On August 8, 1957, the Western Region attained Self-Government.

We remember the date.

We remember the achievements.

But do we remember the idea?

Self-Government was not merely the transfer of administrative authority from Britain to Nigerian hands.

It was an experiment in whether a people could translate its own history, values and institutions into the governance of a modern society.

That question remains unfinished.

And perhaps the answer begins in a place we rarely associate with constitutional theory:

The Yoruba Family.

The Yoruba Family and the Foundations of a Secular Constitution

(i) Yoruba social organization historically accommodated religious plurality without making religious affiliation the primary determinant of political or kinship identity.

This proposition may well represent one of the Yoruba people’s greatest contributions, not only to the Constitutional Re-Formation of Nigeria, but to the wider Constitutional development of Africa.

For decades, discussions about Secularism in Nigeria have proceeded from borrowed assumptions.

The debate has largely been framed around European or American Constitutional experiences, asking whether Nigeria should imitate the French doctrine of laïcité, the American separation of church and state, or some hybrid model.

Rarely do we ask a more fundamental question.

Does the Yoruba historical experience already contain Constitutional principles capable of informing a modern Secular Federation?

We believe it does.

The starting point is neither politics nor the Constitution.

It is the Yoruba family.

(ii) Before the State Came the Family

Long before colonial Constitutions, military decrees, political parties or modern governments, the Yoruba had already evolved institutions through which people of different beliefs coexisted within a common social order.

The family was the first of these institutions.

The extended family (idile) preceded the modern State.

Kinship determined belonging.

Religion did not.

Even today, it is common to find within the same Yoruba family Muslims, Christians and adherents of indigenous religious traditions.

They inherit from the same ancestors.

They participate in the same family meetings.

They celebrate marriages together.

They bury their dead together.

They share obligations toward one another.

Religious affiliation may differ.

Family identity does not.

This is an extraordinary social achievement.

It demonstrates that religious plurality need not dissolve social cohesion.

Rather, the family provides a higher framework within which different religious commitments coexist.

The Yoruba family therefore embodies an important constitutional principle:

Kinship precedes religious affiliation.

(iii) A Different Historical Experience

This historical experience differs significantly from much of Europe’s Constitutional development.

Modern European Constitutionalism emerged after centuries of religious conflict.

The Protestant Reformation, the Wars of Religion, and particularly the Thirty Years’ War demonstrated the destructive consequences of allowing religious differences to determine political authority.

Secular Constitutionalism in Europe therefore emerged largely as a mechanism for ending religious conflict by separating ecclesiastical authority from political authority.

In other words, European Secularism was born out of conflict.

The Yoruba experience suggests a different historical pathway.

Religious diversity was accommodated within social institutions that already possessed legitimacy independent of religious belief.

The family remained intact.

The lineage remained intact.

The town remained intact.

The kingdom remained intact.

Religious differences were real.

They did not ordinarily determine political belonging.

Europe separated religion from the State after conflict.

Yoruba society largely organized coexistence before the modern State arrived.

These are different historical experiences leading toward a similar constitutional principle: political community should not depend upon religious uniformity.

(iv)Switzerland and the Yoruba Experience

The comparison with Switzerland is instructive.

Switzerland is often cited as one of the world’s most successful Federal democracies.

Yet its Constitutional stability does not arise from linguistic, religious or cultural uniformity.

It is home to four national languages: German, French, Italian and Romansh and historically has accommodated both Catholic and Protestant communities within a Federal Constitutional framework.

Its Constitutional genius lies not in eliminating diversity but in organizing coexistence.

The Swiss Confederation recognizes that unity need not require uniformity.

Each Canton enjoys substantial autonomy while remaining committed to the common Federal project.

The Federation exists because its Constituent units freely cooperate, not because their identities have been dissolved.

The Yoruba historical experience points toward a remarkably similar Constitutional intuition, though through an entirely different historical path.

Where Switzerland institutionalized coexistence through Cantons, the Yoruba historically institutionalized coexistence through the family, lineage, town and kingdom.

In both cases, diversity did not require fragmentation.

Rather, social cohesion emerged because differences were accommodated within institutions that commanded legitimacy independent of religious affiliation.

The comparison is not intended to suggest that Nigeria should imitate Switzerland.

Historical experiences are entirely different.

Rather, it demonstrates that Constitutional pluralism is not uniquely European.

Different civilizations may arrive at similar Constitutional principles through their own historical experience.

The Yoruba contribution to Constitutional Re-Formation therefore need not be borrowed.

It can emerge authentically from Yoruba institutions themselves.

(v) Omoluwabi Before Religious Identity

This understanding is reinforced by the Yoruba concept of Omoluwabi.

The Omoluwabi ideal evaluates a person primarily by Iwa—character.

Integrity. Responsibility. Respect. Industry. Wisdom. Public conduct.

None of these qualities depends exclusively upon adherence to a particular religion.

A Muslim may be Omoluwabi.

A Christian may be Omoluwabi.

An adherent of indigenous religion may equally embody the same virtues.

The standard is ethical rather than sectarian.

This does not diminish religion.

It places character above religious affiliation as the principal measure of citizenship.

It suggests that the moral foundations of public life need not depend upon religious uniformity.

(vi) From Family to Constitution

The Constitutional implications become immediately apparent.

If the family-the oldest institution in Yoruba society-has historically accommodated religious plurality without sacrificing cohesion, why should the modern State be organized differently?

Indeed, should the State not learn from the family rather than the family from the State?

The modern Constitution should therefore recognize what Yoruba social organization has long demonstrated:

Political equality must never depend upon religious affiliation.

Public institutions must belong equally to all citizens.

This is the true meaning of a Secular Constitutional order.

Not hostility toward religion.

Not preference of one religion over the other.

But Constitutional neutrality among religious traditions.

The Yoruba family demonstrates that such neutrality is neither foreign nor artificial.

It is rooted in lived historical experience.

(vii) The Yoruba Referendum

This understanding also changes the meaning of the proposed Yoruba Referendum.

Too often, the Referendum is viewed merely as a political instrument.

It is much more than that.

It is an opportunity for the Yoruba people to articulate, through democratic consent, the Constitutional principles arising from their own historical experience.

Federalism.

Developmental freedom.

The Omoluwabi ethic.

And religious pluralism.

These are not imported doctrines.

They are products of Yoruba history.

The Referendum therefore becomes an exercise in Constitutional self-definition.

It asks not merely what powers the Yoruba should possess.

It asks what Constitutional values the Yoruba wish to contribute to a renewed Nigerian Federation.

That distinction is fundamental.

The Referendum is not only about political autonomy.

It is about Constitutional contribution.

(viii) Beyond Nigeria

The significance of this argument extends beyond Nigeria.

Africa remains one of the world’s most culturally, linguistically and religiously diverse continents.

Many Constitutional systems continue to struggle with the relationship between religion, ethnicity and political authority.

The Yoruba experience offers an alternative possibility.

It suggests that Constitutional pluralism need not arise only from imported Constitutional theories.

It may emerge from indigenous institutions that have already demonstrated their capacity to manage diversity peacefully.

The Yoruba Family becomes the first school of Constitutional pluralism.

The Constitution merely extends that principle to the wider political community.

If this insight is developed carefully, it may contribute not only to Nigeria’s Constitutional Re-Formation but also to wider African discussions concerning Federalism, democratic coexistence and Constitutional legitimacy.

The Constitutional Re-Formation of Nigeria cannot succeed merely by redistributing governmental powers.

It must rediscover the social foundations upon which Constitutional order rests.

For the Yoruba, one of those foundations has always been the family.

Within that family, religious plurality has long existed without destroying political or social belonging.

The lesson is clear.

A Constitution that recognizes the equality of all citizens regardless of religious affiliation is not alien to Yoruba civilization.

It is one of its oldest practices.

The Yoruba Referendum should therefore be understood as more than a political necessity.

It is an opportunity to transform an indigenous principle of coexistence into a Constitutional principle capable of strengthening a truly Federal Nigeria.

In doing so, the Yoruba would not merely be asking for Constitutional change.

They would be contributing a Constitutional idea, born from their own historical experience, to Nigeria, and perhaps, in time, to Africa itself.

(ix) The Egbe’s Unfinished Mission

More than seventy years ago, the founders of the Egbe Omo Oduduwa and the Action Group and later the Unity party of Nigeria, led by Chief Obafemi Awolowo, expressed this aspiration in words that deserve to be read today not merely as an anthem, but as a Constitutional vision, formally defined as the Yoruba Anthem

Stanza 1

Iṣẹ́ wà fún ilẹ̀ wa

Fún ilẹ̀ bíbi wa

Ká gbé e gá, ká gbé e gá

Ká gbé e gá f’áyé rí

(There is work to be done for our land, our motherland. Let us uplift her and make her greatness visible to the whole world).

Stanza 2

Ìgbàgbọ́ wa ní pé

Bá ti b’ẹ́rú l’ábọ̀mo

Ká ṣiṣẹ́, ká ṣiṣẹ́

Ká ṣiṣẹ́ ká jọ là

(It is our belief that a child is born free, just as any other. Let us work hard together so we can all prosper collectively.)

Stanza 3

Ìṣọ̀kan àt’òmìnira

Ní kẹ́ jẹ́ ká máa lẹ́pa

Tẹ̀síwájú f’ọ́pọ̀ ire

Àt’òhun tọ́ dára

(Unity and freedom are what we must always pursue. We strive for continuous progress, abundance, and everything that is noble.)

Stanza 4

Ọmọ Oòdu’a dìde

Bọ́ sí ipò ẹ̀tọ́ rẹ

Ìwọ ní ìmọ́lẹ̀

Gbogbo Adúláwọ̀

(Arise, descendants of Oduduwa, and assume your rightful position. You are the light of the entire Black race (Africa)

The anthem is often remembered as a patriotic song.

It should also be understood as a statement of civilizational purpose.

Its recurring themes are unity, service, dignity, self-development, responsibility, and leadership.

Properly understood, its closing affirmation is not a declaration of ethnic superiority.

It is a declaration of responsibility.

A responsibility to develop ideas, institutions and examples capable of contributing to the progress not only of the Yoruba people but of Africa itself.

The Yoruba Referendum is therefore more than a political necessity.

It is an opportunity to transform an indigenous experience of pluralism, Federalism and human development into a Constitutional contribution to Nigeria-and perhaps, in time, to Africa itself.

That is the unfinished work of Self-Government.

And perhaps it is time for us to begin again.

That is the unfinished work of Self-Government.

On August 8, 1957, the Yoruba demonstrated that they could govern themselves.

Nearly seven decades later, the question is no longer whether we are capable of self-government.

It is whether we are prepared to define what self-government should mean in the twenty-first century.

“We are the light of the Black Race.”

Not a claim of superiority.

A responsibility.

Editorial Board

Yoruba Referendum Committee