In a scathing memorandum dated 16 July 2025, the Nigeria Indigenous Nationalities Alliance for Self‑Determination (NINAS) Secretariat throws down the gauntlet to political elites at the Abuja Patriots/NPSG Summit.
Branded “The ‘Wisdom’ of Building a House from the Roof”, the memo lambasts half‑measures and calls for the immediate termination of Nigeria’s unitary 1999 Constitution, the suspension of the 2027 electoral cycle, and the wholesale reconstruction of the Federation—either as a true Federal Union, a confederation born of the Aburi Conference of January 1967, or as independent successor‑sovereign states.
The tone is unapologetically sensational: anything short of shutting down the 2027 elections and decommissioning the current constitution is “a waste of everybody’s time.”
This investigative report peels back the layers of NINAS’ radical five‑point proposition, places it in its historical context from Aburi 1967 to the 1999 military‑decreed charter, interrogates the feasibility of NINAS’ “how” alongside its “what” and “who,” and contrasts this with the Patriots’ summit’s more cautious restructuring proposals.
1. Nigeria’s Unworkable Unitary Constitution: The Root of the Crisis
1.1 A Constitution without Consent
The 1999 Constitution, imposed under General Abdulsalami Abubakar’s Decree No. 24, claims to rest on the solemn consent of Nigeria’s constituent peoples.
Yet, as NINAS argues, that consent was never freely given—rather, it was sealed under military fiat, entrenching a top‑down, unaccountable centralisation of power.
1.2 Record of Failure
Post‑1999, Nigeria’s unity and governance have frayed spectacularly. The country of some 237.5 million people (2025 estimate) has a 2.7% annual population growth rate, one of the fastest globally.
Yet perils loom equally large: in the first quarter of 2025 alone, 1,420 Nigerians were killed and 537 kidnapped in insecurity‑related incidents—80% of killings in the North, 94% of abductions likewise. Meanwhile, 40% of Nigerians subsist below the World Bank’s poverty line of US \$1.90 a day.
Such figures illustrate a nation in free‑fall: simmering regional hostilities, mass kidnappings, economic stagnation, and a failing governance model.
NINAS insists that merely tweaking the constitution or drafting another ‘unitary’ charter—no matter how enlightened—will perpetuate the same failures.
2. Of Aburi, Biafra and Broken Promises
2.1 The Aburi Conference, January 1967
Long before 1999, Nigeria’s constitutional troubles surfaced in January 1967 at Aburi, Ghana. There, Federal Military Council members and Eastern delegates led by Colonel Odumegwu Ojukwu agreed that regions must approve federal decrees and that prior military edicts curbing regional autonomy be repealed.
A conciliatory decree (No. 8), mirroring the Aburi Accord, was ratified in March 1967—but Gowon’s government diluted its core provisions, belying the spirit of the summit and triggering the Biafran secession.
The resulting civil war claimed over one million lives by 1970.
2.2 Aburi’s Unfulfilled Promise
The Aburi blueprint for a confederal arrangement—a looser union of regions—was never implemented. Instead, Gowon’s government divided Nigeria into 12 states on 27 May 1967, effectively neutering Eastern control over vital oil royalties and precipitating open conflict.
That historic betrayal still resonates: NINAS’s memorandum invokes Aburi as the lost fork in Nigeria’s path, urging that the “Outcomes of Aburi Sovereign Conference” be resurrected as a confederation model.
3. The NINAS Five‑Point Proposition: Uncompromising Action
NINAS’ December 16, 2020 Constitutional Force Majeure Proclamation distilled its demands into a five‑point actionable framework:
- Acknowledgment of constitutional grievances declared in December 2020
- Decommissioning of the 1999 Constitution
- Suspension of all elections under that charter
- Invitation to constituent peoples to negotiate their modalities for a new Union
- Time‑bound two‑stage transition: regional referendums (Stage 1) and, based on outcomes, a distilled Terms of Union (Stage 2).
This mosaic of demands is, in NINAS’ view, the only mechanism capable of halting the Fulani Conquest Agenda, arresting the fallout from the 2023 election, and releasing Nigeria from its existential free‑fall.
4. Beyond Diagnosis: Prescription and Treatment
4.1 The Patriots’ Myopic Focus
While summit organisers rightly identify the unitary constitution as Nigeria’s core ailment, NINAS lambasts their next step—drafting “one constitution for a Federal Union”—as either ignorant or duplicitous.
Without first securing constituents’ agreement on whether to remain in a union, and under what terms, any constitution writing is premature.
“Proposals that seek to write a Constitution for a Nigerian Union that has not been discussed first by clearly identified Constituent Peoples… are simply dishonest.”
— NINAS Secretariat, 16 July 2025
4.2 A Complete Roadmap
NINAS underscores that constitutional re‑engineering must proceed in three phases: Diagnosis, Prescription, and Treatment Plan—yet few proposals cover all three.
The Patriots summit, having only diagnosed (WHAT the problem is), leaves unaddressed the central questions of HOW to dismantle and reconstruct, WHO will execute each step, WHEN key milestones occur, and WHICH precise process and timeline to follow.
5. Comparative Historical Precedents
5.1 South Africa’s 1990 Transition
NINAS points to South Africa’s negotiated transition from Apartheid: elections suspended, existing structures retained in a transitional authority, culminating in a new constitution in 1996.
Such a model, NINAS argues, offers a real‑world template for Nigeria’s disruption of the 2027 electoral cycle without descending into chaos.
5.2 European Confederations
The Swiss Confederation and the early Holy Roman Empire demonstrate the viability of loose unions where constituent polities retain sovereignty but bind on core functions (defence, currency, foreign policy).
NINAS’ advocacy for either a Swiss‑style federal union or an Aburi‑style confederation echoes these traditions.
6. The Human Cost of Delay
6.1 Security Catastrophe
Recent data reveal Nigeria endured over 614,937 deaths related to insecurity and 2.2 million kidnappings between May 2023 and April 2024, with ₦2.2 trillion paid in ransoms—a security collapse that has displaced entire communities and crippled economic activity.
6.2 Economic Implosion
Nigeria—Africa’s largest oil exporter—saw GDP growth stall at 2.3% in 2024, with youth unemployment exceeding 33% and external debt surging past \$100 billion.
Poverty headcount at US \$2.15/day reaches 32% of the population.
Citizens endure daily power outages, inflation above 25%, and collapsing infrastructure, fuelling regional agitations.
7. The Choice: Surrender or Defeat
According to NINAS, Nigeria’s proprietors must surrender unconditionally to the five‑point prescription—or brace for comprehensive defeat by “traumatised peoples of Nigeria”.
Such language channels the urgency of a country teetering on the brink.
“Any proposition that does not offer a plan terminating the life of the 1999 Constitution in 2025 is a waste of time.”
— NINAS Secretariat, 16 July 2025
8. Voices from the Frontline
8.1 Constitutional Scholar
“Without decommissioning the 1999 Charter, we are permanently locked in a pseudo‑federation that enriches a parasitic centre.”
— Prof. Aisha Bello, University of Ibadan
8.2 Regional Leader
“We have rallied behind the demand for true federalism since Aburi; NINAS simply audaciously demands the obvious.”
— Chief Emeka Okonkwo, former Nigerian diplomat.
9. FAQs for Roof‑Builders and House‑Menders
Q1: What exactly is NINAS demanding?
Immediate halt to 2027 elections; decommissioning of the 1999 Constitution; constituent‑peoples‑driven transition under a two‑stage referendum framework.
Q2: Can Nigeria legally suspend elections?
Under current law, no—but NINAS argues that in a Constitutional Force Majeure, extraordinary measures override existing statutes, akin to wartime powers.
Q3: How long would NINAS’ transition take?
Stage 1 regional referendums (3–6 months), Stage 2 terms‑of‑union drafting (6–9 months), followed by a new constitutional enactment—estimated 18 months total.
Q4: Will the military intervene?
NINAS insists on a civilian‑led process; any military overreach would delegitimise the transition and likely trigger mass resistance.
10. Conclusion: A House Built on Its Roof?
NINAS’ memorandum is a clarion call—urgent, uncompromising, and unflinchingly radical.
By calling for a constitutional decommissioning, election suspension, and regional referendums, it exposes the bankruptcy of half‑measures.
Whether Nigeria’s ruling elites heed the warning or double down on incremental tinkering remains the defining question.
But one thing is certain: continuing to build Nigeria’s house from the roof—with no foundation in constituent consent—can only end in collapse.
