support for Western Sahara and Palestine Rights to Self 
Determination:
President Buhari seemed to have rubbed in the enslavement  of Nigerians to the oligarchy, when  the
same time he denied Nigerians' right to Self Determination and appeared to have endorsed the
massacre of self determination agitators by Nigerian security agencies, he openly declared support for
the right to Self Determination of two Arab Moslem  self determination agitators of Western Sahara and of Palestine. What is good for the goose is perhaps not good for the gander, because perhaps, the gander is sub-human.

Self Determination Agitation is the only Meaningful Peaceful Way out of Enslavement:
IPOB and MASSOB self determination agitation,  might at the end of the day be the only meaningful challenge to the arrogance of the oligarchy that has enslaved both Yoruba, Igbo Ijaw, Efik, the Middle Belt and all other minorities, north or south of Nigeria. Equality and mutual respect emerges from
separatist advocacy if well and systematically engineered.
  As Rev.Martin Luther King learnt in the U.S. Civil rights agitation  and expressed in his biography:
 "We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it 
must be demanded by the oppressed."
And Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), one of the founding thinkers of USA, author, publisher,
inventor, scientist who in one of famous quotes prepared the ground for Rev. King's premise for liberation.
Rebellion against tyranny is obedience to God.

IPOB and MASSOB are demanding freedom for all enslaved people of Nigeria. Some may argue that we are not enslaved! The answers to and opinions on following everyday incidents in Nigeria would resolve the issue whether Nigeria is a free nation under the Rule of Law or, as it obvious, crawling
into medieval feudalism in slavery and enslavement.

Evidences of Enslavement:
Cattle Fulani Herdsmen Militancy:
 Over 400 killed and 7000 driven out of their ancestral homes into unkept refugee camps recently in Agatu in Benue State? Agatu Local Government Area is barely 40 kilometers from South-East northern most border, Obollo Afor, in Nsukka area. What about recent killings at Abbi Community, Nsukka, Enugu State among other killings and rapes all over the South-East,  Anioma in Delta State, the rest of South-South and South-West zones. Plateau, Nassarawa, Taraba, Kwara and Kogi States and Southern Kaduna are occupied territories and have lost their voices of protest in subjugation.

 Nigeria is not a major Cattle breeding nation of the world and that  according to 1990/92 Nigerian
Livestock Resources (RIM) Survey estimates, Nigeria had less than 13.90 million cattle  whereas
major cattle breeding countries of the world, by 2009 figures have as high as 285 million cattle in India; 187,087,000 in Brazil; China 139,721,000; U.S.A. 96,669,000; EU 87,650,000,Argentina
51,062,000; Pakistan 38,300,000; Australia 29,202,000; Mexico  26,489,000.
In all of the above countries, laws prohibit wandering of cattle which are restricted to ranches in the interest of public safety, health and economics of cattle breeding.
Nigeria is one of the very few countries in the world where cattle and herdsmen contest freedom of movement and property ownership with citizens under Fulani culture of  Pastorialism which is not only primitive, outmoded & uncivilized but also uneconomic; and has been long discarded by the civilized and productive world! A recent announcement by the Minister of Agriculture, Dr. Audu Ogbeh, that killings, abductions, rapes and sacking of communities by Fulani herdsmen would have to wait until the Federal government has imported grass seeds from Brazil and grown enough
enhanced grass for cattle. Dr. Ogbeh need be reminded that Section 14-((2)(b) of the Constitution of
Nigeria clearly states that  "the security and welfare of the people (not cattle) shall be the primary 
purpose of government;" and that it is armed Fulani militants masquerading under cover as herdsmen
who commit the havoc and need to be separated f  from the kafirs (unbelievers, in the own opinion)  who they wantonly attack.                                            

Kidnap, Rape, Confinement and Forced religious conversion of under-age Girls and Women:
 What about Ese Oruru's abduction from Bayelsa State to Kano State and forceful conversion to a religious faith she and neither of her parents have ever identified with? It is now known that the kidnap and forceful conversion of girls-children  and even adult women, is a common phenomenon  in the twelve Northern Sharia States of Nigeria. The Nigerian Police in those northern States has confessed  helplessness and loss of all the powers conferred on it by the Constitution and the Police Act. It is  instead subordinated to the assumed influence/powers (not conferred on them by the
Constitution of Nigeria)  of the Emirs and the Sharia/Emirate Councils/Hisbah Religious Police, who
invariably boast to the parents of kidnapped victims that their kidnap and forceful conversion/marriage of victims are irreversible by any State authority under The Nigerian Constitution, except them, the usurpers of citizens' rights. Victims have been kept incommunicado from families in some cases for several years before forced marriages. One needs imagine that the victim is one's daughter, grand-daughter or relative to appreciate the trauma affected Nigerian citizens are commonly subjected in these affected states of the North.
What syndrome compels such inhumanity against minors, and even adults, can be best explained by the perpetrators of these crimes against humanity!
Does anyone think that if that process is reversed and there is a kidnap and forceful conversion from Kano to Yenegoa, that this country would be as cool as it is for two weeks, not to think of  months and years, in some respects. The reaction of triumphalism by the feudal overlords of these Sharia
States to kidnap and forceful conversion/ marriage of femal minors puts a serious question mark to
the seriousness of fundamentalist Islam-dominated Federal bureaucracy in finding the Chibok girls.
Perhaps as the nation mourns its humiliation in the  Chibok saga, Nigeria's feudalist overlords celebrate their triumph behind porous veils. The  Bring-Back-our-Girls frenzy engendered by the outrage of the 279 girls abducted from Government Secondary School, Chibok, Borno State on 6th May 2014, might as well be comic melodrama.

 What about Miss Charity (Aisha) Uzoechina, 24-year-old daughter of Pastor Uzoechina of the Redeemed Christian Church of God, RCCG, who in 2013 was kidnapped from Federal Polytechnic, Bida, Niger State, and today is one of the harem women of the Etsu Nupe, in Niger State, having under influence, renounced her family and faith?

Conspiracy of Silence:
What gives the Hausa-Fulani, a right to roam Nigeria, killing indigenes of the Middle Belt and Southern Nigeria in their ancestral homes, and boldly take over ancestral lands, the same time the Hausa-Fulani drive other Nigerians away from their Northwest and North-East home lands with religious intolerance, oral and physical violence, which acts of impunity are now common place, since the Federal Government Security Agencies, by acts of omission and commission, openly endorse these above-the-Law privileges?
If Nigeria is not a slave camp for people outside the oligarchy, can someone explain why State Governors and Houses of Assemblies of the States ravaged by Cattle Fulani militants are unable to prohibit movement of cattle on hoof; and limit their movement to rail and/or motorized transportation by enactment of State Laws since the Nigerian Constitution empowers States to regulate markets and
livestock movement under Commerce and Agriculture?
The National Assembly (NASS) is also complicit by its uncommon silence over this notorious saga.
Representatives of the enslaved in the National Assembly, have abandoned their constituents and kept mum, perhaps in the interest of the Slavers. NASS is also complicit  by its deafening silence on cattle Fulani herds men's indiscriminate violations of citizen's fundamental rights.
Prisoners have rights regulated by Law but Slaves have no rights except as arbitrarily granted by their masters.

Conclusion:
The Igbo have a saying. Oru full ka eji mbazu eni ibe ya malu na etua ka ogadi mbosi nke ya (Literally meaning - a slave who witnesses the burial of a slave with  traditionally forbidden spear, must note that his own burial, whenever it will be, will take the same forbidden pattern.

"This nation cannot survive half slave and half free,"  declared Abraham Lincoln years before he went to war as U.S. 16th President (1861-65) to liberate all Slaves in the United States.

May God Help us!

Emeka Onyesoh

President, Forum for National Ethos and Values, Enugu.
17th March 2016.
                                                                                 















Thursday, March 3, 2016

THE  DEMAND BY NIGERIANS FOR THE RIGHT TO SELF DETERMINATION IS LAWFUL .

Separatism or the advocacy or practice of separation of a certain group of people from a larger body on the basis of ethnicity, religion, or gender is in both Nigerian and international law inherent and inalienable right of the peoples of Nigeria.

The United Nations General Assembly on 16th Dec. 1966,  in a bid the minimize the abridgment of minority rights by over-bearing majorities in member states , adopted the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) which came into force on 23rd March 1976. Nigeria ratified this Covenant on 29th July, 1993.
The first article of ICCPR emphasizes the premium the UN places on peoples’ right to self determination in unions in member states.
Part I, Article 1 provides that “All peoples have the right of self-determination.” And “By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.” Part II, Article 2 (1) binds “Each State party to the Covenant to undertake to respect and ensure to all individuals within its territory and subject to its jurisdiction the rights recognized in the present Covenant, without distinction of any kind . . . .“ Article 2 (2) further binds all parties to the Covenant, to domesticate the provisions of the Covenant into their national laws and “adopt such laws or other measures as may be necessary to give effect to the rights recognized in this Covenant.” Article 2 (3) compels each state party to undertakings to ensure remedy for its citizens whose rights under this Covenant have been violated or denied.”
Finding the UN ICCPR as a very critical document for stabilizing unions in Federations, the Organization of African Unity (OAU), now African Union (AU), on 27th June 1981, in its Summit meeting in Banjul, Gambia, adopted its on charter to regulate civil and political rights in the continent. This is what is now known as the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) (also called Banjul Charter). Article 20 of the Charter is centered on the Right to Self Determination of constituents of member states.
 (1)”All peoples shall have the right to existence. They shall have the unquestionable and inalienable right to self-determination. They shall freely determine their political status and shall pursue their economic and social development according to the policy they have freely chosen.”
(2)”Colonized or oppressed peoples shall have the right to free themselves from the bonds of domination by resorting to any means recognized by the international community.”
(3)”All peoples shall have the right to the assistance of the State Parties to the present Charter in their liberation struggle against foreign domination, be it political, economic or cultural.”
The ACHR came into effect in all AU member nations on 21st October 1986 when over 50% of AU member states had ratified it. Nigeria signed the charter on 31st August 1982, ratified it on 22nd June 1983 and deposited it with the African Commission on Human Rights on 22nd July 1983. The African Human Rights Commission headquartered in Banjul, Gambia, regulates the ACHR and serves as a court on violations of its provisions by member States.
Nigeria further domesticated ACHR as its own municipal law by its enactment of African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act, Chapter A 9 (Chapter 10 LFN1990) (No.2 of 1983) 10, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990.
Separatism or aspiration for separation from  political entity is therefore within the laws of UN, AU and Nigeria.
Salutary Effect of the Provision For Right to Self-Determination:
The essence of entrenching the right to self-determination in the laws of federations is not necessarily to cause disintegration. The provision at the end of the day, helps in fostering genuine unity and strengthens longer lasting and peaceful unity than unity forced on the entity by laws which pay no regard to the feelings and reactions of the divergent peoples of the federation.
Assertion of the right to self determination provision therefore humbles the excessive arrogance of the majority by ensuring equality of all before the Law and ensures that minority rights are protected.
Equality and mutual respect between the peoples comprising it, are two inherent principles of federation, the absence of which there is acrimony and alienation. Assertion of the right to self determination therefore compels mutual respect in federations between minorities and the majority groups. The absence of that right results in enslavement of minorities.
Equality and Mutual Respect between the federating people's have been identified by all political thoughts as two of the inherent principles of all successful federations.

The resolution of two Separatism agitation in Canada and UK, confirm that the exercise of the right to self determination, does not necessarily lead to secession.
 It is this right that entitled the French Roman Catholic Canadians of Quebec province who constitute only 23.07% (8.10 million) of Canada’s 35.1 million (2014) to twice freely test in referenda (1980 & 1995) their wish to separate or remain with the rest of English-speaking CanadianProtestant Pentecostals. By  Official Languages Act (1969), Canada adopted English and French as official languages of Canada.  The 1960 Canadian Bill of Rights was the country's first federal law to protect human rights and fundamental freedom. Considered groundbreaking at the time, it was eventually superseded by the 1982 Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. These Acts among other things also guaranteed minority rights.  It is worthy of note that Mr. Joseph Philippe Pierre Yves Elliott Trudeau, a Quebecer and  the 15th Prime Minister of Canada  (1968 -1979 & 1980-1984) and 5th of eleven  Quebecers who have been Prime ministers, was in office during the 1980 referendum.  Quebecers found no reason to leave Canada and therefore chose to remain. Rejection of secession was again repeated in the 1995 referendum.

The Scottish Independence Referendum of Sept. 18, 2014 for the Scots, who make up only 8.32% of the UK population, is one of the most patent demonstrations of a liberal world’s assertion that “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” (United Nations Declaration of Human Rights - UDHR Article 1) and of UK's compliance with Article1 of United Nations International Convention on Civil and Political Rights ( UN ICCPR): “All People have the right of Self Determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status . . .”
The British Prime Minister explained that Britain had no legal framework for referendum but on account of the human rights implications of the Scottish agitation, he had to introduce an Order-in-Council which was supported by all political parties, to enable that referendum take place .  London and Scottish Parliaments ratified the the Order-in-Council, thereby setting up the vote. The government of United Kingdom set up an all-party committee and ensured that most Scottish grounds for separation were ameliorated or removed. On September 18, 2014, The Scottish Nation Party, the promoters of Scottish separatism, consequently lost the vote.
Consequently, nearer home,  MASSOB and IPOB are breaking no laws in agitating for separation. Indeed, they are following international and Nigerian laws by peacefully expressing their dissatisfaction with Nigeria and their separatist wish. IPOB and MASSOB are doing what regional politicians did in Quebec and Scotland, and what Catalonian politicians are doing in Spain,  since most Nigerian politicians, now out of fear of exclusion from dipping in the honey pot, do not wish to be identified with their people's aspiration, which the almighty Federal government might consider hostile.
It is the binding duty of the governments at the centre and in the states to ascertain whether it is the wish of the area the agitators are claiming to represent, by enacting a bill for referendum. If the bill passes in the area's legislative houses, then referendum must be conducted to ascertain the people's definite wish.
Shooting agitators for separatism whilst they are demonstrating peacefully or praying for their separateness is an international crime for which the Federal Government of Nigeria need to answer in the International Criminal Court and under various protocols of other UN charters/ covenants, African Commission on Human Rights, EU and municipal laws of various UN member states
Nigeria cannot claim indivisibility after allowing Bakassi to be excised from it and awarded to Cameroon for the the assistance it gave to Nigeria during the war. Not even governments are allowed in international law to approbate and reprobate. "Quod approbo non reprobo" (that which I approve, I cannot disapprove).
IPOB and MASSOB activities in this respect,  might at the end of the day be the only meaningful challenge to the arrogance of the oligarchy that has enslaved both Yoruba, Igbo Ijaw, Efik, the Middle Belt and all the northern minorities. Equality and mutual respect emerges from separatist advocacy if we'll and systematically engineered.
  As Rev.Martin Luther King learnt in the U.S. Civil rights agitation  and expressed in his biography:
 "We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed."

IPOB and MASSOB are demanding freedom for all enslaved people of Nigeria. Some may argue, We are not enslaved! But what about 300 killed and 7000 driven out of their ancestral homes into unkept refugee camps recently in Agatu in Benue State? What about Ese abduction from Bayelsa to Kano and forceful conversion to a religious faith she and neither of her parents have never identified with? What syndrome can compel such inhuman act against an infant?
Do you think that if that process is reversed and there is a kidnap from Kano to Yenegoa that this country would be as cool as it is for SEVEN GOOD MONTHS?
 What about Miss Charity (Aisha) Uzoechina, 24-year-old daughter of Pastor Uzoechina with the Redeemed Christian Church of God, RCCG, who was kidnapped from Federal Polytechnic, Bida, Niger State, and today is one of the harem women of the Etsu Nupe, in Niger State, having under influence, renounced her family and faith?

May God Help us!

Emeka Onyesoh

President, Forum for National Ethos and Values, Enugu.
3rd March 2016.
                                                                                 
















Monday, November 30, 2015

DEMONSTRATION BY IGBO YOUTHS IS IN ACCORD WITH UN COVENANT & ACHPR AND NIGERIAN CONSTITUTION



  Demonstrations by Igbo youths constitute very legitimate demand for the Right to Self Determination provided for and guaranteed by UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (UN ICCPR) Part One Article 1(1).

 All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

Nigeria ratified and deposited this Covenant with UN on 29th July 1993 and according to Article 1(3) of the Covenant, is bound to protect and defend the Right to Self Determination of all ethnic nationalities of Nigeria.

Article 1(3) The States Parties to the present Covenant, including those having responsibility for the administration of Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territories, shall promote the realization of the right of self-determination, and shall respect that right, in conformity with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.

The African Union (AU) version of the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights was adopted  in a Summit of African Heads of State of the AU in Nairobi, Kenya on 28th June 1981 as the African Charter on Human and Political Rights (ACHPR), otherwise referred to as Banjul Charter. It was first ratified on 21st October 1981 in Mali and came into force on 21st October 1986. Articles 19 and 20 of the ACHPR clearly states the right to equality, elimination of domination, the right to existence and self-determination of the peoples of the country of Africa in very blatant terms.

ARTICLE 19
All peoples shall be equal; they shall enjoy the same respect and shall have the same rights. Nothing shall justify the domination of a people by another.

ARTICLE 20
All peoples shall have the right to existence. They shall have the unquestionable and inalienable right to self-determination. They shall freely determine their political status and shall pursue their economic and social development according to the policy they have freely chosen.
Colonized or oppressed peoples shall have the right to free themselves from the bonds of domination by resorting to any means recognized by the international community.
All peoples shall have the right to the assistance of the State Parties to the present Charter in their liberation struggle against foreign domination, be it political, economic or cultural.

On 31st August 1982 Nigeria signed the ACHPR; ratified it on 22nd June 1983 and deposited its ratification with AU headquarters in Addis Ababa on 22nd July 1983.

Conscious of the full implications of Articles 19 and 20 of ACHPR  and Article 1(1) & (3) of UN ICCPR, on Right to Self Determination of the over 250 ethnic nationalities of Nigeria, the oligarchy manipulating power in Nigeria did what it knows best in doing - Jihad of Deception. It enacted a benign Act claiming to have domesticated ACHPR by merely enacting  the African Charter on Human and People's Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act Chapter A9, (Chapter 10 LFN 1990)(No 2 of 1983) Laws of the FederationNigeria 1990.
The ACHPR Act is a ruse, not intended to enforce any of the ACHPR provisions not entrenched in the Nigerian Constitution.
Out of morbid fear that the over 250 million ethnic nationalities whom the oligarchs oppress and insult daily would exercise their self determination rights, no effort whatsoever has been made by the goalers of Nigeria to entrench in Nigeria's Constitution the Right to Self Determination provision in
the UN ICCPR Part One Article 1(1).

In 1999 when the oligarchy's Army Generals decided to execute another chicanery, branded 'Transition to Civil Rule' they concocted a Prisoner-of-War Ordinance, otherwise known as the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, in which Geneva Convention  for the entrapped prisoners, was deliberately omitted. It was faked as having emanated and ratified by Nigerians even though it was a decree signed by one the oligarchy's Generals.

Provisions were made in Chapter IV of that Constitution in accordance with UN ICCPR and ACHPR for fundamental rights to Life, Respect for Dignity of the Human Person, Personal Liberty, Fair Hearing, Privacy of Citizens and Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion,  Freedoms of Expression, of Assembly and Association with other Persons and of Movement and Residence. The
oligarchs knew they could easily violate these provisions as custodians of the rights of the people,
either by openly violating them or by benign negligence, like it does  with Cattle -Fulani herdsmen  who daily kill, maim, rape and violate property rights by forcefully occupying people's homes and farms and are never arrested or arraigned.

For the Right to Self Determination, which is the ultimate glue that bonds federations by bonding them through engendering equality and mutual respect between federating units, the oligarchy not only made sure it was not entrenched in the unitary Constitution of the Federation they concocted; but also foreclosed by that  Right to Self Determination of over 250 nations that make up Nigeria. They introduced an article unknown to federating concept by proscribing the Right to Self Determination by Article 2(1) of the 1999 Constitution. There was no such provision in the 1960/63 Constitution negotiated in six Conferences by the founding wise men of Nigeria, because  they intelligently and patriotically accepted Nigeria's diversity and hoped to build a union by accepting the
inherent principles of federating.

Article 2. (1) Nigeria is one indivisible and indissoluble sovereign state to be known by the name of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

No Union created by God or man is indeterminable. Life ends in death. There is provision for divorce in marriage under most,if not all laws. In business, incorporated companies have provisions for dissolution. The existence of this provision for dissolution compels parties to work hard on strengthening their union thereby engendering mutual respect.

The insertion of Article 2(1) in the Nigerian Constitution therefore offends the stipulations and spirit of UN ICCPR and AU's ACHPR.
Union of human beings is not by force; only Cattle and other mammals, not humans can be forcefully
united.

Article 2(1) is therefore a real instrument of enslavement of the rest of Nigeria by the OLIGARCHY IN ORDER TO GUARANTEE PERMANENT ACCESS TO THE SEA AND THE OIL RESOURCES. The existence of that nonsensical article on indissolubility and indivisibility of the Federation and exclusion of the Right to Self Determination in the Nigerian Constitution is the source of arrogance and disrespect by the oligarchy on the rest of over 250 ethnic nationalities, who are as it is, entrapped in the oligarchy's enslavement. An Act of Parliament on Self Determination is inferior to the constitutional provision which has entrenched indissolubility and  indivisibility.

It is imperative that for Nigerians to free themselves from this enslavement of the oligarchy, this
breach and/or abridgment  of international covenants and charters must be challenged in the
international arena and expunged from the Nigerian Constitution and its place have entrenched the
provisions of UN ICCPR Part One Article 1(1) and AU's ACHPR Article 20(1).

This is what MASSOB and IPOB (Indigenous People of Biafra) are agitating for and under
 Chapter IV Article 39(1) of the Nigerian Constitution, which guarantees Freedom of Expression - Every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference;
and Article 40 which guarantees Freedom of Association -

  Every person shall be entitled to assemble freely and associate with other persons, and in particular he may form or belong to any political party, trade union or any other association for the protection of his interests. . .; neither the Federal Government of General Buhari nor South East
Governors and bandit Ohanaeze Ndigbo, has a right under Nigeria's laws to deny the demonstrators
their constitutional rights. It is instead binding duty of the governments to protect the demonstrators.
Nandi Kanu, has fulfilled the terms of his bail and it is a demonstration of irresponsible lawlessness for the Federal Government to continue to detain him indefinitely. It is time his minders took his case international courts.

All free thinkers in Nigeria who value fundamental freedoms in place of present enslavement by the oligarchy, must support the struggle within Nigeria and in the international arena for expunging Section 2(1) from the Nigerian Constitution and the entrenchment of the Right to Self Determination in the Nigerian Constitution.

Not to take any action, is endorsement of the present POW Cattle Republic of Nigeria in which the enslavers equate Nigerian citizens' fundamental rights to cattle rights based on a primordial, decadent
and retrogressive culture.





Sunday, November 15, 2015

MASSOB DEMONSTRATION IS AGITATION FOR A GENUINE FEDERATION IN PLACE OF PRESENT CATTLE UNITARY REPUBLIC

MASSOB DEMONSTRATION IS AGITATION FOR A GENUINE FEDERATION IN PLACE OF PRESENT CATTLE UNITARY REPUBLIC

 Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives." (James Madison, 4th President of USA, father of US Constitution because he authored the draft and Sponsored of the monumental US Bill of Rights).

I insist that in Nigeria ignorance rules. Agitation for Biafra is not so much for physical Biafra but against the denial of the inherent right of the 350 ethnic nationalities that make up Nigeria, to Self Determination by the monstrous and unitary Cattle Republic of Nigeria. The right to self determination in all federations engenders and guarantees EQUALITY and MUTUAL RESPECT  between the federating units in all enduring federations. Nigeria ratified all articles and protocols of the United Nations and African Union on the right to Self Determination of all peoples but as is typical of the lie that is Nigeria, none of the articles and protocols of the AU Charter and UN Covenant and Conventions are being observed or complied with in Nigeria's Cattle Unitary Republic.

Timorous and Gullible Nigerians do not understand that the Country is  a P. O. W. Camp where none of the Geneva Conventions is observed. Otherwise, can someone explain to me why in the past four years over 5,000 Nigerians have been wantonly killed by Cattle Fulani herdsmen in Southern Nigeria and Middle Belt, side by side with raping of women and sacking of whole communities. Tens of thousands are Internally Displaced Persons in Refugee Camps from communities sacked by Cattle Fulani herdsmen. Yet No Cattle Fulani has been arrested. A Senator and leader of Plateau State Assembly was killed by herdsmen in 2013 and till date no arrest. The Governor of Benue was shot at by herdsmen in his own State and no arrests were made. His ancestral community and 29 others within 25 kilometers radius were sacked by the herdsmen. The Police Inspector General pleaded helpless and the State Governor was compelled to eat humble pie. A nebulous peace was contrived enabling the herdsmen to graze their cattle anywhere in Benue State.

Seventy-seven year-old Chief Olu Falaye is a recent example. His farm was raided by these herdsmen. He was kidnapped and brutalized by these herdsmen for four long days and nights. For how long will Nigeria live with the menace of cattle Fulani herdsmen?

The demonstration or agitation by MASSOB can therefore be rightly construed as a demand for a real federation in place of present Cattle Unitary Republic of Nigeria OR like Dr. Azikiwe called for during the hectic days of the 1964 general elections, "if we cannot have a federation, let us call a meeting and separate in peace" INSTEAD OF THE PRESENT CATTLE UNITARY REPUBLIC!



Emeka Onyesoh.

Saturday, October 31, 2015


PATRIOTISM - LOVE OF COUNTRY
Patriotism, as it is generally known and accepted in informed circles, derives from love of country and is invariably reaction from citizens to how well the State discharges its primary rationale for existence – security and welfare of citizens in equitable and transparent manner.  Love is by nature mutual. A country which does not care for its average citizens, naturally should expect no love from them and citizens will never offer such love.  Chapter II Fundamental Objectives &Directive Principles of State Policy (Section 14(2)(b) "The security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government."
Dictionary Definition of Patriotism
 Patriotism is defined in Dictionaries as“zealous love of one’s country.”
Love by definition is an intense feeling of deep affection.
Synonyms of Love are: deep affection, fondness, attachment, endearment, warmth.
Definition of Patriotism in Social Science:
Patriotism as a feeling of attachment and love to one’s own social group – an ethnic group, nation or state – is usually regarded as a noble sentiment. it breeds altruism and engenders attitudes and behaviors promoting well being of the group. In extreme cases, it can also involve self-sacrifice: choosing welfare and safety of one’s national group over one’s own survival.
Patriotism is, in other words, a social force that can keep separate individuals together by turning an array of self-concerned agents into a community and a collection of distant groups into a nation.”
 Love of Country is therefore the summary of all definitions of patriotism. It is common knowledge that love (affection) between two persons cannot be decreed. It is a mutual relationship in which the two are bound in a reciprocal manner, with each giving, the same time it is taking or expecting to take. Patriotism can only therefore be generated by what a State represents to its citizens. It is like the relationship between a father and child and that between man and wife/lover. Was the father/man there for the child/woman when he/she needed support? In the case of a country, the determining factor is the ability of the government to fulfill the primary purpose of government – provision of and concern for the security and welfare of the people, identifiable in a transparent and easily realizable manner, not by nebulous concepts. If the state is unable to provide its aspect of what the English philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) best known today for his work on political philosophy, termed ‘Social (political) Contract’, patriotism is truncated.
Government as Ultimate Teacher of the Populace: Nigerians witnessed Prof. Onyebuchi Chukwu, Nigeria’s Minister of Health, assume citizens’ teacher on Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) during the EVD out-break in Nigeria. Prof. Filled in full the role of government as the ultimate teacher in special circumstances. Without the enlightenment care of the Federal Government, Ebola might have overrun Nigeria. It is worthwhile to note that this was one of the very rare occasions, the Federal Government of Nigeria was able to fulfill its social contract obligations to the people of Nigeria.
The Social Contract Theory in Governance:
The social contract theory of government requires that citizens cede individual freedoms to state with the understanding that they do so for the greater good of many, including themselves. If this is not so, if there is no clear benefit to society as a whole as a return for the loss of the individual rights and freedoms, then the spirit of the tacit agreement the citizen entered into has been broken.
Naturally when the spirit of the tacit agreement the citizen entered into with the state is broken, disorientation against the state follows and no amount of legislation can bring back such citizen’s affection for the state.
Serial and compound breaches of this social contract by government, a God-like party, lead to alienation. Patriotism automatically is withdrawn and no law can compel it.

Misconception of Patriotism by the 2014 National Conference

The 2014 National Conference obviously misconceived what generates love  of Country and was led to make following recommendation on Patriotism:

“In order to place a duty on citizens to embrace national loyalty above sectional or ethnic loyalties” the conference recommended in Section 6.2.1.s/No. 11 that a new Section 42 (3) be inserted in the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria after the existing Section 42 (1) & (2) so as to probably compel all Nigerians to be patriotic (Section 11, page 549): “Every Nigerian citizen shall adhere to the ideology of national patriotism above sectional or ethnic interest.” Here there is a simplistic assumption that patriotism, which naturally flows out of love of country, can be commanded into Nigerians by a law as an ideology. This military disposition to command affection for a country into citizens is consistent with the senseless “indivisible and indissoluble” provision in Section 2(1) of the Constitution intended to enforce unity in Nigeria regardless of malfunctioning governance. Unfortunately this nonsensical provision was repeated in the Conference Annexure titled “Charter for National Reconciliation and Integration.”
 Behind this presumption is an assumption by the oligarchs that ordinary Nigerians are cattle that can be commanded; and that all the oligarch’s subversive activities against love for the Nigerian State are not being observed and noted by the ordinary people.
To think that patriotism can be conjured by mere legislative action of adding Section 42(3) as proposed, is an exhibition of a misconception of human nature. Definitely this flows from military mentality. The soldier swears an oath to lay down his life for the fatherland in return for which the State is supposed to take full responsibility for his life. Unfortunately in non-military live situations, citizens cannot be commanded to love a country that does not care for them.
That close to 500 Nigerian elite could spend five billion Naira of the county's scarce resources to think out how to make Nigeria better, but did not understand the basic relationship between government discharge of its own aspect of the social contract and patriotism, shows how ruinous the Military has been to the mentality of Nigerian political elites. Nigeria citizens are definitely not soldiers that can be commanded to love their country as an ideology.
Nigeria is a disastrous failure in fulfilling any of the two crucial roles it owes to its citizens - welfare and security - as per the Social Contract.
The most provocative aspect of this failure is the flagrant display of impunity by Nigeria’s political class as they show off wealth acquired by abusing their offices and the people’s trust. They further display total rejection of any social contract with citizens. Nigerian citizens seem helpless since the political class at election time would manipulate themselves back to power. Regardless of political party, all Nigerian politicians share evenly in this same irresponsible attitude to their obligations to the privileges they enjoy by holding public offices. In the given circumstances of Nigeria, love-of-country and consequently patriotism, is withdrawn. No law can bring it back. What changes citizens’ attitude is not Law; it is a change to the right attitude of people in government on their obligations and responsibilities to citizens. If they do the right thing, alienation will cease and love-of-country/patriotism would resume.
The patriotism enjoyed by countries in the first world derive from generations of public office holders’ overt effort to meet the terms of the social contract with the citizens - gainful employment (with living wages), standard social security and infrastructure, security, guarantee of fundamental rights including decency in and out of the country and equality under the law as guaranteed by Common Law in an openly equitable judicial system.

PATRIOTISM - LOVE OF COUNTRY
Patriotism, as it is generally known and accepted in informed circles, derives from love of country and is invariably reaction from citizens to how well the State discharges its primary rationale for existence – security and welfare of citizens in equitable and transparent manner.  Love is by nature mutual. A country which does not care for its average citizens, naturally should expect no love from them and citizens will never offer such love.  Chapter II Fundamental Objectives &Directive Principles of State Policy (Section 14(2)(b) "The security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government."
Dictionary Definition of Patriotism
 Patriotism is defined in Dictionaries as“zealous love of one’s country.”
Love by definition is an intense feeling of deep affection.
Synonyms of Love are: deep affection, fondness, attachment, endearment, warmth.
Definition of Patriotism in Social Science:
Patriotism as a feeling of attachment and love to one’s own social group – an ethnic group, nation or state – is usually regarded as a noble sentiment. it breeds altruism and engenders attitudes and behaviors promoting well being of the group. In extreme cases, it can also involve self-sacrifice: choosing welfare and safety of one’s national group over one’s own survival.
Patriotism is, in other words, a social force that can keep separate individuals together by turning an array of self-concerned agents into a community and a collection of distant groups into a nation.”
 Love of Country is therefore the summary of all definitions of patriotism. It is common knowledge that love (affection) between two persons cannot be decreed. It is a mutual relationship in which the two are bound in a reciprocal manner, with each giving, the same time it is taking or expecting to take. Patriotism can only therefore be generated by what a State represents to its citizens. It is like the relationship between a father and child and that between man and wife/lover. Was the father/man there for the child/woman when he/she needed support? In the case of a country, the determining factor is the ability of the government to fulfill the primary purpose of government – provision of and concern for the security and welfare of the people, identifiable in a transparent and easily realizable manner, not by nebulous concepts. If the state is unable to provide its aspect of what the English philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) best known today for his work on political philosophy, termed ‘Social (political) Contract’, patriotism is truncated.
Government as Ultimate Teacher of the Populace: Nigerians witnessed Prof. Onyebuchi Chukwu, Nigeria’s Minister of Health, assume citizens’ teacher on Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) during the EVD out-break in Nigeria. Prof. Filled in full the role of government as the ultimate teacher in special circumstances. Without the enlightenment care of the Federal Government, Ebola might have overrun Nigeria. It is worthwhile to note that this was one of the very rare occasions, the Federal Government of Nigeria was able to fulfill its social contract obligations to the people of Nigeria.
The Social Contract Theory in Governance:
The social contract theory of government requires that citizens cede individual freedoms to state with the understanding that they do so for the greater good of many, including themselves. If this is not so, if there is no clear benefit to society as a whole as a return for the loss of the individual rights and freedoms, then the spirit of the tacit agreement the citizen entered into has been broken.
Naturally when the spirit of the tacit agreement the citizen entered into with the state is broken, disorientation against the state follows and no amount of legislation can bring back such citizen’s affection for the state.
Serial and compound breaches of this social contract by government, a God-like party, lead to alienation. Patriotism automatically is withdrawn and no law can compel it.

Misconception of Patriotism by the 2014 National Conference

The 2014 National Conference obviously misconceived what generates love  of Country and was led to make following recommendation on Patriotism:

“In order to place a duty on citizens to embrace national loyalty above sectional or ethnic loyalties” the conference recommended in Section 6.2.1.s/No. 11 that a new Section 42 (3) be inserted in the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria after the existing Section 42 (1) & (2) so as to probably compel all Nigerians to be patriotic (Section 11, page 549): “Every Nigerian citizen shall adhere to the ideology of national patriotism above sectional or ethnic interest.” Here there is a simplistic assumption that patriotism, which naturally flows out of love of country, can be commanded into Nigerians by a law as an ideology. This military disposition to command affection for a country into citizens is consistent with the senseless “indivisible and indissoluble” provision in Section 2(1) of the Constitution intended to enforce unity in Nigeria regardless of malfunctioning governance. Unfortunately this nonsensical provision was repeated in the Conference Annexure titled “Charter for National Reconciliation and Integration.”
 Behind this presumption is an assumption by the oligarchs that ordinary Nigerians are cattle that can be commanded; and that all the oligarch’s subversive activities against love for the Nigerian State are not being observed and noted by the ordinary people.
To think that patriotism can be conjured by mere legislative action of adding Section 42(3) as proposed, is an exhibition of a misconception of human nature. Definitely this flows from military mentality. The soldier swears an oath to lay down his life for the fatherland in return for which the State is supposed to take full responsibility for his life. Unfortunately in non-military live situations, citizens cannot be commanded to love a country that does not care for them.
That close to 500 Nigerian elite could spend five billion Naira of the county's scarce resources to think out how to make Nigeria better, but did not understand the basic relationship between government discharge of its own aspect of the social contract and patriotism, shows how ruinous the Military has been to the mentality of Nigerian political elites. Nigeria citizens are definitely not soldiers that can be commanded to love their country as an ideology.
Nigeria is a disastrous failure in fulfilling any of the two crucial roles it owes to its citizens - welfare and security - as per the Social Contract.
The most provocative aspect of this failure is the flagrant display of impunity by Nigeria’s political class as they show off wealth acquired by abusing their offices and the people’s trust. They further display total rejection of any social contract with citizens. Nigerian citizens seem helpless since the political class at election time would manipulate themselves back to power. Regardless of political party, all Nigerian politicians share evenly in this same irresponsible attitude to their obligations to the privileges they enjoy by holding public offices. In the given circumstances of Nigeria, love-of-country and consequently patriotism, is withdrawn. No law can bring it back. What changes citizens’ attitude is not Law; it is a change to the right attitude of people in government on their obligations and responsibilities to citizens. If they do the right thing, alienation will cease and love-of-country/patriotism would resume.
The patriotism enjoyed by countries in the first world derive from generations of public office holders’ overt effort to meet the terms of the social contract with the citizens - gainful employment (with living wages), standard social security and infrastructure, security, guarantee of fundamental rights including decency in and out of the country and equality under the law as guaranteed by Common Law in an openly equitable judicial system.