Seite - 51 - in Austrian Law Journal, Band 1/2017

ALJ 1/2017 Non-State Law in Nigeria 51 tion of independence of 1776, it was proclaimed that the government derived ”their just powers from the consent of the governed,” and in that connection, if any such government became destruc- tive, the people should have the power to abolish such government. This ideology was later res- urrected in the run-up to the World War II by the US President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. And as parts of the Allies’ goals in the post-war world, certain commonality principles were agreed and these culminated in the Atlantic Charter of the 14th August, 1941, and Dumbarton Oaks Proposal of 1944. The contents of these documents helped to shape the world thereafter, particularly to the effect that both the US and Great Britain agreed that they would not seek territorial expansion. This indication was emphasised by the fact that both countries affirmed their commitments to support the restoration of self-governments for all countries that had been occupied during the war and thereby allowing all peoples to choose their form of government.50 Three relevant provisions of the Atlantic Charter on the part of US, Britain and their allies formed the foundation on which the idea of self-determination is being drawn in recent times: 1. these countries would not seek territorial gains from the war; 2. they opposed territorial changes that were against the wishes of the peoples concerned; and 3. all peoples shall have the right to choose their form of government; this meant the restora- tion of sovereign rights and self-government to those who had been forcefully deprived of them. Importantly, the principle of self-determination has since been restated and recognised by various international and regional instruments, such as the U.N. Charter, ICCPR, ICESCR, the Helsinki Final Act adopted by the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) in 1975, African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 1981, etc. It is useful to emphasise that in practice, there are two forms of self-determination: external and internal. Legal Information Institute of Cornell University emphasises that contemporary notions of self- determination usually distinguish between “internal” and “external” self-determination, suggest- ing that self-determination exists on a spectrum. Internal self-determination may refer to various political and social rights. By contrast, external self-determination refers to full legal independ- ence/secession for the given “people” from the larger politico-legal state.51 According to Michael C. van Walt van Praag, “Internal self-determination can (...) mean the right to exercise cultural, linguis- tic, religious or (territorial) political autonomy within the boundaries of the existing state.”52 There is another tragedy currently gaining momentum in its own name in the Nigerian polity. It clamours for the creation of the state of Biafra. Those who know a bit of Nigerian history are aware that the attempt by Biafra (made up of southern Nigerians of mainly Igbo extraction) to secede from Nigeria was the reason for the civil war that claimed so many lives between 1967 50 Milestones: 1937–1945: The Atlantic Conference & Charter, 1941, OFFICE OF THE HISTORIAN, https://history.state.gov/milestones/1937-1945/atlantic-conf (last visited Mar. 27, 2017). 51 Self-determination, LEGAL INFORMATION INSTITUTE, http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/self_determination_inter- national_law (last visited Mar. 27, 2017). 52 Michael C. van Walt van Praag, Implementation of the Right to Self-determination As a Contribution to Conflict Prevention, UNREPRESENTED NATIONS AND PEOPLES ORGANIZATION (1999), available at http://www.unpo.org/downloads/THE% 20IMPLEMENTATION%20OF%20THE%20RIGHT%20TO%20SELF.pdf (last visited Mar. 27, 2017).