Legal Perspective to Marginalization and Peaceful Agitation – What you Should Know
The political marginalization of people from Nigeria’s Southeast region, largely inhabited by the Igbo ethnic group, is a significant issue with deep legal and constitutional implications.
Marginalization in this context refers to the systematic exclusion or discrimination against the Southeast people in access to political power, economic opportunities, and social representation at the federal level.
Legally, the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria as amended provides explicit provisions aimed at preventing discrimination and ensuring equality among all citizens regardless of their ethnic or regional backgrounds.
Section 42(1) of the Constitution prohibits discrimination on grounds including ethnic group, place of origin, and political opinions, which theoretically should protect the Southeast from marginalization.
Also, Section 14 outlines the Federal Character Principle designed to ensure equitable distribution of public offices and resources across Nigeria’s diverse groups.
However, despite these constitutional safeguards, political exclusion of the Southeast remains pervasive, undermining the region’s socio-political development and violating the spirit of the Constitution.
The marginalization of the Southeast raises fundamental legal questions regarding Nigeria’s compliance with both domestic constitutional norms and international law.
The region and its advocates argue that the consistent political sidelining contradicts Nigeria’s obligations under international instruments such as the 1970 Declaration on Friendly Relations, which Nigeria ratified.
This declaration emphasizes equal rights and self-determination for all peoples within a state and holds that territorial integrity is only valid when the government represents all peoples without discrimination based on race or ethnicity.
By refusing to adequately include the Southeast in political power-sharing and economic development, the Nigerian government arguably fails to uphold this international principle, thereby invalidating its claim to territorial unity from this legal perspective.
The right to agitation by marginalized groups in the Southeast is protected under Nigerian constitutional law, especially as it relates to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, and association.
Sections 39 and 40 of the 1999 Constitution explicitly guarantee citizens the right to freely express their opinions and to peacefully assemble and protest.
This legal framework provides a foundation for the Southeast people to agitate for political inclusion and redress of marginalization.
The courts have, in some landmark cases like ANPP v. IGP, declared unconstitutional any law or practice that restricts peaceful protests by requiring permits, affirming that the right to protest is fundamental in Nigeria’s democratic society.
However, the practical exercise of this right to agitation is often met with resistance and repression.
Security forces frequently deploy excessive and sometimes lethal force against protesters, which undermines the constitutional guarantee of peaceful assembly.
The #EndSARS protests and other demonstrations in Nigeria have shown the state’s sometimes violent response to citizens’ demands for accountability and reform.
This state behavior contradicts the constitutional protections and principles enshrined in law, causing further grievances among marginalized groups, including the Southeast.
The legal perspective on political marginalization must also consider internal governance dynamics within the Southeast.
While the federal government is often blamed for marginalization, poor governance and lack of political cohesion at state and local government levels within the Southeast also contribute to developmental deficits.
Local governments in the Southeast have been politically weakened or denied autonomy, further hampering grassroots participation and the region’s overall political strength.
This internal dimension complicates the narrative and suggests that addressing marginalization requires not only confronting federal exclusion but also promoting good governance within the Southeast itself.
Agitation by the Southeast for greater political inclusion and recognition can take various lawful forms, from protests to legal challenges and political advocacy.
The constitution protects such actions, provided they remain peaceful and respect public order.
Importantly, the Nigerian judiciary and human rights institutions have a responsibility to uphold these rights and protect agitators from unlawful suppression.
Strengthening accountability within security agencies and reforming laws that hinder peaceful assembly is critical to ensuring that the right to agitation remains a meaningful tool for marginalized groups to assert their constitutional rights.
In conclusion, the political marginalization of the Southeast represents a violation of Nigeria’s constitutional and international legal obligations to protect equality and non-discrimination.
The right to agitation is firmly grounded in Nigerian law, offering a lawful means for the Southeast to seek redress and political inclusion.
For true progress, Nigeria must enforce its constitutional safeguards, uphold international norms on self-determination and equality, ensure good governance at all government levels, and protect the constitutional rights of all citizens to peacefully agitate for their legitimate political and developmental interests.