Editor’s Note: In this article, Daniel Nengak explores the citizenship and indigeneship angle in the Nigerian state
[I begin by paying tribute to Taiwo Bankole Ogunyemi and to Governor Patrick Yakowa, General Andrew Owoye Azazi Warrant Officer Kamal Mohammed, Dauda Psokho,Commander Muritala Mohammed Daba and Lt Col. Adeyemi O. Sowole. All citizens who died travelling in Nigeria within the last week]
The debate on citizenship and the indigene has raged on in the Nigerian political system for the last thirty years. The debate became official when the 1979 Constitution provided under the ‘Federal Character Principle’ that the government and its agencies [state and federal] must be inclusive and representative of all parts of the country and also that ‘indigenes’ of states should be appointed ministers.
Recently, the Leadership Newspaper published an article titled “Non-Indigenes: 7 Years Stay Earns Bauchi Citizenship – Yuguda”. The formula proposed by Yuguda is simple and straightforward: the settler must reside in Bauchi State for full 7 years then become a ‘citizen’ of Bauchi State.
According to the report ‘Bauchi Citizenship’ would grant the former settler “all attendant rights and privileges” of citizenship. The problem with the proposal is this: there is no provision for citizenship at state level in Nigerian law. Furthermore, Yuguda boasts that “there are no non-indigenes or settlers in Bauchi State because even those who have not stayed for up to seven years in the state are regarded as being ‘in transition’ to indigenous status”. This could not be true since in February 2010, the “lawless” Bauchi State Assembly had resolved to expel all indigenes of neighbouring Plateau State from its territory.
The ‘Yuguda Formula’ for transforming settlers (including 2 million internally displaced persons) into citizens is on one hand laudable in that is recognizes the problems generated from the bifurcation of citizenship rights between indigenes and settlers in the states of the Nigerian federation. On the other hand, it raises fundamental constitutional, legal and national questions.
First, the idea of 2 concurrent citizenships (national and state levels) is a huge black hole that I think has the potential to grow and be the damnation of Nigeria as we know it. We must ask of Yuguda to clarify for example the hierarchy and exact conversion rate between the citizenship of Nigeria as we know it and the Citizenship of Bauchi State as proposed.
In Nigeria, we have hitherto operated a model of citizenship in which one must be a citizen of the national entity before belonging in local communities. This model differs for example from the Swiss model where one is expected to gain citizenship at the cantons/local levels as precondition for acceptance at the national level.
Legally, one only needs to be Nigerian to enjoy the rights of citizenship enumerated in the Constitution [except the few reserved for indigenes] and the Nigerian state is committed to upholding these rights without discrimination. Yet in the recent years the discourse is changing; the phenomenon of ‘State Citizenship’ is becoming popular (but still very confusing). In 2010, Governor Adams Oshiomole also launched the ‘Edo State Citizens Identification Card Project’.
The idea of citizenship at the state level in Nigeria raises at least 2 important questions namely: how could the rights that the Constitution guarantees each and every citizen of Nigeria be enjoyed in the different states of the federation where residents are divided between citizens and non-citizens? Secondly, assuming that it is valid to hold ‘dual citizenship’ within Nigeria with the national citizenship as superior; then would prerequisites for the acquisition of state citizenship (such as years of residence in a particular state) not amount to discrimination of the rights of national citizenship?
I think that there is an urgent need for reflection on what it really means to be Nigerian; to me citizenship should be national only. I think that Yuguda is right in emphasizing residency over ethnicity which seems to be the formula in neighbouring Plateau State (home of the Jos conflict). It is justified that certain rights such as to hold public office could be based on length of residency, but it should not be considered that those who have lived for longer periods in a state become ‘citizens’ there.
If we must have citizenship at the state level as well, then there is need to define in national law what exactly it would mean to be citizen of a state of Nigeria in contrast to what it means to be a citizen of Nigeria. Such a definition must be careful to emphasize the principles of equity and justice and clearly spelling out procedures that allows settlers to become citizens and how the acquired citizenship could be retained, renounced or lost. Importantly, such a definition must apply to all states of the federation.
In the end, even if we adopt a state citizenship system in every state of Nigeria; it does not solve the crisis [or pathology] of national citizenship in Nigeria. If specific criteria for belonging in the constituent units of the federation must be retained, then the law must make it clearer than the present use of the ‘indigene’ in the Nigerian constitution. But even more crucial would be the need to develop a Bill of Rights for denizens who are not citizens of the states of the federation.
_________
Nengak Daniel Gondyi is presently a post-graduate student in International Migration and Ethnic Relations at Malmö Högskola in Sweden. He is also a Senior Programme Officer of the Abuja based Centre for Democracy and Development, CDD. He holds a Bachelors’ in International Studies from the Ahmadu Bello University. Read his full profile here
