The Yoruba Self Determination Movement (YSDM) has renewed its call for the dissolution of Nigeria and the creation of an independent Oduduwa Republic, while demanding legislation to regulate the political, economic and property rights of non-indigenes in areas it considers part of Yorubaland.
The group made the demands at a press conference organised by the Yoruba Action Group at the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ) Press Centre, Iyaganku, Ibadan.
Speaking at the event, YSDM Deputy Leader (Homeland), Architect George Akinola, said the movement’s position was driven by what it described as worsening insecurity, disputes over territorial identity and concerns about the economic interests of indigenous Yoruba communities.
Akinola said the movement had concluded that restructuring, resource control and regionalism could no longer address what it considered the fundamental challenges facing Nigeria.
According to him, the Yoruba people are increasingly dissatisfied with the country and desire an independent sovereign state where their political, economic and cultural interests can be better protected.
The movement also called on governors, senators, members of the House of Representatives and state lawmakers across the South-West to introduce laws regulating land ownership, commercial activities, migration and political participation.
Among its most controversial demands was a proposal that Igbo candidates should not contest elections in Yorubaland during the 2027 general elections.
“No vacancy for any Igbo candidate in Yorubaland,” Akinola declared, urging those interested in elective positions to return to their states of origin.
The group further proposed that non-indigenes should not control more than 20 per cent of shops and commercial spaces in any market.
It specifically cited Alaba, Ladipo and the Trade Fair Complex markets in Lagos, alleging that some Yoruba traders had faced intimidation and exclusion because of their ethnic identity.
YSDM called for the criminalisation of harassment against indigenous traders and urged relevant authorities to investigate allegations of discriminatory practices in the affected markets.
The organisation also advocated limiting land leases granted to non-indigenes to a maximum of 20 years, as against the 99-year lease arrangements it referenced.
It called for stronger controls over migration into Yoruba urban centres and proposed that non-Yoruba residents convicted of criminal offences could be identified and returned to their states of origin.
The group also demanded an end to open grazing across the South-West, arguing that cattle owners from outside the region should establish ranches rather than allow their animals to roam freely.
It linked the proposal to allegations of kidnapping, killings, rape and attacks on farmers and other residents in rural communities.
On Lagos, the movement rejected claims that the state is a “No Man’s Land” or that Igbo residents were primarily responsible for its development.
It maintained that Lagos is historically and culturally part of Yorubaland and cited Awori, Ijebu, Egba, Egbado, Remo, Ilaje and Egun communities, as well as Yoruba returnees from Sierra Leone, among groups associated with the historical development of the city.
Akinola also questioned aspects of Nigeria’s constitutional framework, arguing that the 1999 Constitution did not sufficiently reflect the consent of the country’s constituent ethnic nationalities.
However, the report noted that Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution describes the country as an indivisible and indissoluble sovereign state and does not provide a unilateral constitutional procedure for an ethnic group or individual state to secede from the federation.
The YSDM nevertheless said it would continue campaigning for an independent Oduduwa Republic and urged elected representatives, traditional rulers and community leaders across the areas it identifies as Yorubaland to support its self-determination agenda and proposed legislative measures.
The movement’s demands, particularly those seeking restrictions based on ethnicity and indigeneity, could raise significant constitutional questions, including issues relating to freedom of movement, property ownership and equal political participation.
