A Motion For The Records Page 1 of 5 A Motion For The Records By Seyi Odewale Last month at the lecture he delivered to mark the silver Jubilee Anniversary of the Radio Service of the Broadcasting Corporation of Oyo State (BCOS), Ibadan, Second Republic Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Chief Richard Osuolale Akinjide literally sparked off controversy of sorts. In the lecture titled, "Democracy and the challenges of succession in Nigeria", Akinjide attempted to correct a widely held notion that has lingered for more than four decades that the motion for Nigeria's independence was moved by Chief Anthony Enahoro. But while Akinjide was 'correcting' this notion 'with facts', that the independence motion was indeed moved by the late premier of Western Region, Chief Samuel Ladoke Akintola, Alhaji Lam Adesina, Oyo State Governor, sharply disagreed and stuck to the old view that the motion was moved by Enahoro. This disagreement between the two compatriots must have arisen from their political convictions and leanings. Akinjide, to many, belong to the conservative class of politicians whose views always support the Northern conservative political elite. His views, to many from his geo-political zone, had always stirred controversies. But in the case of independence motion, Akinjide claimed he was not out to cause confusion or rewrite history, but to state the facts. Arming himself with the copy of the Hansard, which was the record of proceedings at the floor of the House in 1957 when the said motion was moved, Akinjide said in dealing with the history of political succession from British dependence to a sovereign state of Nigeria, the relevance of who moved the motion for independence was imperative. In the words of the former Attorney-General for the Federation, the confusion about who moved the motion for independence must have arisen from ignorance. "Enahoro's motion in 1953 dealt with internal self-government for various regions of the country, he said, insisting that the lecture was not meant to confuse people, but to put the records straight and educate Nigerians on the difference between internal self government and independence. "It may well be that people made innocent confusion or they were unable to distinguish between self http://www.nigerdeltacongress.com/articles/a_motion_for_the_records.htm 7/21/2008 A Motion For The Records Page 2 of 5 government and independence," Akinjide explained. Most textbooks on government and politics in Nigeria which tried to chronicle the nation's path to independence had committed similar errors or mistakes of equating self government motion of 1953 with that of 1957 which was for independence. "That of Enahoro was in 1953, the motion he moved then was for internal self-government, not for independence for Nigeria," Akinjide argued. He continued, "Enahoro's motion in 1953 deals with internal self government for various regions of the country... In other words, succession of Nigeria as a colonial country to independence from Britain. I have the record of the proceedings of the Hansard which showed that Chief S. L. Akintola moved it and it was seconded by Chief Ayo Rosiji and amendment was moved by Mr. Jaja Wachukwu and seconded by Maitama Sule from Kano." Chief Akinjide's stand was corroborated by Chief Ayo Adebanjo. According to Adebanjo, Enahoro's motion which was moved in 1953 was for self governance for the regions. "This however led to the change of constitution. Oliver Lytelton was the secretary of state then while Macpherson was the Governor. Incidentally, regional autonomy which the 1954 constitution guaranteed was an off- shoot of the 1953 motion by Enahoro." Adebanjo further explained that when the 1953 motion was moved by Enahoro, ministers who then constituted the colonial government cabinet were barred from taking part in the discussion, but the ministers however went against the Governor's directive and took part in the discussion for self government. "Consequently those ministers who came from the West had to resign from the cabinet." Adebanjo's explanation was lent credence by Akinjide's earlier submission that the rejection of Chief Enahoro's motion of 1953 led to the resignation of Action Group ministers from the Federal cabinet of which the late Ooni of Ife Sir Adesoji Aderemi was a minister without portfolio. "It was the compromise of the first motion" according to Chief Adebanjo, "that led to the second motion of Chief Samuel Ladoke Akintola." Adebanjo further stated that following the rejection of the 1953 motion for self government for the regions in 1956, the Sardauna of Sokoto who was seen as a main antagonist to the motion was booed in Lagos. Sardauna had moved the counter motion that the regions should be given autonomy "as soon as practicable." http://www.nigerdeltacongress.com/articles/a_motion_for_the_records.htm 7/21/2008 A Motion For The Records Page 3 of 5 Many writers had written and quoted Chief Enahoro when moving his 1953 motion which they called motion for independence in 1956 in 1953. One of such writers was Kole Omotosho in his book Just Before Dawn. Omotosho had quoted Enahoro as saying in 1953 that "the question for independence for Nigeria is not controversial. Every well-meaning Nigerian wants this country to become independent. Why then do I choose 1956? There are only three reasons that I can give right here. "The first is that 1956 is a convenient date especially when the other two reasons are added. These are, the factors of previous commitments by the various regional governments and the federal government as well, and the fact that 1956 marks the end of MacPherson constitution. I therefore beg to move". With this and several similar writings in textbooks, most readers concluded that it was Enahoro who moved the motion for independence. This is what Akinjide has proved wrong after over four decades of according Enahoro the honour. Quoting Ahmadu Bello in Just Before Dawn, Omotoso wrote that Ahmadu Bello stated in a reply to Enahoro: "Since my honourable colleagues do not wish to withdraw the motion, I hereby move an amendment substituting for 1956, the phrase "as soon as practicable." This phrase when it was passed on amendment nailed the coffin for the 1953 motion as the house adjourned sine die. This, according to Adebanjo, resurrected the 1957 motion of Chief Akintola. "It was the compromise of the first motion that led to the second motion of Chief S. L. Akintola in 1957," Adebanjo explained. But Akinjide disagrees: "Those are two different motions. In substance, in purpose and in timing, they were different. When Enahoro moved his motion in 1953, it was lost. And it led to the Action Group ministers resigning from the cabinet", Akinjide argued. A copy of the Hansard in 1957, tagged Akintola's motion as that for self government for Nigeria. Akintola then rose on the floor of the house and said: "Sir I rise to move the motion standing in my name on the order paper. The motion reads as follows: that this house instructs the delegates specifically added to the Federal Delegation to the forthcoming constitutional conference to express the view of the House to do all in their power to secure the grant of self government to the Federation of Nigeria in 1957". "I start by assuring the House that in moving this motion, we are animated with the best http://www.nigerdeltacongress.com/articles/a_motion_for_the_records.htm 7/21/2008 A Motion For The Records Page 4 of 5 intentions in the world. The motion as it proceeds will show that there will be no element of recrimination whatsoever and that, in moving it as best I can, I would express what I believe to be the legitimate desire not of just one party or one section but of the whole of the Federation of Nigeria". "I would say that this motion pre-supposes that the time has come to put an end to imperalism as far as it applies to this country. Colonialism and imperialism are synonymous and I need to recount that imperialism is an evil; it has a lot of the elements of evil in it and, in saying that, I would not rely just on my own word: I would cite an instance in which one of the imperialists admitted that imperialism contains a lot of elements of evil: I quote the words of a former Governor of Nigeria. On the 29th December, 1920, Sir Hugh Clifford made this statement to the old Legislative council: 'The first and most obvious results of the clash of the higher with the less advanced civilizations are the demoralisation which it almost inevitably causes, alike in the possessors of the one and of the other, and of this the history of West Africa has furnished in the past and, in a measure, furnishes even to this day - only too rank a crop of illustrative examples. Akintola went on in the Hansard by saying that "the motives which brought about the first harsh impact between Europeans and the peoples of Nigeria were supplied by a hunger for wealth on both sides and by the traffic in human beings by means of which that hunger was assuaged for white men not for black men alike". Akintola who represented Osun West in the House stated further after establishing that imperialism was an unmitigated evil, that "the question which now arises in that motion is that are we ready for self government in 1957". Opinions, Akintola noted, may differ but he asked that what were the reason for "our feelings that we are perhaps ready even in this year - 1957? "The experiment in self government", Akintola noted, "has been on in this country for the past five years.