By Mark Orgu, News/Comments
Abuja-Famous Nigerian jurist, Constitutional Lawyer And Human Rights Activist, Prof. Mike Ozekhome, Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), has reacted to the trending statement made by a Senior British Conservative politician of Nigerian, Kemi Badenoch, who offered a striking and controversial insight into the limitations of Nigerian citizenship law in an interview with CNN’s Fareed Zakaria.
Ozekhome who noted that, Kemi, as a woman of Nigerian heritage serving as the UK’s Secretary of State for Business and Trade, (formerly known as Olukemi Adegoke and who grew up in Lagos before going to stay in the UK at the age of 16) is no stranger to questions of identity, belonging and migration. But it was her deeply personal revelation and its legal implications that ignited a wave of public conversation not only among Nigerians in diaspora and those resident in Nigeria, but among leading scholars and constitutional analysts, particularly regarding gender equality in Nigeria’s citizenship.
Recall that Mrs. Badenoch in that interview with CNN categorically said: “It’s virtually impossible, for example, to get Nigerian citizenship. I have that citizenship by virtue of my parents. I can’t give it to my children because I’m a woman. Yet loads of Nigerians come to the UK and stay for a relatively free period of time, acquire British citizenship. We need to stop being naïve.
Meanwhile, Prof. Ozekhome in his write up conclusively gave detailed insights on the implications of either retaining citizenship or renouncing it:
“Kemi Badenoch’s statement that she cannot pass Nigerian citizenship to her children because she is a woman, though legally inaccurate under Section 25 of the 1999 Constitution, opens up an important and necessary conversation. The Constitution clearly provides that citizenship by birth can be transmitted through either parent, whether mother or father, regardless of where the child is born. Consequently, if Badenoch holds Nigerian citizenship and has not renounced it, her children are indeed Nigerian citizens by birth.”
“However, her remarks (though maybe politically expedient, having regard to her past negative statements about Nigeria) reflect a deeper frustration that is not entirely unfounded. While Section 25 affirms gender equality in theory, other provisions particularly Section 26, which governs citizenship by registration expose persistent gender biases in Nigeria’s nationality laws. The exclusion of foreign men married to Nigerian women from the registration pathway to citizenship demonstrates a clear constitutional imbalance. This asymmetry not only reinforces patriarchal assumptions but also undermines Nigeria’s commitment to international human rights obligations.”
“Badenoch’s experience, viewed through this lens, underscores the dissonance between constitutional promises and practical enforcement, especially for Nigerian women in the diaspora. It illustrates how systemic, bureaucratic and cultural barriers often prevent women from fully exercising the rights that the Constitution guarantees them.”
In sum, while the law on its face protects the right of women to pass on citizenship, the structure around it does not always support or respect that equality. Kemi’s statement, though flawed in legal substance, serves as a catalyst for broader reflection and reforms; a reminder that constitutional rights must be matched with equal access, unbiased implementation and an unambiguous commitment to gender justice in law and in practice. Nigerian women, whether resident in Nigeria or in the diaspora, must be accorded equal rights, gender equity and equality within the Nigerian space. They remain our daughters, sisters and mothers.”
For breaking news/commentary, adverts, please call, +2348028592006, email us: afrikanwatch122@gmail.com. follow us on twitter: @afrikanwatchm, facebook: linkedin: afrikanwatch network communications, afrikanwatch network, instagram, @afrikanwatchm.
