The South-East region of Nigeria (Igbo-Biafra) represents a ‘sui generis’ case for remedial secession due to the entrenched, state-sponsored policy of marginalisation, systematic oppression, and violent persecution of the Igbo people. This situation is not merely an instance of ethnic discrimination, but a complex and deliberate effort to weaken, depopulate, and subjugate an entire Igbo ethnic group. From the overt violence and destruction of property to the subtler mechanisms of political and economic marginalisation, the Igbo people have faced sustained attacks on their social, economic, and political existence. This treatment bears the hallmarks of apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and constitutes a crime against humanity under international law.
Deliberate Short-Changing of the South-East: A Policy of Systematic Underrepresentation
One of the clearest indications of the deliberate nature of the marginalisation of the Igbo people is the systematic short-changing of the South-East in terms of political representation and economic resources. The South-East is the only geopolitical zone in Nigeria with just five (5) states, while other regions have six (6) or more. This structural imbalance is not accidental; it is the result of a calculated policy to ensure that the South-East remains politically weak and underrepresented in key national institutions.
The distribution of states in Nigeria directly affects political representation in the National Assembly, where each state is allocated seats in both the Senate and the House of Representatives. In the Senate, where each state is entitled to three senators regardless of population size, the South-East’s five states translate into only 15 senators, compared to the 18 to 21 senators in other regions with six or seven states. This significant disparity in representation severely limits the South-East’s ability to influence national legislation and advocate for its interests at the federal level.
In the House of Representatives, the situation is similarly dire. The number of representatives allocated to each state is based on population size, but the unequal number of states further compounds the underrepresentation of the South-East. With fewer states and fewer local government areas (LGAs) within those states, the South-East has consistently received fewer representatives than it should, given its population. This has left the region politically disenfranchised and unable to effectively participate in the decision-making processes that shape national policies and resource distribution.
This political underrepresentation has far-reaching consequences for the South-East’s ability to access federal resources. Revenue allocation in Nigeria is heavily influenced by the number of states and LGAs, meaning that regions with more states receive a larger share of federal funds for infrastructure, education, healthcare, and other essential services. The deliberate denial of additional states to the South-East has ensured that the region receives a disproportionately small share of federal revenue, despite being a major contributor to Nigeria’s economy through commerce, trade, and oil production.
This structural marginalisation is a form of political apartheid, designed to keep the South-East in a state of perpetual underdevelopment and political weakness. By limiting the region’s representation in federal institutions and restricting its access to resources, the Nigerian state has effectively created a two-tiered system in which the South-East is treated as a second-class region, denied the political and economic power necessary to protect its interests and ensure its development.
The Political and Economic Exclusion of the Igbo: A Deliberate Policy of Apartheid
The political underrepresentation of the South-East is only one aspect of the broader policy of exclusion and marginalisation that the Igbo people have faced since the end of the Biafran War. This exclusion is mirrored in the deliberate economic sabotage and neglect of the South-East, where critical infrastructure has been allowed to decay, and federal investment in development projects has been minimal or non-existent.
Despite the South-East’s significant contributions to Nigeria’s economy, particularly through commerce, trade, and oil production, the region has been systematically denied access to the resources and investments necessary for its development. Federal roads, educational institutions, healthcare facilities, and other critical infrastructure in the South-East are in a state of disrepair, while other regions of Nigeria receive far more attention and funding from the central government.
This economic neglect is not merely the result of poor governance; it is part of a deliberate policy to weaken the South-East and prevent it from achieving economic self-sufficiency. The underdevelopment of infrastructure, combined with the destruction of Igbo businesses and markets, is designed to ensure that the Igbo people remain economically dependent on the Nigerian state and unable to challenge their political marginalisation.
The Targeting and Destruction of Igbo Properties and Businesses: Economic Sabotage as a Tool of Marginalisation
The destruction of Igbo-owned properties and businesses has been a recurring feature of Nigeria’s political landscape, particularly during periods of political tension. The Igbo people, known for their entrepreneurial spirit and commercial success, have built thriving businesses in cities across Nigeria, particularly in Lagos, Abuja, and Port Harcourt. However, these businesses have often been targeted for destruction, both during elections and in times of ethnic or political unrest.
The arson attacks on Igbo-dominated markets, such as the Akere Market and other Igbo-dominated markets in Lagos during the 2023 election period, are not isolated incidents. They are part of a broader pattern of economic sabotage aimed at crippling the economic power of the Igbo people. These attacks are often met with little or no response from Nigerian security forces, suggesting tacit approval or direct complicity from the state. The destruction of Igbo businesses is intended to weaken the South-East’s economic base, making it more difficult for the region to assert its political and economic independence.
The deliberate targeting of Igbo businesses is a clear violation of the Igbo people’s economic rights and constitutes a form of economic apartheid, in which an entire ethnic group is systematically denied the opportunity to participate fully in the national economy. This economic sabotage is not only a violation of the Igbo people’s rights but also a clear indication that the Nigerian state is committed to keeping the South-East economically weak and politically powerless.
State-Sponsored Violence and Ethnic Cleansing
The violence directed at the Igbo people, both during the Nigerian Civil War and in the decades since, is a clear example of ethnic cleansing, designed to depopulate and weaken the South-East. The Igbo pogroms of 1966, during which tens of thousands of Igbo people were massacred in Northern Nigeria, were an early manifestation of the ethnic hatred that would later fuel the Biafran War. These pogroms were not random acts of violence; they were part of a deliberate strategy to eliminate the Igbo people as a political and economic force in Nigeria.
Since the end of the war, this violence has continued in more subtle forms, often directed at Igbo youth and political activists. The Nigerian state has used its security forces to violently suppress any form of political dissent in the South-East, particularly movements calling for greater autonomy or self-determination. Operation Python Dance, a military operation ostensibly designed to maintain law and order in the South-East, has resulted in widespread human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings, torture, and arbitrary detentions of Igbo activists and youth.
This use of state-sponsored violence to suppress the political aspirations of the Igbo people is a clear violation of their human rights and constitutes a form of ethnic cleansing. By targeting young Igbo men, who represent the future leaders of the region, the Nigerian state is attempting to depopulate and weaken the South-East, ensuring that the region remains politically and economically subjugated.
Igbo-Phobia: A Tool for Scapegoating and Marginalisation
Igbo-phobia, the irrational hatred and fear of the Igbo people, has been a central tool used by the Nigerian state and political elites to justify the marginalisation and persecution of the South-East. This deep-seated prejudice, which dates back to the colonial era, has been propagated by political figures, media outlets, and social influencers, who have consistently portrayed the Igbo people as disloyal, domineering, and untrustworthy.
This narrative of Igbo disloyalty has been used to justify the exclusion of the South-East from key national institutions and to scapegoat the Igbo people for Nigeria’s political and economic problems. The portrayal of the Igbo as secessionists and troublemakers has allowed the Nigerian state to justify its violent repression of self-determination movements in the South-East.
Igbo-phobia has also been used to incite violence against the Igbo people, particularly during election periods. The online hate campaigns directed at the Igbo during the 2023 elections, which called for the expulsion of the Igbo from Lagos and other parts of Nigeria, are part of a broader pattern of scapegoating that has been used to mobilise ethnic hatred against the South-East. These hate campaigns, which are often amplified by political figures and social influencers, serve to dehumanise the Igbo people and create a climate in which violence against them is seen as justified.
Ethnic Cleansing and Crimes Against Humanity: The Case for Remedial Secession
The deliberate targeting of the Igbo people through political marginalisation, economic sabotage, and state-sponsored violence constitutes a clear case of ethnic cleansing and a crime against humanity. The Nigerian state’s actions are not isolated or accidental but part of a sustained and coordinated effort to weaken, depopulate, and marginalise the South-East region. These actions violate the basic principles of human rights and international law, particularly the right to self-determination, which is enshrined in the United Nations Charter and other international legal instruments.
The Nigerian state’s treatment of the Igbo people meets the criteria for crimes against humanity as outlined in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Crimes against humanity include acts such as persecution, extermination, forced displacement, and other inhumane acts committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population. The targeted killing of Igbo people during the pogroms of 1966, the deliberate destruction of their property and businesses, and the systemic political and economic exclusion they face all fit within this framework. The Nigerian government’s failure to protect the Igbo people from violence, coupled with its active participation in their persecution, underscores the need for international intervention.
The case for remedial secession is further strengthened by the right to self-determination under international law. The International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) advisory opinion on Kosovo affirmed the principle that when a state fails to protect a population from severe discrimination, violence, or persecution, the affected group has a legitimate claim to secession. The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, to which Nigeria is a signatory, also recognises the right to self-determination, particularly in situations where a people are denied the opportunity to participate meaningfully in their governance or are subject to systemic oppression.
In the case of the South-East (Igbo-Biafra), all peaceful attempts to address the region’s grievances through political and legal channels have been met with violence, exclusion, and economic sabotage. The Nigerian state’s refusal to implement political reforms, such as the creation of additional states in the South-East or addressing the region’s underrepresentation in the National Assembly and federal appointments, demonstrates that the internal political remedies available to the Igbo people have been exhausted. As a result, secession becomes not only a last resort but also a legitimate means of securing the rights and future of the Igbo people.
Political Apartheid: The Marginalisation of the South-East in National Governance
The deliberate underrepresentation of the South-East in Nigeria’s political system is not merely an oversight, but a calculated policy of exclusion designed to maintain the political subjugation of the Igbo people. Despite being one of Nigeria’s largest ethnic groups, the South-East is consistently excluded from key positions in government and the military. For example, the region has not produced a Nigerian president or vice president since the end of the Biafran War, despite the Igbo people’s significant contributions to the nation’s political, economic, and cultural life.
The Federal Character Principle, enshrined in the Nigerian Constitution, was designed to ensure equitable representation of all regions and ethnic groups in the allocation of government appointments and resources. However, this principle has been consistently flouted when it comes to the South-East. The deliberate exclusion of Igbo candidates from key government positions, particularly in the security and military sectors, has left the region politically disenfranchised. This political apartheid ensures that the South-East has little to no influence over national policy, even as its people are disproportionately affected by government decisions.
The underrepresentation of the South-East in the National Assembly further entrenches this political marginalisation. As previously mentioned, the region’s allocation of only five states results in fewer senators and representatives compared to other regions, limiting its ability to advocate for its interests in federal legislation. This lack of political power has profound consequences for the South-East, as it is effectively denied the ability to influence key decisions related to resource allocation, infrastructure development, and national security.
Economic Sabotage: The Deliberate Neglect of South-East Development
The economic sabotage of the South-East is a critical component of the Nigerian state’s broader policy of marginalisation. The region’s contributions to Nigeria’s economy, particularly through commerce, trade, and oil production, are significant. Yet, despite these contributions, the South-East has been systematically denied the federal investment necessary for its development. Federal roads in the region are in a state of disrepair, healthcare facilities are underfunded, and educational institutions receive far less funding than their counterparts in other regions.
This deliberate neglect is not simply a matter of poor governance; it is part of a broader strategy to keep the South-East economically weak and dependent on the central government. By denying the region access to the resources it needs to develop its infrastructure and industries, the Nigerian state ensures that the South-East remains economically disadvantaged. This economic disenfranchisement, combined with the destruction of Igbo-owned businesses during periods of political unrest, further weakens the region’s ability to achieve economic self-sufficiency.
Violence as a Tool of Suppression: Ethnic Cleansing and Depopulation
The violence directed at the Igbo people, particularly in the South-East, is part of a broader strategy of ethnic cleansing aimed at depopulating and weakening the region. The repeated military operations in the South-East, such as Operation Python Dance, have been characterised by widespread human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings, torture, and arbitrary detentions. These operations, which are ostensibly designed to maintain law and order, are in fact intended to suppress the political aspirations of the Igbo people and eliminate any movement towards self-determination.
The targeting of young Igbo men, in particular, is a clear indication of the Nigerian state’s intention to depopulate and weaken the South-East. By eliminating the region’s future leaders and activists, the state aims to ensure that the Igbo people remain politically and economically subjugated. This strategy of ethnic cleansing is reminiscent of other historical campaigns of depopulation, where violence is used to weaken a particular ethnic group and prevent them from asserting their rights.
International Legal Framework for Remedial Secession
The right to remedial secession is firmly rooted in international law, particularly in cases where a state has failed to protect a population from systematic oppression, discrimination, and violence. The principle of self-determination, as articulated in the United Nations Charter and other international treaties, grants people the right to freely determine their political status and pursue their economic, social, and cultural development.
In the case of the South-East (Igbo-Biafra), the Nigerian state’s consistent failure to protect the Igbo people from violence, its deliberate policy of economic sabotage, and its refusal to address the region’s political marginalisation provide a strong legal basis for remedial secession. International legal precedents, such as the ICJ’s advisory opinion on Kosovo and the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights’ ruling in Katanga v. Zaire, affirm that secession is justified in cases where a people’s fundamental rights are being systematically violated and where internal remedies have been exhausted.
The failure of Nigeria’s internal political processes to address the grievances of the South-East, combined with the state’s active participation in the persecution of the Igbo people, leaves secession as the only viable option for securing the region’s future. The international community must recognise the legitimacy of the South-East’s claim to self-determination and support its peaceful pursuit of independence.
A Case for International Recognition of Remedial Secession
The systematic and deliberate targeting of the Igbo people by the Nigerian state constitutes a clear violation of their fundamental human rights and provides a compelling case for remedial secession. The marginalisation of the South-East in terms of political representation, economic investment, and access to federal resources is part of a broader policy of apartheid, aimed at keeping the region politically weak and economically dependent. The destruction of Igbo properties and businesses, coupled with state-sponsored violence and the suppression of political dissent, amounts to ethnic cleansing and a crime against humanity.
The South-East (Igbo-Biafra) has exhausted all internal remedies for addressing these grievances, and the Nigerian state has shown no willingness to protect the rights of the Igbo people or to rectify the systemic injustices they face. As such, the pursuit of remedial secession is not only justified but necessary to ensure the protection of the Igbo people and the preservation of their political, economic, and cultural rights.
International recognition of the South-East’s right to secession is crucial in addressing the ongoing crisis in Nigeria and ensuring a peaceful resolution to the region’s long-standing grievances. The international community must take action to prevent further ethnic cleansing and support the South-East’s legitimate claims to independence, in line with the principles of international law and the right to self-determination.
Uche Mefor is the Convenor of the Igbo-Biafra Nationalist and the Indigenous People of Nation for Self-determination
