A lecture given at the Nigerian College of Arts, Science and Technology, Enugu, on 4th February, 1961.THERE has been a good deal of controversy on the true meaning and implications of the Anglo-Nigerian Defence Pact which was executed by Nigeria and Britain within a month or so of our country's attainment of independence. The Federal Government, fully conscious of the unfavourable reaction of the entire generality of our people to the Pact, has sought to place on this document a construction which its provisions cannot bear. In the process, some government spokesmen have done violence to the ordinary meanings of certain words. We have been told that the execution of the Pact does not necessarily oblige Nigeria to take part in any war in which Britain might be involved. A high-ranking British spokesman has made an abstruse refinement of this point by saying that a Pact of this nature automatically terminates when one of the contracting countries is involved in war. It was claimed for the Pact that it was designed mainly for the benefit of Nigeria, as under it Britain undertakes to provide facilities for the training of our armed forces. Speaking at Nsukka two days ago, the Prime Minister reiterated and re-emphasised this claim. When he moved a motion calling upon the House of Representatives to ratify the terms of the Pact, the Minister of Defence, Alhaji Mohammed Ribadu, declared that the existence of the Pact does not preclude Nigeria from entering into similar undertaking with any other country or countries, and that under it no provision has been made for the leasing to Britain of a military base in Nigeria.From the brief summing up of the government case which I have just made - and I believe that my summary is fair and unimpeachable - it will be seen that there are six important points. According to the federal government, the Pact: Will not involve Nigeria in any war in which Britain may be engaged;Automatically terminates in the event of one of the contracting parties being involved in war.Is designed for Nigeria's benefit, in that under it Britain provides training facilities for members of our armed forces; Docs not provide for the leasing of a military base in Nigeria to Britain;Is not incompatible with the federal government's declared foreign policy; and does not preclude Nigeria from entering into a similar Pact or Pacts with any other country or countries; and Does not in any way detract from our country's sovereignty.I have a feeling that the Federal Government and its friends have repeatedly been urging these points for public consumption, in the belief that since the vast majority of the people do not posses copies of or have read the Pact, a persistent advocacy of a bad case might make it look good.Similarly, those of us who see in the Pact the diametric opposite of the Government's points of view and a veritable danger to our country's sovereignty, peace and well-being; shall continue repeatedly to present the other side of the case, until truth triumphs over misrepresentation, and the contracting parties feel obliged to abrogate what is, to all intelligent Nigerians, an infamous document.In presenting to you the true meaning and implications of the Pact, and refuting the case made by the spokesmen of the Nigerian and British Governments, I think it will be convenient to take, one by one and in the order in which I have stated them, the six points which I have previously enumerated.With regard to the first point in the Federal Government's case, the preamble and Article I of the Defence Agreement are relevant, and I quote them in full.Preamble:'Whereas the Federation of Nigeria is fully self governing and independent within the Commonwealth;'And whereas the Government of the Federation of Nigeria and the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland recognise that it is in their common interest to preserve peace and to provide for their mutual defence;'And whereas the Government of the Federation of Nigeria has now assumed responsibility for the external defence of its territory; 'Now therefore, the Government of the Federation of Nigeria and the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland have agreed as follows:Article I:'The Government of the Federation and the United Kingdom Government each undertake to afford to the other such assistance as may be necessary for mutual defence, and to consult together on the measures to be taken jointly or separately to ensure the fullest co-operation between them for this purpose.'The meaning and implications of these provisions are, in my humble and candid opinion, clear beyond any peradventure. The aim of the two countries - Nigeria and Britain - in entering into this Agreement is 'to preserve peace and to provide for their mutual defence ... 'There is a legal authority which has the force of law in all civilised societies (of which I venture to say we are one), that in the construction of documents and statutes every word will be understood to have its ordinary meaning- unless the contrary is expressly stated in the document or statute concerned. In the absence of express interpretations to the contrary, we are bound to construe the operative words in the preamble and in Article I in their ordinary meanings.
Click here to read full news..
