₦airaland Forum

Realtruth2023:
You are still missing the point, who abolished regions and created states? It wasn't Ironsi but Gowon.

It was ironsi that introduced decree 34 that united Nigeria under one federal power. No matter how much you tried it won't change the fact. Deal with that☹️

Kdon2:
It was ironsi that introduced decree 34 that united Nigeria under one federal power. No matter how much you tried it won't change the fact. Deal with that☹️

You are still trying to clutch straws. Nigeria has been a federation after independence, try and look up what a federal power is. Ironsi's unitary decree only consolidated and centralized administrative control of the regional civil service. he kept the regional control autonomous.

Yoruba Muslim always making excuses for thier slave master

Mindlog:
Gowon created the 12 states out of the regions, ending regionalism but dem hang for Ironsi head.

gidgiddy:
They have lied for almost 60 years that Aguiyi-Ironsi's Decree 34 is what abolished the Region's and ended true federalism

They know that those who will believe the lies are those too lazy to Google Decree 34 and realise it was just a civil service Decree

It was Gowon who abolished the 4 Region's Nigeria had, and replaced them with 12 states, using Decree 14

Then Gowon introduced full blown unitary rule by abolishing resource control with Decree 15

The truth is in black and white below

Bros , Nah saw-dust dey your head no be brain at all . You come here online to gaslight people just to prove a point . God go punish you.

Before decree 14 ...there was decree 34 which abolish all existing political structure as it is enshrined in 1963 constitution.

Why do you post only Decree 14 ? You need to post decree 34 and lemme debate this with you ....


Oni kuure

Jagaban2012:
Bros , Nah saw-dust dey your head no be brain at all . You come here online to gaslight people just to prove a point . God go punish you.

Before decree 14 ...there was decree 34 which abolish all existing political structure as it is enshrined in 1963 constitution.

Why do you post only Decree 14 ? You need to post decree 34 and lemme debate this with you ....


Oni kuure

You said I posted Decree 14? Why not post Decree 34?

You cannot post Decree 34 because there is nothing there that supports what you say.

Meanwhile, read what Gowons Decree 14 said below and get sense

There shall , on commencement of this Decree, be created out of the Regions, States to be known by the names in column of 1 of the Shedule of this Decree

Gowon even told you in his own Decree that the Region's were existing, and he was creating states out of them.

Realtruth2023:
It was never pride. The issue was the ruling NPC party was putting things in place to totally dominate the country. They had instigated the crisis in the West and he had already started to replicate the same problem in the Eastern region by courting Adaka Boro and his cohorts, promising them a region of only Ijaws in the Niger delta which was impossible as the Niger delta has other tribes.
You just deliberately ignored that fact. Gowon crafted his own decree he didn't implement Ironsi's decree. Gowon didn't mention that je was implementing Ironsi's decree rather Gowon repealed the unitary decree. Please lie with finesse and stop denying the obvious truth.

The truth bro is that Nzeogwu and his guys killed politicians from other regions except ibos. That gave an ethnic character to the coup and since then it has been bloodshed. Never start a thing you cannot finish. As I said I support the ibos because they are highly industrious people and Nigeria would benefit a lot if these guys are allowed to blossom. However, the truth is that some ibos in the early post-independence period started the problem.

Realtruth2023:
You are still trying to clutch straws. Nigeria has been a federation after independence, try and look up what a federal power is. Ironsi's unitary decree only consolidated and centralized administrative control of the regional civil service. he kept the regional control autonomous.

Your arguing a fact speaks volume about you by the way. No matter how you try twist it, ironsi started it. He changed Nigeria system with decree 34. I know this 8s an attempt like twisting the ibo coup as not being ibo coup but Nigeria coup. But the slowpoke coupists killed Hausa and Yoruba leaders only and the only easterner was not ibo. ☹️

ShogunNoName:
Facts are obvious from this post

1. You are Yoruba

2. You didnt read and cant comprehend English too well

3. You do not know any history and think the rest of us are like you Yorubas.

4. We know where the ibos failed and we hold them to that but you Yorubas are the ones who brought tribalism to southern Nigeria

5. It was Gowon who abolished regionalism

Because someone spoke wrote plenty English doesn't make him right. Go and read up what the regions were before and during Ironsi era.

How can there be regional autonomy when decree 33 was used to ban political parties and associations who were the constituted authority by the people for the people to manage their regional resources?

Refer to decree 33 sections in frames 1,2 & 3.

Thereafter, decree 34 in sections 1, 2(1) c & d finalized who controls the regions (Ironsi) through appointed military administrators. That was it, the genie was let out of the lamp, and has since refused to go back in through successive government’s whether military or democratic.

Realtruth2023:
see guy you still miss the point. there was regional autonomy. The only thing Ironsi did was unify the civil service thus removing administrative autonomy of the civil service in the regions.

This one is trying to split hair. Ironsi's Decree 34 took away the independence of the regions and centralized the affairs of the country. Gowon only put the final nail in the coffin.

9gerian:
How can there be regional autonomy when decree 33 was used to ban political parties and associations who were the constituted authority by the people for the people to manage their regional resources?

Refer to decree 33 sections in frames 1,2 & 3.

Thereafter, decree 34 in sections 1, 2(1) c & d finalized who controls the regions (Ironsi) through appointed military administrators. That was it, the genie was let out of the lamp, and has since refused to go back in through successive government’s whether military or democratic.

Don't mind our ibo brother. That yoruba author was just trying to mess with their heads as usual

9gerian:
How can there be regional autonomy when decree 33 was used to ban political parties and associations who were the constituted authority by the people for the people to manage their regional resources?

Refer to decree 33 sections in frames 1,2 & 3.

Thereafter, decree 34 in sections 1, 2(1) c & d finalized who controls the regions (Ironsi) through appointed military administrators. That was it, the genie was let out of the lamp, and has since refused to go back in through successive government’s whether military or democratic.

Nobody is disputing that Ironsi introduced military rule. There's no such thing as democracy in military rule

The bare faced lie being in disputed is that it was Ironsi who changed the structural arrangement of Nigeria

Well, Gowons Decree 14 tells the world that it Gowon was that abolished the 4 Region's Nigeria had, and created 12 states

And Decree 15 tells the world he was the one who abolished resource control the region's enjoyed, even under Ironsi

gidgiddy:
They have lied for almost 60 years that Aguiyi-Ironsi's Decree 34 is what abolished the Region's and ended true federalism

They know that those who will believe the lies are those too lazy to Google Decree 34 and realise it was just a civil service Decree

It was Gowon who abolished the 4 Region's Nigeria had, and replaced them with 12 states, using Decree 14

Then Gowon introduced full blown unitary rule by abolishing resource control with Decree 15

The truth is in black and white below

You have continued to push this lie even when you have not been able to explain what Ironsi meant when he said in his broadcast that "The regions are hereby abolished and broken down to provinces". Secondly, why do you always quickly upload Gowon's Decree gazette without uploading Ironsi's own side by side so that the open minded reader will go through both and decide from an informed opinion?
Why are you hiding Ironsi's gazette but quick to show that of Gowon if you are not trying to deceive people?

gidgiddy:
Nobody is disputing that Ironsi introduced military rule. There's no such thing as democracy in military rule

The bare faced lie being in dispute is that it was Ironsi who changed the structural arrangement of Nigeria

Well, Gowons Decree 14 tells the world that it Gowon was that abolished the 4 Region's Nigeria had, and created 12 states

And Decree 15 tells the world he was the one who abolished resource control the region's enjoyed, even under Ironsi

If anything, Gowon at some point reversed Ironsi's decrees.
Ironsi renamed "Republic of Nigeria" While Gowon changed it back to "Federal Republic of Nigeria". So going by the meaning of the word "federal" who between Ironsi and Gowon abolished federalism?

Deadlytruth:
If anything, Gowon at some point reversed Ironsi's decrees.
Ironsi renamed "Republic of Nigeria" While Gowon changed it back to "Federal Republic of Nigeria". So going by the meaning of the word "federal" who between Ironsi and Gowon abolished federalism?

We are not talking about what name Ironsi's Government or Gowons government decided to to call Nigeria. Nigeria became a Republic on October 1st 1960

We are talking about what abolished the 4 Region's Nigetia had, created states, and removed resource control

Deadlytruth:
You have continued to push this lie even when you have not been able to explain what Ironsi meant when he said in his broadcast that "The regions are hereby abolished and broken down to provinces". Secondly, why do you always quickly upload Gowon's Decree gazette without uploading Ironsi's own side by side so that the open minded reader will go through both and decide from an informed opinion?
Why are you hiding Ironsi's gazette but quick to show that of Gowon if you are not trying to deceive people?

Why would I care about broadcast when Decree 34, Decree 14 and Decree 15 are all in the public domain to compare?

Gowons Decree 14 says it all

There shall , on commencement of this Decree, be created out of the Regions, States to be known by the names in column of 1 of the Shedule of this Decree

Gowon has already told you in his own Decree that he is creating States out of the Regions, so why do I need to be looking for broadcast to know who abolished Regions?

Gpwons Decree 15 abolished resource control, so why am I looking who brought unitary rule where government took over everything?

You guys make me laugh, talking about broadcast because you can't anything in Decree 34 that Ironsi did wrong

Realtruth2023:
Oga bring the original transcript exactly as it is from the archives not a newspaper publication.

No!!

You bring the Archives copy to prove this one is wrong !

You alleged and you said it was wrong copy of the broadcast

You should then show us the Archived Transcript copy then to prove it


Newspaper and Journal Publication is evidence !!

Why playing with words?

Did Ironsi’s introduction of military rule end the autonomy enjoyed by the regions before his ascension? The answer is YES. Could ironsi have worked with the existing political structures on ground to restore normalcy after quashing the coup? The answer is YES as that was the exact sentiment of most of cabinet members.

Was there any consultation before Ironsi ceased power? The answer is YES. An account has it that there was consultation between Ironsi, Azikiwe and Nwafor Orizu prior to the transfer of power by Orizu to Ironsi. Was this consultation sufficient for a multi ethnic country like Nigeria? The answer is NO because the agreement for independence was wide before settling for regional autonomy as the basis for independence.

And that’s how a unitary system of government was introduced by Ironsi to Nigeria. Refer to the screenshot (Britannica article https://www.britannica.com/place/Nigeria/Independent-Nigeria#ref517364) of the account of events leading up to the counter (revenge) coup by Northern soldiers.

In fact, Ironsi may have been left alone to rule Nigeria had he not tampered with the federal structure the way he did. This is because the counter coup was premised on the unification decree that ended regional autonomy and the North was going to break away after the counter coup but for the British ambassador that convinced them that the North would suffer because it was landlocked.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RR-VRVO1rU

If still in doubt in spite of the overwhelming evidence, kindly consult a lawyer to help you understand decree 33, unification decree 34 and all Gowan’s decrees and point out which it was that proscribed regional autonomy.

The records are there for all who are objective.

Cheers!

gidgiddy:
Nobody is disputing that Ironsi introduced military rule. There's no such thing as democracy in military rule

The bare faced lie being in disputed is that it was Ironsi who changed the structural arrangement of Nigeria

Well, Gowons Decree 14 tells the world that it Gowon was that abolished the 4 Region's Nigeria had, and created 12 states

And Decree 15 tells the world he was the one who abolished resource control the region's enjoyed, even under Ironsi

Excerpts from decree 33 and unification decree 34:

gidgiddy:
You said I posted Decree 14? Why not post Decree 34?

You cannot post Decree 34 because there is nothing there that supports what you say.

Meanwhile, read what Gowons Decree 14 said below and get sense

There shall , on commencement of this Decree, be created out of the Regions, States to be known by the names in column of 1 of the Shedule of this Decree

Gowon even told you in his own Decree that the Region's were existing, and he was creating states out of them.

Christistruth02:
No!!

You bring the Archives copy to prove this one is wrong !

You alleged and you said it was wrong copy of the broadcast

You should then show us the Archived Transcript copy then to prove it


Newspaper and Journal Publication is evidence !!

Oga that publication is a recent publication, there is no transcript there. Stop quoting 3rd party sources verbatim.

9gerian:
How can there be regional autonomy when decree 33 was used to ban political parties and associations who were the constituted authority by the people for the people to manage their regional resources?

Refer to decree 33 sections in frames 1,2 & 3.

Thereafter, decree 34 in sections 1, 2(1) c & d finalized who controls the regions (Ironsi) through appointed military administrators. That was it, the genie was let out of the lamp, and has since refused to go back in through successive government’s whether military or democratic.

Banning Political parties is not regional autonomy bro. Stop trying to be half clever you are doing a poor job at it. It was definitely a military regime that controlled regions and were the military rulers autonomous in theor decision making? Yes they were. The logic here is Ironsi kept the regions intact with their autonomy albeit under a military leadership.

Kdon2:
Your arguing a fact speaks volume about you by the way. No matter how you try twist it, ironsi started it. He changed Nigeria system with decree 34. I know this 8s an attempt like twisting the ibo coup as not being ibo coup but Nigeria coup. But the slowpoke coupists killed Hausa and Yoruba leaders only and the only easterner was not ibo. ☹️

So are you telling me that Ademoyega, Captain Adeleke and Lt Fola Oyewole were all igbos? Their participation is a clear indication that it was not an igbo coup. Also the lie that no igbo military leader was not killed also failed with the killing of Col Arthur Unegbe.

Anatolia:
The truth bro is that Nzeogwu and his guys killed politicians from other regions except ibos. That gave an ethnic character to the coup and since then it has been bloodshed. Never start a thing you cannot finish. As I said I support the ibos because they are highly industrious people and Nigeria would benefit a lot if these guys are allowed to blossom. However, the truth is that some ibos in the early post-independence period started the problem.

An igbo senior military officer was killed. If you must know by 1964 the NPC/NCNC coalition was dead. Even Zik at a point refused to accept the results of the elections that caused the wettie crisis.
The principal actors at that time were mainly Yoruba and Northern Politicians Sardauna and Akintola the main actors. Saying that no igbo leader military or civilian was killed is actually a big lie, as the Quartermaster General of the Army Lt Col Arthur Unegbe was killed. And the lie that he held keys to the armory makes no sense as Quartermaster General does not hold armory keys.

Ha! This is unbelievable

So you don’t know or understand that the military administrators appointed by Ironsi took their powers from an autocratic military dictatorship of Ironsi and therefore cannot be said to maintain regional autonomy that derived its powers from the people through democratic means.

That you are arguing this way suggests serious deficiencies in your capacity to analyze problems for root cause and possible solutions.

This is serious!

Realtruth2023:
Banning Political parties is not regional autonomy bro. Stop trying to be half clever you are doing a poor job at it. It was definitely a military regime that controlled regions and were the military rulers autonomous in theor decision making? Yes they were. The logic here is Ironsi kept the regions intact with their autonomy albeit under a military leadership.

9gerian:
Ha! This is unbelievable

So you don’t know or understand that the military administrators appointed by Ironsi took their powers from an autocratic military dictatorship of Ironsi and therefore cannot be said to maintain regional autonomy that derived its powers from the people through democratic means.

That you are arguing this way suggests serious deficiencies in your capacity to analyze problems for root cause and possible solutions.

This is serious!

So what essentially is your point. All military dictatorship is autocratic. The crux of the argument is did Ironsi destroy the regions? The answer is No. You are just trying to be half clever so that you can stick to the theory of blaming Ironsi.

Bros go and rest these games are stale, social media has exposed you people with jour fake patriotism whereas you are knee deep in close tribalism.

9gerian:
Excerpts from decree 33 and unification decree 34:

And where in all you posted did Ironsi abolish the 4 Region's Nigeria had, nor deny them resource control?

Goeons Decree 14 says:

There shall , on commencement of this Decree, be created out of the Regions, States to be known by the names in column of 1 of the Shedule of this Decree

Gowon told you in his own Decree that he is creating States out of Regions

His Decree 15 abolished sections 141 and 167 that had to do with resource control

Tell us where in Decree 34 Ironsi did similar

9gerian:
Why playing with words?

Did Ironsi’s introduction of military rule end the autonomy enjoyed by the regions before his ascension? The answer is YES. Could ironsi have worked with the existing political structures on ground to restore normalcy after quashing the coup? The answer is YES as that was the exact sentiment of most of cabinet members.

Was there any consultation before Ironsi ceased power? The answer is YES. An account has it that there was consultation between Ironsi, Azikiwe and Nwafor Orizu prior to the transfer of power by Orizu to Ironsi. Was this consultation sufficient for a multi ethnic country like Nigeria? The answer is NO because the agreement for independence was wide before settling for regional autonomy as the basis for independence.

And that’s how a unitary system of government was introduced by Ironsi to Nigeria. Refer to the screenshot (Britannica article https://www.britannica.com/place/Nigeria/Independent-Nigeria#ref517364) of the account of events leading up to the counter (revenge) coup by Northern soldiers.

In fact, Ironsi may have been left alone to rule Nigeria had he not tampered with the federal structure the way he did. This is because the counter coup was premised on the unification decree that ended regional autonomy and the North was going to break away after the counter coup but for the British ambassador that convinced them that the North would suffer because it was landlocked.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RR-VRVO1rU

If still in doubt in spite of the overwhelming evidence, kindly consult a lawyer to help you understand decree 33, unification decree 34 and all Gowan’s decrees and point out which it was that proscribed regional autonomy.

The records are there for all who are objective.

Cheers!

What Ironsi introduced was military rule, he did not tamper with the structural arrangement of Nigeria nor did he deny the Region's resource control

Ghana had many military rulers, but Ghana still practices Regionalism with each Region controlling its resources, because none of the military rulers abolished the Region's and created states like Gowon did with Decree 14, and removed resource control with Decree 15

So when military rule ended in Ghana, civilian rule restored autonomy. But because Gowon and others like him embarked on state creation, we now have 36 States that don't control any of their resources

The key word here is autonomy and federal that are , synonymous and interchangeable as resource control. Notice that Ironsi’s decree 33 proscribed the political parties and various ethnic associations that negotiated the independence as a first step of dismantling the structure. Then Ironsi’s decree 34 in section 1 stated that Nigeria ceases to be a federation, and even goes on to change its name from the Federal Military Government to National Military Government in section 2(1)a. It doubled down removing Federal from the Federal Capital Territory and renaming it Capital Territory in 2(1)b. This intentional stripping of autonomy continued in 2(1)c & d and so on. It was emphatic and unambiguous.

Every learned and enlightened person understood this, including the international community, council on foreign relations, etc. It is not even debatable once properly assessed as I have shown you here.

All of these was to strip Nigeria of its regional autonomy.

Again, if you are still in doubt, consult a lawyer.

Realtruth2023:
So what essentially is your point. All military dictatorship is autocratic. The crux of the argument is did Ironsi destroy the regions? The answer is No. You are just trying to be half clever so that you can stick to the theory of blaming Ironsi.

Bros go and rest these games are stale, social media has exposed you people with jour fake patriotism whereas you are knee deep in close tribalism.

The key word here is autonomy and federal that are , synonymous and interchangeable as resource control. Notice that Ironsi’s decree 33 proscribed the political parties and various ethnic associations that negotiated the independence as a first step of dismantling the structure. Then Ironsi’s decree 34 in section 1 stated that Nigeria ceases to be a federation, and even goes on to change its name from the Federal Military Government to National Military Government in section 2(1)a. It doubled down removing Federal from the Federal Capital Territory and renaming it Capital Territory in 2(1)b. This intentional stripping of autonomy continued in 2(1)c & d and so on. It was emphatic and unambiguous.

Every learned and enlightened person understood this, including the international community, council on foreign relations, etc. It is not even debatable once properly assessed as I have shown you here.

All of these was to strip Nigeria of its regional autonomy.

Again, if you are still in doubt, consult a lawyer.

gidgiddy:
What Ironsi introduced was military rule, he did not tamper with the structural arrangement of Nigeria nor did he deny the Region's resource control

Ghana had many military rulers, but Ghana still practices Regionalism with each Region controlling its resources, because none of the military rulers abolished the Region's and created states like Gowon did with Decree 14, and removed resource control with Decree 15

So when military rule ended in Ghana, civilian rule restored autonomy. But because Gowon and others like him embarked on state creation, we now have 36 States that don't control any of their resources

9gerian:
The key word here is autonomy and federal that are , synonymous and interchangeable as resource control. Notice that Ironsi’s decree 33 proscribed the political parties and various ethnic associations that negotiated the independence as a first step of dismantling the structure. Then Ironsi’s decree 34 in section 1 stated that Nigeria ceases to be a federation, and even goes on to change its name from the Federal Military Government to National Military Government in section 2(1)a. It doubled down removing Federal from the Federal Capital Territory and renaming it Capital Territory in 2(1)b. This intentional stripping of autonomy continued in 2(1)c & d and so on. It was emphatic and unambiguous.

Every learned and enlightened person understood this, including the international community, council on foreign relations, etc. It is not even debatable once properly assessed as I have shown you here.

All of these was to strip Nigeria of its regional autonomy.

Again, if you are still in doubt, consult a lawyer.

Dude stop trying to be clever by half. Military rule is autocratic meaning the order is given no doubt. But the argument here unless you want to be a liar, is did Ironsi destroy the regions? The answer is No, even within the regions there was autonomy even under military rule. There was council of chiefs that still played an advisory role to the military governor.

So where did the destruction of regions come into the argument.

Why not act intelligently by reading the subject of dispute in the thread and aligning your arguments for or against accordingly instead of creating a topic in your head and trying to force your unsubstantiated/unsupported opinions on others by gaslighting and calling them liars.

Bear in mind that you are also calling all the african archives, journalists, historians and documentary evidence referring to Ironsi as proscribing regional autonomy and introducing a unitary system liars just to suit your baseless narratives and attempts to rewrite the history. Very watery take indeed!

From here on you will need to consult a lawyer to enlighten you. I hope he charges you for wasting his time too!

Realtruth2023:
Dude stop trying to be clever by half. Military rule is autocratic meaning the order is given no doubt. But the argument here unless you want to be a liar, is did Ironsi destroy the regions? The answer is No, even within the regions there was autonomy even under military rule. There was council of chiefs that still played an advisory role to the military governor.

9gerian:
The key word here is autonomy and federal that are , synonymous and interchangeable as resource control. Notice that Ironsi’s decree 33 proscribed the political parties and various ethnic associations that negotiated the independence as a first step of dismantling the structure. Then Ironsi’s decree 34 in section 1 stated that Nigeria ceases to be a federation, and even goes on to change its name from the Federal Military Government to National Military Government in section 2(1)a. It doubled down removing Federal from the Federal Capital Territory and renaming it Capital Territory in 2(1)b. This intentional stripping of autonomy continued in 2(1)c & d and so on. It was emphatic and unambiguous.

Every learned and enlightened person understood this, including the international community, council on foreign relations, etc. It is not even debatable once properly assessed as I have shown you here.

All of these was to strip Nigeria of its regional autonomy.

Again, if you are still in doubt, consult a lawyer.

Stop deceiving people, it was military rule not civilian rule. The military does not take power and allow political parties, ethnic associations or democratic institutions to exist. That the Ironsi regime changed some names, preferred to call Nigeria a Republic, which it was anyway, or call the Capital a different name, does not mean he tampered with the structural arrangement of Nigeria

We had 4 Region's that were controlling their resources, and so it remained under Ironsi. What the Region's did not have was democracy.

You have Gowons Decree 14 where he abolished all 4 Region's and created 12 states

You have Gowons Decree 15 where he removed sections 141 and 164 that were about resource control and revenue sharing formula

Clearly it was Gowon that changed the structural arrangement of Nigeria

Yet you people are more interested in if Ironsi’s regime preferred to call Nigeria a federation rather than a Republic? Both of which it already was

You guys are funny