THE NIGERIAN UNITY AND THE CHALLENGE OF SELF-DETERMINATION AND SECESSION

Abstract

Self-determination is no doubt one of the hallowed principles of international law, recognized under customary international law and enshrined in a number of international treaties, as a right of ‘all peoples’ to determine their political and socio-economic destiny. In contemporary times, the notion of self-determination has been interpreted to justify secession by distinguishing between ‘internal self-determination’ and ‘external self-determination’. This distinction is an attempt to expand the ambit of self-determination to accommodate the rights of secession movements. Arguably, this expanded interpretation is apparently in conflict with the principle of ‘uti possidetis juris’, which is another principle of international law which seeks to maintain the territorial status quo by the preservation of traditional legal boundaries and stability. In this connection, it can be argued, that Section 2(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 which provides that ‘Nigeria is one indivisible and indissoluble sovereign State’ seeks to preserve the Nigerian territorial legal boundaries. To this extent, any secession bid from any part of the Nigerian territory is apparently unconstitutional and contrary to the Nigerian dream of one indivisible and indissoluble sovereign State bound in freedom, peace and unity. However, this paper deconstructs the concept of right to self-determination vis-a-vis right of secession. It argues that the right of secession is a circumstantial right that is subsumed into the larger right of self-determination. The paper concludes that the Nigerian dream can be realized in a sustainable manner on the condition of a restructured political economy which sincerely addresses its existential challenges of plurality, marginalization and inequity.