The Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives, Benjamin Kalu, has withdrawn his proposed indigeneship bill from further legislative consideration, citing the need for broader consultation and alignment with public sentiment.
In a statement issued by his media aide Levinus Nwabughiogu, late Tuesday, Mr Kalu said the decision followed extensive feedback from stakeholders and insights from the National Institute for Legislative and Democratic Studies (NILDS), which submitted a detailed bill analysis report.
|
|
“Although the intention of the bill was to promote national unity, equity, and inclusiveness among all Nigerians, regardless of where they reside, part of the report stated that the State Houses of Assembly should make laws that will make settlers in different states enjoy the same rights and privileges by the indigenes,” he said.
According to Mr Kalu, the bill analysis report submitted by NILDS advised against proceeding with the legislation in its current form.
|
|
|
|---|
While the bill aimed to promote national unity, inclusiveness, and equity for Nigerians residing outside their ancestral states, the report warned of potential complications, particularly the risk of creating overlapping or multiple indigeneship claims.
“States should make laws that would allow settlers to benefit same rights and privileges enjoyed by indigenes without any form of discrimination as rightly provided for in the constitution.
“Though the Bill seeks to achieve some commendable objectives, however, this can be achieved through enactment of law. If this Bill is passed, it would pose challenges with time especially on the issue of double or multiple indigenship,” the report stated.
Mr Kalu, who also chairs the House Committee on Constitution Review, reaffirmed his commitment to a people-centred legislative process.
He reiterated that the constitution amendment process would remain open, participatory, and inclusive, urging citizens to stay engaged.
About the indigeneship bill
The indigeneship bill has only passed first reading in the House.
It sought to grant Nigerians who have resided in a state for a specific period the same rights and recognition as indigenes. The goal was to eliminate discrimination against so-called “non-indigenes” and foster national integration.
Opposition
However, the bill sparked debate over the legal and political implications of multiple indigeneship claims and concerns about undermining state autonomy, prompting its temporary withdrawal.
A socio-cultural group, De Renaissance Patriots Foundation, asked Speaker Abbas Tajudeen not to entertain the bill, warning that it could provoke widespread ethnic conflict across the country.
In a strongly worded statement titled “Rejection of the Proposed Bill on Indigenous Rights Due to Its Potential to Invite Ethnic Conflict,” the group criticised the bill as a potential trigger for national disunity.
Also, The Society for Odua Socio-Cultural Renaissance, in a statement, expressed deep concerns about the implications of the bill, arguing that indigeneity is an ancestral and cultural identity that cannot be legislated.
According to the society, while citizenship is determined by legal frameworks, indigeneity is tied to lineage and heritage, passed down through generations.
The pan-Yoruba socio-political organization, Afenifere, in a statement by its National Publicity Secretary, Jare Ajayi, said this bill could “aggravate ethnic tension and violence.”
However, the Ohanaeze Ndigbo Youth Council Worldwide, backed the bill, wondering why it was being criticised.
In a statement, the group’s president, Okwu Nnabuike, wondered how a bill that would benefit every citizen of the country could be termed to be favourable to Ndigbo.
READ ALSO: Bill seeking fresh educational qualification for LG chair passes second reading at House of Reps
He reminded those making anti-Igbo sentiments that “a Fulani man from Sifawa in Sokoto Caliphate – Umaru Altine, had in 1952 become elected as the first Mayor of the City of Enugu, the heart land and heartbeat of the Igbo Nation.
“Following from above, it is strange when people struggle to present Ndigbo as a people that are not accommodating other tribes, even when they know deep down in their hearts that such postulation is a fallacy.
“The fact that Ndigbo live and cohabit with other Nigerians freely is a testament to the fact that they have open and large hearts.”
