Opinion and reporting by Mathew Carr

Jan. 24, 2024

A region of Nigeria wants to determine its own future. Who are we in the OECD to stand in its way? Why should bullsh!t colonial decisions made decades ago hold so much sway?

Check out Olayomi Koiki’s You Tube, below, and subscribe and donate if you can. Go to 1.40 hours/mins and have a listen if you are short of time. (I like the way he whispers to the camera.)

I believe I’m the ~”journalist” he references as taking an interest in his messages.

He says the biased global corporate media misconstrue the situation — they say Yoruba people are separatists, but they are merely wanting to move toward the situation that existed before reckless colonialists got involved decades ago.

It’s several years ago that Yoruba’s should have been given autonomy (2014?). Fake borders should not rule people’s lives. That’s Koiki’s resonating message.

See, also, this campaign website for context:

“Since the 19th century, the Yoruba have found themselves forced into political and economic union with peoples with who they have absolutely nothing in common.
 
First, towards the end of the 19th century, the British unilaterally abolished the Yoruba Empire, which had been in existence for centuries, and annexed it into a territory that they called the Southern Protectorate. The ‘protectorate’ designation was not to protect the Yoruba people but to protect the lucrative commercial interests of Britain in Yorubaland.
 
Second, in 1914, the British without consultation with the Yoruba people amalgamated into the country Nigeria, the Southern Protectorate and the Northern Protectorate that they had also previously established. The British introduced separate governance for the two protectorates in their recognition of the fact that the Yoruba had nothing in common with the other peoples in the amalgamated territory.
 
Third, in the 1950s during various consultations regarding independence, the leaders of the various ethnic groups in Nigeria made very clear to the British their desire to go their separate ways. Indeed, the Yoruba leaders were opposed to the idea of one country. The British refused to grant independence unless the ethnic leaders agreed to form one country. Therefore, the parties were forced to agree to a federation of autonomous, self-governing regions with separate constitutions.
 
Fourth, in 1966, the Nigeria army committed a crime against the state when they assassinated the elected leader of the Yoruba and abolished the self-governing Western Region of Nigeria, the home of the Yoruba.
 
Fifth, in 1999, the Nigeria army when leaving office foisted on the Yoruba, a constitution that was neither negotiated nor agreed with them. Between 1966 and 1999, the Nigeria army abolished the rule of law and governed without the consent of the Yoruba people.
 
After more than 100 years of being forced to be part of the country Nigeria as outlined above, it is now the wish of the Yoruba people to right the wrong that have been perpetrated on them and to establish their own country, the Oduduwa Republic, with membership of the United Nations (UN).”

Judicial Appointments Tainted, Threatening Rule of Law in a Wide Variety of Countries (3)

Nigeria ‘Rendition’ Shows How Britain’s Colonial Past (and Present?) is Making COP26 Leadership Tricky Indeed (5)