Timeframe: 2014 – 2025
Location: Edinburgh, Quebec City, Abuja
Key Actors: UK Electoral Commission, Elections Canada,
Centre for Democracy and Development (CDD), Nigerian National
Assembly
Epigraph:
“Voting, not bullets, resolved Scotland’s constitutional
crisis.”
— UK Government White Paper on the 2014 referendum [1].
The Camera Lens
Scotland’s 2014 referendum ended with a “No” vote but left the union intact because consent was tested at the ballot box. Quebec’s 1995 plebiscite did the same. Nigeria’s leaders cite unity yet fear the tool that has preserved it elsewhere: a referendum.
UK and Canadian precedents show that referendums measure legitimacy without triggering war [1][2]. Campaigns were boisterous but peaceful; the losing sides accepted results because the process was transparent.
CDD proposes a Nigerian Referendum Act outlining thresholds, neutral umpire mechanisms, and options ranging from restructuring to independence [3]. Such a law could channel agitation into ballots instead of bullets.
Unity cannot rely on force alone. Equity—fiscal federalism, state policing, constitutional guarantees—must accompany any referendum pledge. Otherwise, even a “No” vote would not calm fears.
A referendum is not automatic breakup; it is a democratic audit. Nigeria can either test legitimacy at the ballot box or continue bleeding on the battlefield.