₦airaland Forum

ezenwajosh:
We never hated Awolowo for that... We hated Awolowo for the war....

HE HAD RGIONAL GOVERNMENT IN MIND(RESTRUCTURING)
what was agreed in aburi accord (restructuring)
Then Ojukwu and GOWON(who is from platue state) came back and GOWON after being approached by Britain refused to hold up to his end of the signed RESTRUCTURING that was agreed(remember today the people of platue has been over runned by one Nigeria jihadists) ... Now Ojukwu had to declare a state of biafra

Now Awolowo who should say GOWON YOU GOT IT WRONG AND YOU'RE AT FAULT BY NOT HOLDING UP TO WHAT WAS AGREED ON SIDED WITH GOWON AND BLAMED OJUKWU(just like telling the village that was massacred by fulani herdsmen that it's their fault they were killed because they refused RUGA settlement) AND EVEN WENT AS FAR AS SUGGESTING AND USING HUNGER AS A WEAPON OF WAR



TODAY YORUBA PEOPLE HAVEN'T EVEN SUFFERED HALF THE KILLING OF IGBOS IN NIGERIA BUT THEY WANT OUT..... THEY NOW SEEING SAME THING OJUKWU SAW IN THE CONFIGURATION OF FULANI NORTHERN POLITICS

Am sorry it's all in caps

Per the first bolded, what was agreed at Aburi had nothing to do with restructuring (i.e. a genuine return to the federalism which Ironsi abolished with his Unification Decree). Aburi Accord was extreme confederalism which was totally different from the federalism which Nigerians were already used to and was working for them perfectly.
Per the second bolded, how could Awolowo have adjudicated between Gowon and Ojukwu over an agreement he (Awolowo) wasn't part of hence didn't really know exactly what was actually agreed upon? Did Awolowo attend Aburi meeting? Was he invited by either Gowon or Ojukwu? If anything, Ojukwu who, by virtue of his level of education courtesy of being a graduate of the prestigious Oxford University, was the one who shamelessly stood up at the meeting and accused the politicians including Awolowo of being responsible for the Nzeogwu coup and the counter coup and all the crises that followed. So how exactly was Aburi agreement an Awolowo's business?

wirinet:
You are beating a dead horse. You can never never wake up their reasoning part of the brain concerning General Ironsi's decree 34. They just can comprehend the meaning of the decree. They even fail to see that General Ironsi took over the WHOLE COUNTRY WITH that decree.

It is not as if I don't know that the only circumstance under which they would have viewed the Unification Decree as destructive of the true federalism we started with at independence is if it were to have been made by a Yoruba, Hausafulani or Midwestern military officer. But as long as it came from the mouth of Ironsi an Igbo man like themselves, be sure that they will never bow to any analysis proving beyond reasonable doubt that the decree in question destroyed federalism.
However, I take the pain to always respond to them not because of they themselves but because of members of other tribes, especially the youthful ones, who might be relatively ignorant of these details hence vulnerable to their deceptive revisionisms. I have a lot of such ignorant youths in my hometown and state of origin who have been made to believe that Igbos are just innocent victims of the wickedness of all other Nigerian ethnicities including ours going by the half truths and outright lies being peddled by IPOB in recent times, and I have been doing a lot to dissolution them with hard contrary and complete facts just as I do online.

Uchek:
"You mean Azikiwe the father of one-Nigerianism, the chief saboteur of secession clause motions, and originator of the doctrine that the unity of Nigeria is perpetual and non-negotiable"

Azikiwe is not the Chief Saboteur of secession clause. Zik could not be because his position was in minority compared to Awo and Bello.
According to Daniel Patrick Moynihan (1927-2003), United States Senator from New York from 1976 to 2000, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts. The British colonists were the Chief Saboteur of the secession clause motions because they were in charge of the process and they had the final say regarding whether to accept or reject the secession clause.

And l watched the attached video. There was nothing in his speech that affirms your statement that Zik "being the architect of one-Nigerianism philosophy …killed Nigeria beyond salvage"

Per the two bolded lines, all that the British overlords needed as regards the secession clause motion was just one dissenting region which they found in the East through Azikiwe. This is the practice all over the world by imperialists wherever they colonize or have their political focus on. The US didn't need the consent of majority of Afghanistans to invade the place and erect a puppet government. Same with Libya. Likewise they didn't need majority of Iraqis to accent to their invasion of Iraq and the subsequent capture and execution of Saddam Hussein. With just a few handsfull of voices speaking in consonance with them, they have a ground to impose their idea. The canonization of true federalism in the independence Constitution at the 1958 Constitutional Conference in London was successful because all the three regions voted for it. Had the East made a case for a highly centralized system which the British would have preferred, then they would have imposed unitary system at independence and the pro-federalism North and West majority wouldn't have been able to do anything about it.

DonroxyII:
They will take it to Supreme Court .... who will give it back to the Federal Government......

That Mallam Supreme Court is there for this kind of Reason such as VAT ....... or when super states wants to go rogue !!

Nonetheless, Wike already ascent the bill for Rivers to collect VAT ..... if some Super States like Lagos can also join hands to help him ... Federal Government may leave this one .....

But lol, this is where Presidency Lobby Tinubu to Super impose on Sanwo Olu not to join Wike ..........

I'm gonna love to watch this Legal and Political Battle ..... e dey totori my belle

The bolded makes it clear that you don't know which state pioneered this whole movement for transfer of VAT collection power to the states and who the governor was in the pioneer state. For your information Tinubu started it all as Lagos governor and that was exactly when his SS colleagues of Ibori, Lucky Igbinedion, Alams, Donald Duke, Attah and Peter Odili began agitation for resource control. And this made Tinubu the only non-Southsouth governor to attend resource control strategy meetings of the SS governors back then. You think it is for nothing that the North-centric faction of APC are not favourably disposed to his ambition to succeed Buhari in 2023?

Unity19:
Why did you think he vehemently supported the Secession clause

You are not even completely correct. Awolowo was one of the originators of the secession clause motion and he moved that motion at least three times on the floor of the pre-independence parliament. He also moved the motion to have the federal capital moved out of Lagos to the East and promised to make funds available from the Western Region's purse to assist in building the new federal capital if his motion was allowed to materialize. But those Biafrans now calling him names today were the very ones who killed that motion of his in the pre-independence legislature because they wanted Lagos declared as no man's land on account of being federal capital.

Grupo:
Lol. You are naive.

Without one Nigeria, most of the companies that are in Lagos boosting Lagos IGR will not be there.

IOCs will not have their headquarters in Lagos. Their headquarters will be in Biafra.

Most multinationals will not have their headquarters in Lagos.

Most importantly, Lagos seaport wouldn't have been the only one in the country.

But how come you knew all these yet you invented the fraudulent one-Nigeria philosophy and rejected Awolowo's proposal in 1953 to have the federal capital shifted from Lagos to the East? Then your people also went further to make the Unification Decree which imposed this very unitary system that concentrated nearly all the economy in Lagos by virtue of its being the federal capital for long under that unitary system?

onuman:
Look the meaning of the word “agenda “ in the dictionary. Was there any day Igbos met and gave Ironsi an agenda to take more powers from the regional governments?
Never. Your uninformed use of the phrase: “Igbo agenda “ is devious. Till today, Ironsi is not respected by Igbos because of his private agenda in taking more powers from the regions. Where have you seen Aguiyi Ironsi monument in Igbo land except in his Umuahia hometown where a street was named after his name?

Same goes for your Nzeogwu you said was on Igbo agenda with the military coup of Nigeria’s armed forces planned as you accepted by Igbo and non Igbo soldiers. Igbo leaders at the time did not meet and gave any Igbo soldier an agenda to organize a military coup. Igbo soldiers halted the coup, made the coup unsuccessful; you ignore that aspect of the coup. If the coup was an Igbo agenda, why then would Igbo soldiers halt the coup?

People of your sort have clutched tight to the fact that the coup plotters failed to kill Azikiwe and other Igbo leaders as an alibi for making the coup an Igbo coup.

By the way, since Nigeria’s independence, no Igbo has led Nigeria except the six months of Ironsi. Nigeria is under the gutters. You still clutch tight to, and live on the past events of the 1960s as excuse to continue to exclude Igbo from apex political leadership of Nigeria. Good luck to you.

If the coup didn't have an Igbo agenda behind it, then why did Igbo civilians celebrate the coup in Northern cities like Kaduna and Kano?
If Aguiyi Ironsi's centralization of powers and revenue sources was not based on an Igbo agenda, then how come the decrees through which he made and executed those policies were formulated based on the advice of his Igbo dominated set of advisers like Nwabueze, Nwokedi, etc? How come Ironsi himself was illegally handed power by another Igbo man, Nwafor Orizu, as against the Dipcharima thrown up constitutionally by the parliamentarians as Balewa's replacement?
How come when Ironsi began to centralize everything and other tribes were either staging riots or demonstrations against it, no single individual or group from Igbo land publicly denounced Ironsi let alone stage a demonstration against him? Rather there was a very loud conspiratorial silence from all over Igbo land. I hope you recall that silence is consent?
The biggest joke ever told about Ironsi is that he stopped the coup, and here is what makes it an award-winning joke:
A coup kills democracy and replaces it with military rule. Now, Nzeogwu and co had through their coup tried to introduce military rule. Ironsi "intervened" but ended up introducing military rule himself. So what was the difference? His intervention produced exactly the same end result as Nzeogwu's action would have produced, i.e. military rule and death of democracy. So how did he stop the coup in principle? It is like thief A robs you of your money at gunpoint and on his way to enjoy the money he forced out of you, thief B waylaid him, robbed him of the money and made away with it, then you the original and actual victim begins to eulogize thief B for stopping thief A from robbing you when it is not as if thief B returned your money to you after forcing it out of their A. Does that make sense on your part as the victim? Had Ironsi ended up giving power back to civilians immediately after frustrating Nzeogwu and co, only then would it have made sense that he stopped the coup. And for that he would have become Nigeria's all time greatest hero of democracy and nation building with a lot of monuments named after him and his image on Naira note, and by so doing entrenching discipline and professionalism in the Nigerian Army as against the indiscipline and irritating corruption within the ranks and file of the armed forces today. Anyhow you look at it, Ironsi's tenure, short as it was, committed very fundamental blunders which served and still serve as the foundation of everything wrong with Nigeria till today.

Norwichsailor:
What is SS/SE
I'm pretty sure Akwa-ibomites like me out there do not want another northern president, a southern president even with one leg will do. Can you even imagine what you're saying

Thank you very much. As a SS native I hate this SS/SE narrative with a passion especially considering the fact that those peddling it now didn't give a fucking damn about the Southern minorities (now collectively termed SS) while they were in cahoots with the the Hausafulanis dinning and wining with them begining from independence.

kcnwaigbo:
The SW are on their own.Do not involve us the SS/SE in your political woes

The SS is an independent region so please stop merging it with the SE. I don't understand the rationale behind this SS/SE combination. It is annoying to say the least. Please desist from it because you won't take it when you start seeing something like NW/SE based on the political partnerships you repeatedly entered into with them many times in the past. Speak for your SE alone. Thanks.

onuman:
Nigeria armed forces organized a military coup. The organizers were Igbos, Yorubas, Hausa Fulanis, etc.
Dishonest people like you turned the coup story into an Igbo coup.

After the coup, the north wanted to secede from Nigeria. The army HoS then Aguiyi Ironsi, proclaimed a Decree that took some little more powers from the regional governments, in order for the Aguiyi led government to preserve one Nigeria.
People of your type later told the untrue story that Igbos cancelled regional government system.

So Nzeogwu who was himself a direct participant in the coup lied when, in an interview with Ejindu, said "At the core of the plot were just five of us (in obvious reference to himself, Okafor, Ifeajuna, Nwatuegwu and Adegboyega).? Apart from Adegboyega, which of these names was not Igbo or at least Igboid?

Then are you also suggesting that Nzeogwu lied again when Ejindu asked him about the ethnic agenda undertone in the execution of the coup and in response he said; "in the North, no but in the South, yes"? If you want the full interview excerpts, I will gladly furnish you with it here. In essence it was Nzeogwu a participant himself who told the whole world that it was an Igbo coup as against your revisionism that it was from so-called dishonest people. I repeat, if you want a link to the interview in which Nzeogwu laid it bare in unequivocal terms that it was an Igbo coup, I will gladly furnish you with it here and now.
On your attempt to whitewash Ironsi and rationalize his wicked, demonic and Igbo agenda focused decrees, you need to ask yourself how it made common sense for him to make decrees which took more powers to the center when the remote cause of the crisis all over the country at that point in time was the abuse of powers at that very center by Balewa.
So if you yourself were to be opportuned to become president of Nigeria under the present circumstance of serious abuse of powers at the center by the Fulanis, you would further take powers from the states and transfer them to the Federal Government just because you want one-Nigeria? Are you sure you are for real? Let us assume now that Tinubu becomes president in 2023 and then on assumption of office he begins to make polices that gives more powers to the FG in the name of seeking national unity, won't you see it as a purely Yoruba domination agenda clothed in the garb of national unity quest? All logical analyses always prove that Ironsi acted against common sense in pursuit of a very sinister agenda.

onuman:
From my view side, you should have deserved more abuses since you don’t understand that you have been cheating like a parasite on others in Nigeria.

A cheat and abusive fellow like you will never accept the principles of egalitarianism in his/her country.

Your tribe must have participated in the rulership of Nigeria since 1960 but will not accept that the Igbo will be on the rulership position. What other worst abusive character do you think you have? Is Nigeria you have participated in its rulership a country you are proud of today?

Why not change your worst form of abusive character and let the Igbo also rule Nigeria to see if the Igbo can make a difference from the ugly situation in Nigeria today?

And you have forgotten that Nigeria was derailed onto this ignominious path of dysfunctionality by a collection of Igbos who subverted democracy, introduced military rule into our national lives and destroyed the pristine constitution we started with at independence. So how exactly is an anticipated Igbo rule in 2023 not going to cause a repetition of that bad experience?

gidgiddy:
Just two question. How is it that Ironsi abolished the Regions if the 4 Regions he met when he came to office were still existing the day he left office?

2) How is it that Gowon met the 4 Regions as Ironsi, but when Gowon was leaving office, he left 12 states?

Answers:
1. Ironsi, in his May 24 1966 broadcast unequivocally stated that the regions were abolished and that Nigeria had stopped being a federation but had become simply The Republic of Nigeria as against the official name "Federal Republic of Nigeria". In that broadcast he all through described the regions as "former regions". What does the word "former" mean to you?
Then he broke the regions to groups of provinces which he appointed military governors over, and subjected them to his own authority at the center.

2. Gowon did not meet four regions. What Gowon met were four groups of very weak provinces under the mercy of an omnipotent center which, according to Ironsi in that broadcast, would all further be obliterated in the new constitution he was already drafting through his constitution review committee headed by Nwabueze. It was these weak provinces that Gowon regrouped into 12 states and partially restored their autonomy from the total non-autonomous status they suffered under Ironsi.

gawu1:
The man below holding Atiku was the brain behind that decree. He drafted every of the A to the Z in that infamous document with mind set that it was going to give his people advantage over others in the country.
During Jonathan regime he attempted to repeat same thing at the failed national conference put together by Jonathan administration in it attempt to change the constitution through back door by sidelining the NASS which has legitimate power under our present democracy to effect changes in our constitution. As he did in 1966, he drafted a complete constitution inside his seating room and attempted to superimpose it on the hand-picked delegates of the Jonathan conference to legitimise it; and made it as if it was the conference works. Thanks to the eagle eyes of the northerners and same vigilant men from the west who they picked with intentions they would abide without scrutiny any resolution prepared and put before them, the plan failed.
Jonathan defeat in 2015 put full stop to his hope, the reason why the prof. and his people would once again reinvigorate their hatred for Buhari and the north. Towards build up to the 2019 elections when Atiku came up with campaign mantra that he was going to revisit the Jonathan conference resolution in order to hoodwink them to elect him, the prof and his people began to see hopes of their niferous plan coming to life. They quickly fall for Atiku especially when he picked one of them as his VP. Meetings upon meetings, they drafted all their lawyers to Atiku, suggested the infamous Dubai strategies to him after drafting the disgrace Chief Justice into the plan. The rest are now public, from transmission of results to inexisting INEC server and so on.
Atiku earned the huge hug from the prof

You forgot to add that the same Professor Nwabueze also killed the opportunity to restore the decentralized structure in 1978 when he, as head of Obasanjo's 1979 Constitution drafting committee, further transferred over 50% of the remaining items in the residual and concurrent lists to the exclusive list ostensibly in search of national unity but actually because he had seen that Ekueme (his brother) would soon become the vice to Shagari amidst the hope that Shagari would hand over to him later on to enable Igbo domination agenda execution materialize with Ekweme now in power and a further centralized constitution in his hands.
Going by how Ironsi's centralization of powers through his advice in 1966 caused a constitutional crisis which culminated in a war that took millions of lives of his own Igbo race, one would have expected common sense to dictate to Professor Nwabueze to use the 1978 opportunity to get a lot of items transferred from the exclusive list back to the concurrent and residual lists in which they were prior to Ironsi era, but trust those folks from the East to always lose common sense when it really matters and especially when it appears to them that it is an opportunity to achieve their domination agenda

joeyfire:
Dont miss the central point. The regions still had control of their resources under Ironsi. Gowon was the person that TOOK AWAY resource control. Northern military leaders did not have access to oil money until Gowon started sharing it to them. It is Gowon's fault that Lagos State did not even smell the N400 Billion revenue collected from Apapa port in 2019

Why do you think Easterners started moving to other regions in large numbers after the war? There was NO infrastructure developed in the East after the war by the FG. Its not even an issue for argument. Asides from the Niger Bridge that they HAD to build, name one that Gowon built after the war. The 70s was the worst period in terms of development

It wasn't after the war that Igbos started moving to other regions in large numbers. Please recall that most prominent Igbo actors of those days like Azikiwe, Ojukwu, Okpara, etc were born and brought up in the North.... meaning that their parents moved to the North to settle before independence. A person like Azikiwe specifically was born in Zungeru in 1904 meaning that his parents moved to settle in the North far before the dawn of 1900 thus before amalgamation.

Below is the interview granted by an Igbo man, Philip Asiodu and published by an Igbo-owned newspaper, The Sun, so the cry of Yoruba/ Ibadan Expressway media propaganda doesn't hold water at here at all.
Philip Asiodu's revelation makes it clear that the dismantling of the regions and the abolition of federalism was a premeditated agenda by Ojukwu and Ironsi ever before the January 15 1966 coup which only came across to them as an opportunity windfall to execute that evil agenda of subjecting Nigeria to undemocratic control of the Igbos.

https://www.sunnewsonline.com/impunity-killing-nigeria-phillip-asiodu/

Please note where the report reads:

As for May 30, I am not for division. Emeka Ojukwu and I were very good friends in school, Kings College, Lagos, and Oxford University. In fact when the coup happened, he wanted me to join him in Enugu and I told him that I was not a regional man. And Ojukwu told me ‘we shall abolish the regions within 6 months’. ........ Philip Asiodu.

It is shocking that Igbo monikers on NL have continued seeking exoneration for Ironsi as regards the introduction of unitary system and the abolition of regions and federalism.

Below is the introductory part of Ironsi's national broadcast of May 24 1966 in which he unequivocally and repeatedly refered to the regions as "former regions" meaning that he had abolished the regions and ceased to recognize Nigeria as a federation. These Igbo revisionists should explain what exactly Ironsi meant by the parts I put in bold if they think his Unification Decree didn't abolish the regions and ended federalism.

Ironsi's broadcast to the nation - May 24, 1966.


"The Regions are Abolished': Ironsi's Broadcast to the Nation banning
Political Parties and introducing Decree No. 34, 24 May 1966.



Fellow Nigerians:
During the past two weeks I presided over meetings of the Supreme
Military council and the Central Executive Council at which many
important state matters were considered. . .
It is now three months since the Government of the Federal Republic
of Nigeria was handed over to the Armed Forces. Now that peace has
been restored in the troubled areas it is time that the Military
Government indicates clearly what it proposes to accomplish before
relinquishing power. The removal of one of the obstacles on the way
is provided for in the Constitution (Suspension and Modification)
Decree (No. 5) 1966 which was promulgated by me today and comes into
effect at once.
The provisions of the Decree are intended to remove the last
vestiges of the intense regionalism of the recent past, and to produce that cohesion in the governmental structure which is so
necessary in achieving, and maintaining the paramount objective of
the National Military government, and indeed of every true Nigerian,
namely, national unity.
The highlights of this Decree are as follows:
The former regions are abolished, and Nigeria grouped into a number
of territorial areas called provinces. . . .
Nigeria ceases to be what has been described as a federation. It
now becomes simply the Republic of Nigeria.
The former Federal Military government and the Central Executive
Council become respectively the National Military Government and the
executive Council. All the Military Governors are members of the
Executive Council.
A Military Governor is assigned to a group of provinces over which
and subject to the direction and control of the Head of the National
Military Government, he shall exercise executive power. In order to
avoid any major dislocation of the present administrative machinery,
the grouping of the provinces has been made to coincide with the
former regional boundaries. This is entirely a transitional measure
and must be understood as such. The present grouping of the
provinces is without prejudice to the Constitutional and
Administrative arrangements to be embodied in the New Constitution in
accordance with the wishes of the people of Nigeria.
The National Military Government assumes the exercise of all
legislative powers throughout the Republic subject to such
delegations to Military Governors as are considered necessary for
purposes of efficient administration.
The public services of the former federation and regions become
unified into one national public service under a National Public
Service Commission. There is a provincial Service Commission for
each group of provinces to which is delegated functions in respect of
public officers below a given rank. This rather drastic change will
probably involve a reconstitution of the existing commissions, and
the National Military Government reserves the right to do so in the
manner stipulated in the Decree. Until this is done, the present
Commissioners continue to act in their posts. Every civil servant is
now called upon to see his function in any part of Nigeria in which
he is serving in the context of the whole country. The orientation
should now be towards national unity and progress. I expect all
civil servants to co-operate and to consult at all levels, vertically
and horizontally, between groups of Provinces and between Provinces
and the Centre.
People are aware that Study Groups have been set up to look into
various aspects of governmental activity. One of them is concerned
with problem relating to the Constitution. This Decree is without
prejudice to their activities and their reports will be given proper
consideration by the National Military Government in formulating the
proposals for the future civilian government.
In my nation-wide radio broadcast of January 28, 1966, I said, among
other things: "We cannot afford to continue with sterile political
strife and mutual recriminations. I have therefore ordered that
there shall be no display in party flags or symbols, and no shouting
of political slogans.'
On March 3, I caused a press release to be issued calling attention
to the fact that political meetings were, in spite of my order, being
held in certain parts of the country, and warned the public and the
press to cooperate with the Federal Military Government in its tasks
of national reconstruction.
In spite of these warnings, political party activities still
continue, either directly, or through various tribal societies and
organizations. The National Military Government owes it as a duty to
the people of this country to remove the ills which infested the
former regime, to restore the faith of our people in their to remove
the ills which infested the former regime, to restore the faith of
our people in their fatherland and its institutions, so that when the
time comes for the civilian government to return, a healthy body
politic would have emerged, and last vestiges of bitter factionalism
removed.
The National Military Government having committed itself to this
task is firmly resolved to conclude it, and will not be diverted from,
or obstructed in, the fulfillment of this objective by the
activities or political manoeuvres of any society, party, union or
association. Part of our task is the removal of politics based on
tribal affiliations which, as everybody knows, have manifested
political intrigues, or have been used as bases for party-political
propaganda

The Unification Decree
DAWODU.COM
Dedicated to Nigeria's History, Socio-Economic and Political issues










The Unification Decree: No. 34 of 1966


Decree No. 34

[24th May 1966]



THE FEDERAL MILITARY GOVERNMENT hereby decrees as follows:

Subject to the provisions of this Decree, Nigeria shall on 24th May 1966 (in this decree referred to as ‘the appointed day’) cease to be a Federation and shall accordingly as from that day be a Republic, by the name of the Republic of Nigeria consisting of the whole of the territory which immediately before that day was comprised in the Federation.

As from the appointed date—

the Federal Military Government and the Federal Executive Council shall be known respectively as the National Military Government and The Executive Council;
the Federal territory shall be known as the Capital territory;
the provinces, including Kaduna capital territory, in schedule 1 of this Decree which immediately before the appointed day were respectively comprised in Northern Nigeria, Eastern Nigeria, Western Nigeria and Mid-Western Nigeria shall be known respectively as the Northern group of Provinces, the Eastern group of Provinces, the Western group of Provinces and the Mid-Western group of Provinces;
for the purpose of administration each group of provinces shall subject to the authority of the Head of the National Military Government,be under the general direction and control of a Military Governor appointed by the Head of the National Military Government;
Act No. 20 of 1963 (that is to say the Constitution of the Federation) may be cited as the Constitution of the Republic. Without prejudice to section 8 of this Decree, the person who immediately before the appointed day holds the office of Military Governor of a Region shall be deemed to have been appointed by the Head of the National Military Government as Military Governor of the corresponding group of provinces with effect from that day.
The National Military Government may either conditionally or unconditionally delegate to a Military Governor of a group of provinces power to make laws by edict for peace, order and good government with respect to any matter specified in the delegation in relation to that group of provinces.
Subject to this and any other Decree, a Military Governor of a group of provinces may exercise by way of edict or, as the case may be, by regulation, order, or instrument the powers and functions vested in the Executive Council of the Government of a former Region, or of the Governor, Premier, or Minister (except in relation to criminal prosecutions) of a government of a former Region under any existing law with respect to that group of provinces; and accordingly sections 3 (2), (3), (5), (6), and (7) and section 4 (6) of the Constitution (Suspension and Modification) Decree 1966 (in this Decree referred to as the ‘principal Decree’) shall cease to have effect.
Subsection (4) shall be without prejudice to section 8 of this Decree, and the repeal by that subsection of any provision of the principal Decree shall not affect the operation of that provision in relation to any time before the appointed day.
Any Edict made by the Military Governor of a Region which is in force immediately before the appointed day shall, as from that day, have effect as a Decree applying only to the group of provinces which corresponds to that region; and references to a Decree shall be construed accordingly.
In this subsection ‘Edict’ includes a decree made as mentioned in section 4 (6) of the principal Decree.

Notwithstanding section 1 of this Decree, on and after the appointed day—
the provisions of the constitution of each former Region which are not for the time being suspended shall, in relation to the corresponding group of provinces, have effect as modified by the combined operation of the principal Decree, as amended, and this Decree; and
the constitution of each former Region may be cited as the Constitution of the Northern, Eastern, Western or Mid-Western group of Provinces, as the case may be, and references to the constitution of a group of provinces shall be construed accordingly.
3. 1. As from the appointed day all offices in the service of the Republic in a civil capacity shall be offices in a single service to be known as the National Public Service; and accordingly all persons who immediately before that day are members of the public service of the Federation or of the public service of a Region shall on that day become members of the National Public Service:

Provided As from the appointed day—

a. the Public Service Commission established under section 146 of the Constitution of the Republic shall be known as the National Public Service Commission, and references in that section and elsewhere to the Public Service Commission of the Federation shall be amended accordingly;

b. all Regional Public Service Commissions established under the appropriate provisions of the Constitutions of the former Regions shall be known as the Provincial Public Service Commissions, and be known as the Provincial Public Service Commissions created under the Constitutions of the Regions shall be construed accordingly.

3. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Constitution of the Republic or of a group of Provinces, the members of the Public Service Commission of the Federation and of the Regions who, immediately before the appointed day hold office, shall continue in office until the appointments expire or are sooner revoked, and fresh appointments are made.

4.1 Subject to the provisions of this section, power to appoint persons to hold or act in offices in the National Public Service (including power to make appointments on promotion and to confirm appointments) and to dismiss and exercise disciplinary control over persons holding or acting in such offices shall, as from the appointed day, vest in the National Public Service Commission.

2. The National Public Service Commission may, with the approval of the Head of the National Military Government, either conditionally or unconditionally delegate any of its powers under subsection (1) above to any person or authority in Nigeria.

3. Subject to subsections (4) and (6) below, all the powers of the National Public Service Commission under subsection (1) above in respect of any office in the National Public Service carrying an initial salary not exceeding £2,292, shall be treated as having been delegated to the appropriate Provincial Public Service Commission.

4. Any delegation effected under subsection (2) above (including any delegation which in accordance with subsection (3) above or subsection (6) below is to be treated as having been effected under subsection (2) above) may be varied or revoked by the National Public Service Commission with the approval of the Head of the National Military Government.

5. Subsection (1) above shall not apply in relation to any of the following offices—

a. the office of any judge of the Supreme Court, the High Court of Lagos, the High Court of a group of provinces or the Sharia Court of Appeal;

b. the office of economic adviser to the republic;

c. except for the purpose of making appointments thereto, the office of the Director of Audit of the Republic and the office of the Director of Audit of a group of provinces;

d. the office of Magistrate and Justice of Peace;

e. any office in the Nigeria Police Force;

f. any office to which section 148 of the Constitution of the Republic applies.

6. Without prejudice to subsection (4) above or to section 8 of this Decree, any delegation effected under section 147 of the Constitution of the Federation, or under the corresponding section of the constitution of a Region, which is in force immediately before the appointed day shall, as from that day be deemed to have been appointed day shall, as from that day, be deemed to have been duly effected by the National Public Service Commission under subsection (2) above.

7. The provisions of this section shall be subject to the provisions of section 5 of this decree.

5.1. Power to appoint persons to hold or act in the office of permanent secretary to any department of government of the Republic or any other office of equivalent rank in the National Public Service, and to remove persons so appointed from any such office shall, as from the appointed day, vest in the Supreme Military Council.

2. Before appointing any person by virtue of this section, the Supreme Military Council shall consult the National Public Service Commission.

3. Subsection (1) above shall not apply in relation to any of the offices mentioned in section 4 (5) of this Decree.

6. As from the appointed day the members of the Police Service Commission shall be appointed by the Head of the National Military Government; and accordingly in the entry in Schedule 2 of the principal Decree relating to section 109 of the Constitution of the Republic, for the words ‘Federal Executive Council’ in both places where they occur, there shall, as from the appointed day, be substituted the words ‘Head of the National Military Government’.

7. 1. As from the appointed day, the provisions of the Constitution of the Republic mentioned in Schedule 2 of this Decree shall be suspended.

2. As from the appointed day—

a. [b]the provisions of the constitution of each group of provinces which are mentioned in Schedule 3 of this Decree shall be suspended;[/b]and

b. Schedule 4 of the principal Decree shall have effect subject to the amendments specified in Schedule 4 of this Decree.

8. 1. As from the appointed day the principal Decree, as amended, shall have effect with

such modifications (whether by way of addition, alteration or omission) as may be

necessary to bring it, and through it—

a. the unsuspended provisions of the Constitution of the Republic and of the constitution of each group of provinces; and

b. all existing law within the meaning of subsection (1) of section 12 of the principal Decree, so far as in force immediately before the appointed day; and

c. all other law which would be existing law within the meaning of the said subsection (1) if the references in that subsection to 16th January 1966 were references to the appointed day; into conformity with this Decree.

2. Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (1) above, section 13 of the

principal Decree (which makes provision for the saving of existing offices, appointments, etc.) shall, with such modifications as may be necessary in consequence of this Decree, have effect in relation to the appointed day in like manner as it has effect in relation to 16th January 1966.

3. Nothing in this Decree shall affect the validity of anything done before the appointed day.

9. In this Decree, and in any other law—

‘enactment’ includes any provision of a Decree;

‘group of provinces’ means the Northern Group of Provinces, the Eastern Group of Provinces, the Western Group of Provinces or the Mid-Western Group of Provinces;

‘the Military Governor’, in relation to a group of provinces, means the Military Governor of that Group of Provinces;

‘the Northern Group of Provinces’, the Eastern Group of Provinces’, the Western Group of Provinces and the ‘Mid-Western Group of Provinces’ have the respective meanings assigned in section 2 (1) © of this Decree.

10. Every Decree made on or after the appointed day shall apply throughout Nigeria except in so far as the contrary intention appears therein.



Source: The Constitution (Suspension and Modification) (No. 5) Decree 1966, Federal Republic of Nigeria Official Gazette no. 51, vol. 53, 24 May 1966, A153.

Gandollaar:
Lies. Acn had always advocated for full regional autonomy.

Care substantiating this with any source? Was ACN a regional party or just a Lagos-only party back then?

Okwyjesus:
�
That was the mistake of yesterday l must admit but then we must continue on that part for the future of our children.

It was not a mistake but a deliberate choice, only that it boomeranged. You don't term as a mistake a choice you made in full awareness of its deadly implications especially if you made it amidst the preponderance of evidence of its danger potentials. Could any of Ironsi, Azikiwe and Ojukwu claim there was any basis of evidence back then that a Nigeria defined by an omnipotent center was going to engender peace, economic prosperity, respect for human rights, citizenship dignity, equity, social justice, etc?

Okwyjesus:
Please am not the one that collected your 30 percent for oil exploration in the desert.

You are the one. You cemented us together with Hausafulanis and introduced unitary system which gave power to Hausafulanis to take control of everyone's resources.

nwatakwochaa:
For me they should have been given less than that.
They believe Igbo’s are their problem.
Hunger go finish their creek

And if Igbos aren't their problem, then of which ethnicity was the Ironsi who promulgated the Unification Decree that took away the peoples' right over their resources from them and transferred same to the center? Which ethnicity was the professor Nwabueze who drafted Ironsi's unitary constitution in 1966 and again in 1978 advised Obasanjo to further transfer 50% of items from the residual and concurrent lists to the exclusive list?

Okwyjesus:
I no pity Niger Delta ten Kobo. Let them enjoy their one Nigeria abeg

You mean Azikiwe the father of one-Nigerianism, the chief saboteur of secession clause motions, and originator of the doctrine that the unity of Nigeria is perpetual and non-negotiable; the Aguiyi Ironsi who promulgated the Unification Decree that imposed unitary system on the country thus creating an omnipotent center in the name of seeking national unity and cohesion; and the Ojukwu who supported Ironsi to promulgate the infamous Anti-secession Decree after getting Isaac Adaka Boro sentenced to death for seeking Nigeria's break up; were all Niger Deltans? What exactly do you Igbos gain from this your perpetual attempt to accuse others of your own very sins which put Nigeria in this sorry state? If your brother, Aguiyi Ironsi, didn't tamper with the Independence Constitution, do you think there would have been the need for PIB today let alone the controversy surrounding the issue of 3% going to the oil bearing communities?

Well, you can look up YouTube through the link below to see your foremost Igbo leader confess to being the architect of one-Nigerianism philosophy that killed Nigeria beyond salvage. Happy viewing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YwA9iFW0Es

Elvictor:
it seem like you don't know what Obasanjo has done, do you know that Obasanjo was the one who pass the law that FG should have control of all resources? I should leave Yoruba race out of it? When he gave Lagos the power to control all their resources during his reign, I should leave Yoruba race out of it when they were using their media to change the narrative of Niger Delta struggles and paint us in bad light?

It seems you never heard about how Obasanjo withheld Lagos State's allocation for three years over Lagos State's creation of LCDAs which was itself a positive contribution to the fight for resource control. Then you also obviously didn't hear about Obasanjo's overruling of Lagos State's proposal to build an independent power plant which again was another pro-restructuring project. You also never heard about Lagos State's sponsorship of a Sovereign National Conference among the members of the civil society in 2005 to discuss the issue of restructuring against which Obasanjo quickly organized a parallel version to sabotage that of Lagos State.
You obviously still have a lot of research to do on how and exactly which tribe abolished resource control and which tribe has been in the forefront of all agitations to restore it.
The only instance where a Yoruba man, other than Obasanjo, acted in a way that was inimical to the struggle for restructuring towards the restoration of resource control was in 1978 and that was when Rotimi Williams colluded with Professor Nwabueze to propose a transfer of more items from the concurrent and residual lists to the exclusive list. Outside that, no other example exists.
The mere fact that majority of Yorubas deride and despise Obasanjo for using federal military might to humiliate and destroy the legacies of Awolowo who is known as the father of Nigerian federalism and was himself the leading advocate of resource control should be instructive enough as to why you should not rub Obasanjo's folly and anti-resource control policies on all Yorubas. Neither of Obasanjo's two times rise to power received the support of Yorubas. I am not by this implying that there are no Yorubas who blindly make a hero out of Obasanjo, but such are in the minority among them and the percentage membership of Obasanjo Fan club relative to the entire Yorubas population is far less than the percentage of his SS fans relative to the entire SS people ironically.

Elvictor:
.
Yoruba are reaping the sins of Obasanjo, if the Hausa|Fulani win't run away from Nigeria after 2023 general election they will reap theirs.

While I am not Yoruba, I don't seem to get this your lumping of Yorubas into the Obasanjo misrule and atrocities. If Yorubas had had their way in 1999 Obasanjo wouldn't have been recycled as Nigeria's president. In fact Obasanjo lost that election woefully in all the six Yoruba states. It was the SE and SS that did their traditional and historical collision with the hegemonic North to vote Obasanjo into power with campaign jingles like 'he is detribalised, he is a patriot, he is contesting under the only truly national party unlike the others contesting through regional pressure groups, he is a unifier, blah, blah, blah.....'
So I am yet to see how it is the fault of Yorubas that Obasanjo was given the opportunity to rule Nigeria again despite his atrocities of the Land Use Decree of 1978, his 1977 Decree which transferred schools from the missionaries to the Hausafulani-controlled military FG which marked the beginning of the fall of education standards in Nigeria, his 1978 constitutional conference through which Professor Nwabueze further transferred 50% of concurrent and residual lists items to the exclusive list, etc.

Rugaria:
Yaraduas regime came to an end the very moment Dora Akunyili, a minister under his administration came out to rail against "cabals".. You guys should stop rewriting history! The Igbo support for the SS has been there and will always be there because of the fact that a sizeable chunk of the SS are either Igbos! Or biologically/culturally close to the igbos! It takes a lot of nerve to rewrite recent history sooo brazenly! The so called SS as a regional grouping is basically the brainchild of Igbo delegations to the national conference under Abacha! Otherwise, most probably, they will still be under the former eastern Nigeria. It was the likes of Ekwueme and co that supported that idea. In that same conference, the idea of resource control/derivation was mentioned, guess what? It was only the SS and the SE that were left together to do the fighting. Even the SW that was hitherto parroting their support for resource control was nowhere to be found..

The bolded deviates from the present narrative being peddled by IPOB and majority of Igbos who now assert that the SS was a creation by the Fulani controlled Federal Government to turn the Niger Deltans against their supposed Igbo brothers while ignoring the Fulani cabal stealing their crude oil. So who between you and Nnamdi Kanu should be believed now? Or were the Alex Ekueme and others you credit with the creation of the SS Fulanis back then during the Abacha Constitutional Conference through which you say they pushed for the creation of the region?

Elvictor:
and Obasanjo, he is worse idiot ever I wonder why he wasn't killed, a greedy bastard.

I can see that you are from Rivers or Bayelsa State and share my belief that Obasanjo is one of the worst things that happened to this country. I am not from either Rivers or Bayelsa and don't take me for a Yoruba either, however I like to ask this question: But why do some persons from your area still regard Obasanjo as a hero and even eulogize him as a nationalist despite the genocide he ordered in Odi? Worse is that the genocide happened in November 1999 and in the 2003 election Obasanjo swept clean the votes of these two states. How come?

Rugaria:
How did he change the political landscape that ushered in military regimes? I don't understand how we reach conclusions sometimes. He stopped a coup which he was not part of. Even danjuma that killed him has come out to say he was angry with the man for not putting the coupists on trial quickly.Ironsi rounded the whole coupists and had them in jail until the day he was killled. A counter coup was organized against him, not necessarily because of what he has done but mainly as a result of the actions of the coupists he arrested. A coup he quelled singlehandedly by the way!

Without Ironsi, that Nzeogwus coup would have succeeded, which in my on appraisal should have been a good deal for Nigeria. Unless you are blaming him for being so politically naive in appointing nothern officers into strategic positions (something I consider to be a crime against humanity with the benefit of hindsight) or for thinking about a unitary system(a policy thrust he never lived to implement), Otherwise, the man should be left alone. Those who really destroyed Nigeria, came after Ironsi not before him. Those abusing him for the situation of the country today while not mentioning the likes of Gowon, murtala, Buhari, Babangida or Abacha are only being mischievous..

Per the first bolded; Let us put on our thinking caps and consider the following historical scenarios:
1. During the Biafra War when Ojukwu found out that Ifeajuna was plotting with the Nigerian side a ceasefire truce which would end up with he himself (Ojukwu) being killed and Ifeajuna taking over the reigns of power to lead Biafran soldiers into surrendering, he got Ifeajuna arrested and wasted no time in wasting him.

2. When investigations revealed that Henry and Charles Okar were the masterminds of the October 1 2010 Abuja bomb blast that would have killed Jonathan, we all recall that Jonathan, gentle as they say he is, did all he could to have these two brothers killed or at least jailed forever. Even when they escaped justice through the Nigerian judiciary Jonathan went as far as looking for alternative help in the South African judiciary which paid off for him.
When Dimkar was caught, Obasanjo made sure he was wasted soon afterwards because as Murtala Mohammed's vice, a successful Dimkar coup would have taken his own life too.
Then IBB would even kill anyone he saw in his dream plotting a coup against him.

The above instances show that when someone in power uncovers an assassination plot against him, it is natural for him to do all he can with his position to kill the masterminds of that plot within the shortest possible time.
But in Ironsi's case, despite it was later unravelled by his own investigation that Ifeajuna, Nzeogwu and the rest had him in their hit list, he wasn't alarmed into trying to waste them but chose strangely to gloss over them and kept them in detention trying to find soft landing for them. That leads to the logical conclusion that he actually had a prior knowledge of the coup and in fact worked hand in hand with the plotters who didn't actually meant to kill him but just put his name on the hit list to make the whole plot appear nationalistic at the planning stage
Per the second bolded, his evil Unification Decree was totally uncalled for because if the remote causes of the crisis (which was Balewa's misrule founded on his illegal interference in the purely intra-Western Region power tussle between the two AG factions, and his rigging of the 1962 census and rigging of the 1965 election in the West) he claimed to want to address were anything to go by, then common sense dictated he should have further weakened the center through centrifugal decrees. But his decision to do the exact opposite (i.e. his promulgation of a centripetal Unification Decree which further strengthened the center and weakened the regions) could only be explained as a manifestation of a hidden agenda which if he was allowed to fully implement would obviously put every other tribe at a permanently disadvantaged position under his own Igbo tribe exactly the way it is with Nigeria now under Fulanis but temporarily. So your attempts to absolve Ironsi of complicity in the mess Nigeria finds herself today is based on a very simplistic analysis of the issues back then.
In essence it could be rightly deduced that the North continued in his unitary system ways after ousting him because they felt such was the only possible way to forever put the now confirmed Igbo domination agenda in check.

Per the third bolded; I want you to honestly answer this question:
If after purportedly stopping the coup, Ironsi had simply sworn in the Dipcharima thrown up by the Parliament as Balewa's, replaced the slain premiers with their deputies, courtmartialled the coupists and then returned to the barracks as a professional career soldier, would any other military officer have ever contemplated staging a coup in Nigeria again? Would the likes of Gowon, Murtala Mohammed, Obasanjo, IBB, Buhari and Abacha have ever smelled power let alone acquired it to come and do worse than Ironsi as you allege? Would the civil war have happened?
Anyhow you choose to look at it, Ironsi sowed the seeds of the Nigerian tragedy.

Gordieshegz:
Another clear explanation that Nigeria has no business with presidential system at the national level. A parliamentary system will quite prevent bigoted guys like donmixc from electing nonsensical characters to rule on the rest of the nation

This is why I advocate that we return to parliamentary system or switch to electoral college under this presidential system.

Gandollaar:
Osunbande in ACN championed restructuring.

Osunbande in APC wants restructuring clearly defined.

In Lagos, restructuring was very clear in meaning as a more decentralized structure hence that understanding formed the basis on which Osinbajo pursued it as Lagos State Attorney General. But in the larger Nigerian context restructuring has various meanings to various individuals and groups so Osinbajo has a point in demanding clarification of the concept as it relates to the entire Nigeria. If you read Atiku's dissertation on restructuring in between the lines you would be shocked to see a section of it where he still advocated greater control of revenue by the FG. Similarly haven't you heard some Nigerians bringing into the restructuring narrative things that merely have to do with the reforms of certain institutions? In fact some people talk about reducing the number of political parties as a part of restructuring when in actual fact restructuring is all about decentralization of powers and nothing about political parties.

lexy2014:
if i lost track, then i wont be repeating the questions am asking over and over again. it shows that am on d same path. if u say am "just playing the devil's advocate", how does that prevent u from answering d questions asked? Was there a time i discussed Obasanjo, yar'adua and jonathan with u? kindly produce where we had that conversation. so based on your claims of Tinubus suitability for president, u have d following questions:

Which other governor contemporary of his made such record? Can you mention just one?
what record are u referring to? how does increasing revenue in lagos make tinubu best governor in nigeria between 1999-2007?


Then you obviously need a refresher course on GDP per capita.

this is what i asked u. do u see any enquiry about GDP in d questions?: If u are comparing d IGR of Lagos state with all other 35states, pls what is d population of d other 35states compared to Lagos? what was d greatest resource in Lagos state under Tinubu?


Do I need to go futher to tell you that some of his contemporary governors owed salaries despite receiving federal allocations steadily while Tinubu owed no salary despite having a far larger civil service than them all amidst seizure of allocation throughout his second term? Can you mention just one other governor that started an enduring transportation scheme in or any of the other projects I have listed before I give you more? Can you even specifically mention one of these your other governors and what they achieved with their so-called lesser revenues rather than just keep making generalizations and blank assertions?

are u trying to tell me that between 1999-2007, Tinubu was d only governor out of 36 that paid salaries? if he improved IGR from 500m to 11billion and all u can mention is paying salaries and BRT, then u have no other achievement to mention. by d way, is starting transportation system d criteria for all governors? and when u say "enduring transportation scheme", enduring in what way?

You have obviously chosen not to see them despite my enumeration of them. So I may not be able to force you to acknowledge them.
what did u "enumerate" that i didnt see? if i didnt see it, then u obviously didnt enumerate anything


Can you tell us a bit about these your other "better" state governors of Tinubu era, their "better" achievements and how successful their successors were?


what has "better state governors of Tinubu era" got to do with d question i asked? u made a claim that Tinubu is d "pioneer of the new Lagos". how does ur question about better state governors in tinubu era relate to ur claim and my question about it?

pls read my question again: which "new lagos"? what of d "old lagos"? whats d difference? did lagos start with Tinubu? what has d continuation by his successors got to do with him being d most qualified nigerian to be president of nigeria?


Then you clearly don't know the danger of social injustice to a society and why the fight against it qualified the likes of Mandela, Abraham Lincoln and many others as good leaders despite their individual imperfections.

Pls tell me d danger of social injustice to a society. What has creating LCDAs in Lagos by Tinubu done to qualify him to be president of Nigeria?

You obviously think governance is all about only economic policies let alone know what democratic ideals are and the relationship between it and political stability which in turn affects economic development.

since u are so knowledgeable about governance not just being about "economic policies and u know what democratic ideals are and the relationship between it and political stability which in turn affects economic development", then answering my question shouldnt have been a challenge for u.

so what are democratic ideals and its relationship with political stability which in turn affects economic development? mind u: how did this affect his ability to govern?

When a person loses track it means he is no longer able to find his way forward and not that he has remained static.
You want to defend yourself with the claim that you didn't talk about Yaradua or Obasanjo? Did I in my very first comment you quoted talk about Tinubu meeting any set qualification criteria to be president based on anything that has to do with his administration of Lagos State in the areas of revenue generation and deployment which you smuggled in in your response which led to this back and forth?
As long as opinions are getting more and more unanimous that only a restructured Nigeria will bring about the Nigeria of our dreams then common sense dictates that the major qualification criterion for a president who will midwife the delivery of such a Nigeria is one with cognate antecedents, and that is how and why Tinubu qualifies on account of his pro-restructuring antecedents which even his most vehement detractors don't deny. You alone chose to bring in the issue of revenue generation and allocation into the criteria.

9jaRealist:
Dude, it was you who “isolated” resource control….
And thus I highlighted and addressed it SPECIFICALLY.

Not everyone has time for a dissertation on Nairaland…
Suffice it to note that GOOD GOVERNANCE does not require restructuring first.

Restructuring is NOT a silver bullet…
And if these folks are incapable of good governance now, it won’t change much!
>

No. You it was who decided to isolate resource control obviously because you are an apostle of unitary system.
If good governance doesn't require restructuring, then how come you have never been able to get it again since 1966 when the military introduced the present structure? The only era which Nigerians are unanimous in reminiscing about as regards good governance and satisfactory progress was the 1960 to 1966 era which was founded on a decentralized arrangement. Were the politicians of that era saints?

9jaRealist:
The IRONY of your dissertation is that restructuring was NOT needed to create the LCDAs…
The only thing states CANNOT do is create LGAs because it requires a constitutional amendment (which is eediotic btw).

Meanwhile, some might point out that even with the LCDAs, the state government is still primarily responsible for practical all development in Lagos State - including basics like building/rehabilitating inner streets, patching up portholes on local streets (through LSPWC), primary healthcare centers, neighborhood skill development and recreational centers and facilities, social housing, primary and secondary schools, garbage disposal and waste management (through LAWMA), gutters and canals, streetlights, neighborhood watch (through LNSC), parks and greenery (through LASPARK), among other basically LOCAL governance responsibilities. Leaves rational people pondering what exactly these LCDAs do (perhaps other than providing jobs and perks for politicians and their Agberos). But let’s continue to fixate over the shadow of “restructuring” instead of concentrating the substance of good governance.
>

And you forgot that the LCDAs creation wasn't the original idea but only came to be what the Lagos State had to settled for after the Supreme Court invoked relevant parts of the unitary constitution to overrule the actual LGAs created originally. It is actually eediotic to believe that constitutional amendment is not possible in favour of states having the power to create their own LGAs without recourse to approval by the National Assembly.

And in what ways exactly are theLGAs in states without LCDAs different from Lagos LCDAs in functional redundancy? If your argument is to be extended, then we wouldn't need even states since the governors aren't accountable. In fact we wouldn't even need a country since the presidency is not accountable. We would just rather have the whole of Africa as just one country to be governed from the capital without any subnational units and that will guarantee good governance? How delusional!