- Say It’s “A Betrayal Of History”
- Demand Transparency, Constitutional Review Of Foreign Military Presence
A COALITION of prominent Nigerian lawyers, academics, and civil society leaders has issued a fierce condemnation of the recent deployment of American troops to Nigeria, warning that the lack of transparency surrounding the arrangement constitutes a grave threat to the nation’s constitutional democracy and sovereignty.
The coalition, which includes a distinguished list of individuals – human rights lawyer, Femi Falana SAN, Prof. Jibrin Ibrahim, Dr Abubakar Siddique Mohammed, Dr Dauda Garuba, Prof. Massaud Omar, Prof. Mohammed Kuna, Engr. YZ Ya’u, and Dr Usman Bugaje, in a statement demanded for the immediate public disclosure and parliamentary scrutiny of any agreement permitting foreign forces to operate on Nigerian soil.
The coalition raises constitutional alarms following reports that the United States has deployed a “small team of troops” to the country, a number that has since been reported to be no fewer than 200 soldiers.
This follows the confirmation by the Nigerian government of US air strikes against Islamic State militants in the country on December 25, 2025.
The signatories argue that this development violates the clear provisions of the 1999 Constitution.
They cited Section 12(1), which mandates that any treaty between Nigeria and another country must be enacted into law by the National Assembly to have force.
“If there exists a mutual defence pact or expanded bilateral agreement permitting foreign troop deployment or the establishment of a foreign military base in Nigeria, such an arrangement must be laid before and enacted by the National Assembly,” the statement reads, asserting that: “Anything short of this procedure raises constitutional red flags.”
The coalition anchors its criticism on a rich history of Nigerian resistance to foreign military domination, portraying the current situation as a dangerous departure from a proud legacy.
The signatories reminded the public of the abrogation of the Anglo-Nigerian Defence Pact in 1962, a moment when public opposition forced the government to reject a “neo-colonial arrangement” with the United Kingdom.
They further recalled the 1976 stance of General Murtala Mohammed, who at an OAU summit declared Africa’s refusal to operate “under the orbit of any extra-continental power,” and more recent instances where military agreements with the US were withdrawn or nullified, including a Bilateral Immunity Agreement voided by the Senate in 2005 for constitutional violations.
“This legacy must not be abandoned,” the signatories assert. “These episodes demonstrate a consistent national principle: foreign military arrangements must comply with Nigeria’s Constitution and must never compromise our sovereignty.”
The signatories argue that the opaque nature of the current deployment, with details regarding the troops’ mandate, location, and duration undisclosed, dilutes national sovereignty “incrementally, perhaps quietly…but meaningfully.”
They warn against drifting into arrangements that future generations would struggle to reverse.
Underpinning that their criticism comes from a firm belief in the capacity of Nigeria’s own armed forces, the signatories highlight Nigerian military’s distinguished record in international peacekeeping and regional counter-insurgency operations, such as ECOMOG in Liberia and Sierra Leone.
Rather than “outsourcing our security,” the coalition urges the government to focus on fully equipping and modernising the Nigeria Police and Armed Forces, strengthening intelligence, improving troop welfare, and investing in domestic defence production.
They point to Section 217 of the Constitution, which clearly establishes the Armed Forces for the defence of Nigeria’s territorial integrity.
“Sovereignty is not a ceremonial concept. It is the foundation of statehood,” the statement declares, stressing that “Nigeria must not drift into arrangements that future generations will struggle to reverse. History teaches us that sovereignty surrendered in the name of expediency is rarely easily reclaimed.”
The coalition demands that any expanded military agreement be publicly disclosed, subjected to constitutional scrutiny, and approved by the National Assembly.
They insist that while Nigeria is capable of defeating terrorism, it must do so as a fully sovereign nation.
Below is the statement in full:
No to Foreign Forces in Our Land: Defend Our Sovereignty
Nigeria’s history is replete with principled resistance to foreign military domination. At critical moments, our leaders—civilian and military alike—have asserted our sovereignty and rejected external interference. That legacy must not be abandoned.
Historical Lessons We Must Not Forget
In 1960, shortly after independence, Nigeria signed the Anglo-Nigerian Defence Pact with the United Kingdom. The agreement, presented as a framework for mutual defense and military training, was widely perceived by Nigerians as a neo-colonial arrangement. Public opposition was swift and intense. By January 1962, the Tafawa Balewa administration was compelled to abolish the pact. The message was clear: political independence without military sovereignty is incomplete.
Again, in 1976, on the eve of an extraordinary summit of the former Organisation of African Unity (OAU) convened to support the liberation of Angola and the MPLA government, the United States attempted to dissuade African leaders from backing the Angolan liberation movement. At the time, Western powers were supporting rival factions in Angola in order to undermine the anti-colonial struggle.
Nigeria led the African rejection of that pressure. In a historic speech at the OAU summit, General Murtala Mohammed declared that Africa had come of age and would no longer operate under the orbit of any extra-continental power. His words were not mere rhetoric; they were a declaration of continental dignity and sovereign equality.
Attempts at Military Agreements: A Troubling Pattern
In 2001, a proposed Military Cooperation Agreement between the United States and Nigeria was withdrawn after strong opposition from Nigeria’s Ministry of Defence, which objected to being excluded from negotiations.
In 2003, Nigeria signed a Bilateral Immunity Agreement (BIA) with the United States—effectively shielding American citizens from surrender to the International Criminal Court (ICC). By 2005, the Nigerian Senate nullified the agreement, citing constitutional violations and inconsistency with the Rome Statute.
These episodes demonstrate a consistent national principle: foreign military arrangements must comply with Nigeria’s Constitution and must never compromise our sovereignty.
The Present Concern
On December 25, 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump announced that American forces had conducted air strikes against Islamic State militants in Nigeria. Nigeria’s Foreign Minister confirmed that the operation had been coordinated with Nigerian authorities.
Shortly thereafter, on February 4, 2026, reports emerged that the United States had deployed a “small team of troops” to Nigeria. While Nigerian officials described them as advisory personnel supporting intelligence and training, details regarding their mandate, location, size, and duration remain undisclosed. It has since been reported that no fewer than 200 American soldiers are present on Nigerian soil.
This development raises serious constitutional and sovereignty concerns.
The Constitutional Question
Section 12(1) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria provides:
“No treaty between the Federation and any other country shall have the force of law except to the extent to which such treaty has been enacted into law by the National Assembly.”
If there exists a mutual defence pact or expanded bilateral agreement permitting foreign troop deployment or the establishment of a foreign military base in Nigeria, such an arrangement must be laid before and enacted by the National Assembly. Anything short of this procedure raises constitutional red flags.
The Nigerian people deserve transparency. West Africa needs transparency and leadership at a critical time when many West African countries are seeking to liberate themselves from neo-colonialism, we cannot go in the opposite direction.
Nigeria Is Not Incapable
Nigeria’s Armed Forces have a distinguished record in international peacekeeping under the United Nations and the African Union. Nigeria played a leading role in ECOMOG operations in Liberia and Sierra Leone. Our military institutions have decades of experience in counterinsurgency and regional stabilization.
Rather than outsourcing our security, Nigeria should:
- Fully equip and modernise the Nigeria Police Force and the Armed Forces
- Strengthen intelligence coordination
- Improve welfare and morale of troops
- Invest in domestic defence production
- Address socio-economic drivers of insecurity
Section 217 of the Constitution clearly establishes the Armed Forces for the defence of Nigeria’s territorial integrity and the suppression of insurrection.
Our security responsibility cannot be subcontracted indefinitely.
Sovereignty Is Not Symbolic
Sovereignty is not a ceremonial concept. It is the foundation of statehood. Once foreign troops are stationed on national soil without transparent constitutional processes, sovereignty is diluted—incrementally, perhaps quietly—but meaningfully.
Nigeria must not drift into arrangements that future generations will struggle to reverse.
History teaches us that sovereignty surrendered in the name of expediency is rarely easily reclaimed.
Conclusion
Nigeria has, in the past, rejected neo-colonial defence pacts. Nigeria has resisted foreign political directives. Nigeria has nullified agreements that violated constitutional principles.
We must remain consistent with that tradition.
If there is an expanded military agreement permitting foreign troop deployment or the establishment of a foreign base, it must be:
- Publicly disclosed,
- Subjected to constitutional scrutiny, and
- Approved by the National Assembly.
Anything less undermines democratic accountability and national sovereignty.
Nigeria can defeat terrorism. But we must do so as a sovereign nation.
Our sovereignty is under threat.
We must stand up and defend it.
Signatories:
Femi Falana SAN
Prof Jibrin Ibrahim
Dr Abubakar Siddique Mohammed
Dr Dauda Garuba
Prof Massaud Omar
Prof Mohammed Kuna
Engr YZ Ya’u
Dr Usman Bugaje
